You are on page 1of 92

Misamis Occidental

Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES)
For Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program (PACAP)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The main problems bugging Misamis Occidental are its poverty heavily attributed to low
productivity in the agricultural sector and the alarming condition of its terrestrial and coastal
environment. PACAP’s Focused Community Assistance Scheme (FOCAS) is a timely
program envisioned to address these issues. In four years, the estimated P86 Million grant
assistance from PACAP will assist development projects of four FOCAS areas, namely, 1)
Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project, 2) Save Labo River Project, 3)
Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management Project and 4) the Coconut Industry Rehabilitation
and Development Project. The P86 Million will be allocated equally for the four FOCAS
areas at P21.5 Million each for four years. Save for a total P12 Million for the four FOCAS
Secretariats or at P3 Million each secretariat, the amount will be used to fund development
projects.

These projects will be implemented separately in and will cover the three cities of Tangub,
Ozamiz and Oroquieta. These will also cover eleven out of fourteen municipalities, namely,
Bonifacio, Clarin, Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez, Panaon, Lopez Jaena, Aloran, Plaridel,
Concepcion and Don Victoriano.

Chapter 1 of the Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES) discusses the provincial information,
plans and situation. The chapter also discusses the involvement of PACAP in the province
of Misamis Occidental. Chapter 2 to 5 explains separately the four FOCAS Areas. Each
chapter discusses the problems involved in the respective FOCAS areas. It also expounds
the strategies on how to address the problems using Logical Framework (LogFrame); list of
projects to be undertaken over the period of four years; proposed organization structure to
manage and co-manage the FOCAS; the participation and roles of each stakeholders;
gender analysis; monitoring and evaluation; sustainability, among others.
CHAPTER 1 – PROVINCIAL INFORMATION

1. Introduction

Background

For more than ten years, the hampered economic growth and development of Misamis
Occidental is generally attributed to concerns on agricultural sector and worsening condition
of its terrestrial and coastal environment. Both the government and non-government sectors
agreed that a balance has to be made to achieve an integrated and holistic development of
the province.

On one hand, the recent development trends in the province are still centered on agriculture,
considering that the province has broad agricultural base. However, since most of the
available agricultural lands are mostly developed, the development activities are geared
towards the maximization of agricultural land use and animal production, as well as
encouragement of consumer goods industries.

Maximization of land use basically includes use of modern methods of agriculture and
multicropping. To further support agricultural development, policies that will promote
increased agricultural production and productivity are necessary. Some of the important
areas for consideration are pricing agricultural commodities, provision of liberalized credits;
technical assistance; product processing; and improvement of storage and marketing
networks. Also needed are the development of a more effective organizational mechanism
for rural mobilization, increased provision of rural infrastructures; and campaign for more
diversified and market-oriented agricultural production. Finally, there is a need to look into
the possibility of coordinating all the activities of different government agencies which deals
with the agricultural sector.

On the other hand, to maintain a balanced eco-system, the pristine environment in the
province must be conserved and protected. Reforestation of denuded forest areas is very
important to prevent soil erosion. The kaingin system and illegal cutting of timber particularly
in reserved watershed areas, which are still prevalent, must be stopped. The burning of
forest cover leave in its wake the disappearance of a great number of animal and plant
species. The forestry sector should generate, opportunities for livelihood through its agro-
forestry activities and woodbased industries. An active campaign for reforestation should
continuously be undertaken to replenish the forest timber stand status.

Rehabilitating the river banks and coastal zones through tree planting, reforestation of
mangrove areas, the strict compliance of pollution regulation and policing the said rivers and
bays against illegal fishing will go a long way in conserving and developing the marine
resources and fishing grounds in and around the province. 1

With this current situation, there is a need to fast track environment and agriculture
development of the Province. However, with little resources and vast concerns in other
sectors such as health, education, water and sanitation, the local government could only do

1 Misamis Occidental Provincial Development Plan, PPDO, 1995 – 2000 (Under Governor Chiongbian); and Misamis Occidental Provincial Development
Plan, PPDO, 1999 - 2004 (Under Governor Clarete)

Chapter 1 - 2
so much to even make a dent on the impending problems mentioned above. The entry of
AusAID and other donor programs in the Province of Misamis Occidental provides means to
address these issues.

Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program (PACAP) is not a newcomer when it
comes to development contribution in the Province. It has released about P7 Million for ten
projects since 1988. Yet with this number, PACAP’s presence in the province is felt less.
The need to area focus was deemed necessary to operationalize PACAP’s desired impact of
achieving a “critical mass” of development inputs. To area focus (via Integrated Area
Development) means providing a more holistic and a more programmatic view so that
PACAP’s assistance shall be integrated and complementary. Such approach is viewed to
encourage a resource-based program that will promote the participation of area-based
delivery structures to implement integrated and sustainable development approach. 2

The Focused Community Assistance Scheme

PACAP is one of the numerous donor programs and one of the four (4) major AusAID
facilities currently operating in the Province of Misamis Occidental. The other three AusAID
programs are PATSARRD, PALS, and PAHRDP. PACAP emphasized that its program will
be a facility for non-government and people’s organizations. As a grant facility for Non-
Government Organizations (NGOs) and Peoples’ Organizations (POs) PACAP will contribute
to the fulfillment of Misamis Occidental Provincial Objectives.

PACAP in 2005 literally brought its programs to the Province and set an Office in Oroquieta
City for its FOCAS program and initially plans to operate in five (5) years. The Focused
Community Assistance Scheme (FOCAS) is a set of interrelated projects addressing
community needs related to a geographic area and/or a specific development issue. 3
FOCAS is more likened to integrated area development (IAD). The other program is the
Responsive Activity Scheme (RAS). RAS business is what PACAP effectively does –
providing assistance for small stand-alone projects of up to P1 Million per year. PACAP’s
core business in Misamis Occidental is more of FOCAS than RAS.

Figure 1 below illustrates the life of projects in Misamis Occidental relative to the life of
FOCAS.

2 “The Mt. Matutum Integrated Conservation and Development (MICADEV) Program”, South Cotabato, CSDO, 1998
3 New PACAP Operations Manual, 2005

Chapter 1 - 3
Project life Allowance
For Evaluation

Project 1
Feb 2005 Feb 2010
Project 2
Project 3
Project 4
Project 5

August 2005
Start of project packaging
Aug 2009
(if strategic plans are approved)
All projects must end

Figure 1. MO FOCAS-Project Life

The Provincial Engagement is for an initial phase of five years (February 2005 – February
2010). This may be extended based on independent evaluations in Yr 3 and 5. The initial
suite of four FOCAS will run from about September 2005 to September 2009. All projects
within each FOCAS must be completed within these four years. Any new FOCAS or
extensions of existing FOCAS can commence after September 2009. If further funds
become available then consideration could be given to instituting a new FOCAS before this
time.

Each individual projects will have varying periods of implementation from one year to a
maximum period of three years. The latest acceptance of three-year projects therefore
would be in September 2006 for it to end in August 2009 (see Project 4 above).

2. Misamis Occidental Provincial Profile and Other Information

Brief Geographic Information

Misamis Occidental, one (1) of the five (5) provinces of Region 10 in Northern Mindanao, is
located on the northeastern part of Mindanao. It is bounded on the northeast by Mindanao
Sea, east by Iligan Bay, southeast by Panguil Bay and the west by the Provinces of
Zamboanga del Norte and Zamboanga del Sur. The Province is accessible by land from
Cagayan de Oro City, the regional center, Pagadian and Dipolog Cities. Misamis Occidental
has a total land area of 1,939.32 square kilometers. It has 14 municipalities and three cities
with a total of 490 barangays. Oroquieta City is the capital of Misamis Occidental. The

Chapter 1 - 4
Province registered a population of 486,723 in 2000. 4 Figure 2 below is the map of
Mindanao showing the location of the Province of Misamis Occidental.

Figure 2. Map of Mindanao

Under the Corona system climate classification of the country, Misamis Occidental belongs
to type IV by virtue of its rainfall pattern or distribution in the area. With this classification,
rainfall is more or less evenly distributed throughout the year although the months of
February to April are considered drier. There is no incidence of typhoon in the area as
majority of Mindanao Island is outside the typhoon belt.

The area receives an average annual rainfall that ranges from 1,415 mm to 3,758 mm.
Average annual rainfall is at 2,312 mm. The total number of rainy days for a year ranges
from 149 days to 270 days with an average of 206 days. 5
6
SWOT Analysis

Strengths

Misamis Occidental’s Strengths lie in its location, abundant natural resources, varied tourism
attractions, development institutions, and the personnel of various institutions operating in
the province.

4 Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan for the Province of Misamis Occidental, Main Report, joint project of JICA
and DILG, CEST Inc., March 2005
5 Ozamiz City Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan (OCISWMP), Ozamiz City Solid Waste Management Project Technical Working

Group, August 2003
6 Updated KFC Strategic Development Plan of Misamis Occidental (2005-2008), August 2005, PATSARRD

Chapter 1 - 5
Located outside the typhoon belt and with rainfall evenly distributed throughout the year, the
province is ideal for year-round production of major food and commercial crops, aquaculture
and industrial activities. Its alienable and disposable lands which constitute 52% of the total
area are highly suitable to most agricultural crops.

With vast tract of coconut plantations, there exist in the province a number of coconut mills
and coco-based factory which is one of the country’s two coco-based factories. High value
crops are also available for agri-based processing.

The province has rich aquamarine resources owing to its long coastline, expansive
swamplands, and rich fishing grounds, the Panguil, Iligan and Murceillagus Bays. These are
recorded as the best spawning grounds of prawn, shrimp, and squid in the Philippines. It has
also the biggest area of brackish water fishponds of the region. These explain why the
province is the base for most of the region’s aquaculture industries.

Misamis Occidental is likewise a place of natural beauty. Tourist attractions include Mt.
Malindang, a national park and wildlife sanctuary; Lake Duminagat, a crater lake in the
mountains between Ozamiz and Oroquieta Cities; the Sibucal Hot Spring in Oroquieta; and
Balacatan Underground River in Tangub.

Apart from these, there are various institutions that cater to the various needs of the province
and its constituents. These include learning and banking institutions and transportation and
communication facilities. Finally, the workforce in the different agencies operating in the
province is its most valuable asset. These personnel have been tasked to look after the
province’s abundant resources.

Weaknesses

Although capable, government agencies in the province have inadequate manpower. This
results to multi-tasking where some personnel hold two or more positions. Insufficient
equipment constrains them from executing their jobs well. The lack of manpower and
equipment can be attributed to the agencies’ limited budget, which is supposed to be the fuel
that keeps the agencies running. Development oriented programs would have been more
successful if carried out by capable personnel. However, capability-building programs can
only be sustained if appropriate funding is available

A substantial portion of the province’s road network is still unpaved, though the national
highway is relatively excellent. Transport of high value agricultural cargoes by air is
expensive because the Ozamiz City Airport is not serviceable.

Weak farmers’ organizations and the farmers’ difficulty in accessing credit have made
marketing of farm products difficult for them and dampened their interest to improve their
income and standard of living.

Opportunities

Mt. Malindang, with its watershed and forest reserve can be turned into a major tourist
attraction. A coconut replanting program and the development of non-copra based
processing plant will further enhance the province’s coconut industry. Moreover, capturing a
share in the growing domestic and international demand for high value crops such as durian,

Chapter 1 - 6
mango, rambutan, and lanzones would be a good opportunity to improve the income of the
farmers. The province’s proximity to the Cagayan-Iligan Corridor gives it a good opportunity
to supply the needed labor force of the industrial corridor. Investment opportunities are
foreseen to upscale in ten years with the construction of the Panguil Bay bridge.

Most importantly, the existence of farmers, fisherfolks, women, and youth organizations,
supportive LGUs and CSO partners, development programs of local government agencies
complemented by the presence of foreign-assisted projects with their financial and technical
support can be harnessed to address the development needs of the province or lay the
groundwork for the long-term growth of the area.

Threats

Overfishing in Panguil, Iligan and Murceillagus Bays and the air and water pollution
generated by CIC industries may pose serious threats to the environment and marine
ecosystems. The illegal cutting of coconut trees simultaneous with the weakening demand
for coconut oil in the world market is a major threat to the local economy. Further,
considering that Misamis Occidental’s economy is agriculture-based, the unregulated
conversion of agricultural lands into residential or industrial has threatened the food security
of the province. Finally, the unstable peace and order situation in the province attributed to
organized crime has discouraged tourist and investors to establish their businesses in the
province.

The Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES)

The Misamis Occidental PSC recognizes that there is no “cure all” formula for the upliftment
of the conditions and plight of the poor people in the province. Recognizing its limitations
and its strengths, the PSC believes that PACAP could contribute to addressing the
Province’s complex problem through this Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES):

“The Provincial Engagement Strategy resolves to reduce poverty in the region
and improving the quality of life of its people by a) augmenting traditional and/or
providing alternative livelihood through agri-aqua based food, raw materials, and
industrial finished products, b) utilizing reasonably and sustainably the natural
resources, and c) considering prominently the rehabilitation, protection, and
preservation of the province's vast watershed area and its coastal resources.

The Integrated Area Development (IAD) approach is a prime scheme in this
strategy in order to effect area- specific project packaging and rational resource
allocation. Cutting across all the development sectors in the strategy is the
recognition of people empowerment thus, the strong collaboration between LGU
and CSO in the development effort, and the participation of the private sector, are
given due importance with corresponding thrust to organize, activate, and
strengthen Peoples’ Organizations (POs) especially the disadvantaged and
vulnerable groups in society.”

This strategy is aligned with the provincial goals and objectives 7 and the current
administration’s Executive Agenda articulated in the Provincial “Target 1000” 8 .

7 See also webpage www.misocc.gov.ph
8 See also webpage www.misocc.gov.ph

Chapter 1 - 7
Provincial Goals and Objectives

The primary goal is the improvement of the quality of life of every individual in the province.
This is to be achieved through increased productivity and income especially to those residing in
the rural areas, more job opportunities and access to basic services at the shortest time
possible. This goal is further refined into the following short term objectives:

1. To be the country’s or even Asia’s potent producer of aquaculture products.
2. To become the country’s or even Asia’s tourist destination.
3. To attain a sufficient production of rice, corn, vegetables and other agricultural crops,
and processed goods and subsequently become a potent provider.
4. To maintain a balanced eco-system through the conservation of the province’s
prestine environment.
5. To enhance the delivery of basic social services through a more systematic
identification and coordinated implementation of critical community projects along
health, nutrition, education/skills training, social welfare, housing and others. 9

Potential Contribution to Strategic Guidance Framework (SGF)

Misamis Occidental PES will contribute greatly to the Fundamental SGF and will carry the
following Supporting SGF:

Economic Governance Security and Stability Rural Living Standards
• Strengthen community • Promote advocacy within • Provide livelihood,
advocacy for improved local poor and marginalized vocational, distance, or
ordinances and legislation communities for improved alternate education for
(eg improved environmental services and planned Out-of-School Youth
governance). development. • Strengthen the
• Strengthen community • Promote the individual engagement of
capacity to lobby local rights of women and communities with the
government for improved children for a safe and LGUs and private sector
legislative compliance. secure home-life • Build community capacity
• Enhance transparency and (especially VAWC). in leadership and
accountability amongst local • Raise awareness and entrepreneurship.
officials especially in promote the cultural • Provide vocational
development planning and uniqueness of indigenous training to indigenous
budgeting. cultures to improve crafts-people to help
• Strengthen NGO coalitions understanding and broaden their skills, identify
to manage, monitor and preserve heritage. new product uses, and
evaluate member activities. • Build capacity of build market access.
• Support LGU capability in community service
assessment or planning organizations working in
activities (e.g project high-risk areas.
mapping, development
planning).

9 Misamis Occidental PDP, 1995 – 2000 and Provincial Website, www.misocc.gov.ph, downloaded June 2005

Chapter 1 - 8
3. Planning Process and Provincial Governance Committee Selection

Criteria for the Selection of FOCAS Areas

The Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC) decided, after lengthy deliberation, to adapt
the following criteria in the selection of FOCAS Areas/Themes:

1. FOCAS Area/Theme should Identify with the real and felt needs of the Province
2. There could only be one FOCAS Area per municipality/city
3. Fund that would be provided by PACAP should be enough to provide an impact for
the geographic area or theme as assessed by the Provincial Stakeholders Committee
(PSC, see discussion below).
4. Should contribute to the fulfillment of the Provincial Objectives, priorities and plans
5. Preferably with available extensive studies, plans and other secondary data and
information. This is considered because PACAP does not fund projects solely for
research and assessment. Also, if ever granted, conduct of research and
assessment will take months or years to finish hence project proposal preparation
and implementation may take longer.

The Misamis Occidental FOCAS Areas

Matching the needs of the people of the province and the resources of PACAP, the
Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC) approved en-banc on May 17, 2005 four Focused
Community Assistance Scheme (FOCAS) Areas. Each FOCAS Areas separately came up
with their respective FOCAS Strategies discussed in succeeding chapters.

1. Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project (MMRNPDP). MMRNPDP
will cover only the Municipalities of Bonifacio, Don Victorino, and Concepcion.
MMRNPDP is a geographic FOCAS area.

2. Save Labo River Project (SLRP). SLRP covers the two Cities of Tangub and Ozamiz
and the Municipality of Clarin. SLRP is a geographic FOCAS area.

3. Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management and Development Project (IBCRMDP).
IBCRMDP is a geographic FOCAS area. It will cover the Municipalities of Tudela,
Sinacaban, Jimenez, and Panaon.

4. Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project (CIRDP). CIRDP is the
only thematic FOCAS Area of the province. The theme is agri-focused.

The choice of the four FOCAS areas is strategic itself. The first three features an integrated
area development of a complete landscape, from the forested mountains, along the river,
and through the coastal area. The fourth FOCAS area also integrates with the other three
because it emphasizes on rural development and agriculture, thus complementing
environment conservation and protection with rural livelihood. Figure 3 shows the MAP of
Misamis Occidental showing the locations or area covered by the FOCASes mentioned
above.

Chapter 1 - 9
Figure 3. Misamis Occidental FOCAS Areas

Misamis Occidental FOCAS Governance

A General Stakeholders Assembly was conducted on April 29, 2005 at the Function Hall of
the Provincial Capitol, Oroquieta City. This was attended by development players from
various local government units, provincial, city and municipal, national government agencies,
civil society organizations and the academe. During the assembly, it was a consensus that
the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC) shall be composed of nine members headed
by Provincial Governor Loreto Leo Ocampos as chair. The other four shall be coming from
the representatives of the mayors of the Province, from the NGOs, from the Peoples’
Organization (POs), and from the academe of Misamis Occidental. The remaining four
representations come from the four approved FOCAS areas and were endorsed by the
interim PSC on May 17, 2005 and was approved by PAC in June 16, 2005.

The Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC) is composed of:
1. Governor Leo Ocampos represented by Terry Calamba
2. Mayor Nilo Obot representing Municipal LGUs
3. Mr. Pempe Procianos representing the Peoples’ Organization
4. Ms. Grace Villanueva representing the academe
5. Mr. Ramonito Acaac representing the NGOs
6. Mr. Andy Pestano representing Save Labo River Project FOCAS
7. Mr. Exequil Barillo representing Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management and
Development Project FOCAS
8. Mr. Zachary Alcoseba representing Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development
Project FOCAS
9. Mr. Rolando Dingal representing Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development
Project FOCAS

Figure 4 below illustrates the Provincial FOCAS governance structure. PSC is tasked to
oversee four (4) FOCAS areas and Management Committees.

Chapter 1 - 10
PSC

PSC Secretariat
(PACAP PPO)

MMRNPDP CIRDP FMC IBCRMDP SLRP FMC
FMC FMC

FOCAS Secretariat
(An NGO or PO)

Project Proponents

Figure 4. MO FOCAS Governance Structure

PSC handles the overall coordination of PACAP FOCAS implementation in Misamis
Occidental. Its secretariat support is carried out by the Provincial Project Officer.
Meanwhile, each FOCAS Management Committees (FMCs) will be supported by separate
FOCAS Secretariat. The FOCAS Secretariats are chosen by the respective FMCs. A
secretariat should be a CSO that is capable of doing committee coordination and
administrative work. The FOCAS Secretariat will be treated as a project and will ink a
separate Grant Agreement with PACAP.

Assessment of Development Approaches in the Province

There is a long history of development work in the Province of Misamis Occidental. Civil
Society Organizations became active in the Province in the early nineties. With the birth of
CSOs in the province, there were great deal of development projects and services with Non-
Government Organizations (NGOs) as proponents in many municipalities concentrating
mainly on Mount Malindang protected area and the three (3) cities, where most CSOs are
based. More recently, secondary organizations of NGOs and Peoples Organizations (POs)
were also established. The reason for the strategic convergence however is more of the
availability of fund than of the need to coalesce. As a result, when projects terminate,
coalitions simply become dormant. They become active again when new funding comes in
or, in some cases, they establish new coalitions. Other secondary organizations that linger
tend to serve as capacity building provider for member organizations.

One primary cooperative, the Paglaum Multipurpose Cooperative, has performed more
successfully than other primary and secondary Peoples Organizations (POs) of the Province
in terms of area of operation and financial performance. As proof of its success Paglaum
MPC reaps awards provincially, nationally and internationally. However they only provide
one prominent service – that is micro-finance.

Chapter 1 - 11
With the enactment of the Local Government Code, LGUs, both provincial and municipal,
became involved more actively in extension of development services especially towards their
constituent barangays. These services highly depend on the priorities of the Provincial, City
or Municipal Governments. Meanwhile, NGA or line agencies resigned to providing technical
and other support for local government programs instead of taking some lead role in
development.

Most of the development programs and projects in the Province are uni-sectoral, either LGU
or CSO implemented. There were many attempts to do integrated area development
covering more than one municipality. Yet, a lot of efforts ended up as good development
plans. Examples are the development management of Mt. Malindang Range and Natural
Park and Panguil Bay Development Project. If ever there had been projects funded by donor
agencies implemented in the area, these had been in the areas of socio-economic surveys,
bio-resource assessment, capability building, and micro-enterprise projects which are hardly
integrated.

NGO-LGU collaboration in development work in the Province seldom happens.
Consultations and collaborations are more observed during the planning stage. During
implementation of projects, more often either these are done by the LGUs alone, with the
assistance of line and donor agencies, or solely by the NGOs, with the support of donor
organizations, international and local.

There is much yet to be done with regards to Integrated Area Development (IAD) and multi-
sectoral approaches to development in Misamis Occidental involving cooperation and
collaboration between LGUs, line agencies and CSOs. Development players in the Province
of Misamis Occidental have a lot to learn in these areas. Undeniably, multi-sectoral
approach to IAD in the Province is relatively new.

Gender and Development

The Province of Misamis Occidental has incorporated gender sensitivity programs in many
aspects of local governance, linkage and coordinating activities with people’s organizations,
and socio-economic enhancement programs. GAD principles and mechanics are built into
the training curriculums of project operations and management seminars, financial
management seminars, organizational strengthening seminars, and leadership training
activities that were conducted by provincial offices with the support of
NationalGovernmentAgencies and internal funding donors. 10 With the entry of Philippines-
Australia Human Resource Development Program (PAHRDP) in the Province, the Provincial
LGU puts heavy emphasis on gender sensitivity in capacity building of government
employees.

The sectoral plan on water 11 reported that there is no specific unit in the provincial
machinery that serves as the focal center of GAD programs. This however can be argued.
In the contrary the Provincial Government has an Office of the Provincial Gender and
Development that focused on Provincial GAD plan formulation, the holding of GAD
orientation workshops, coordinating gender programs and projects, linkaging and networking
since 2001. But there seems to be a large room for improvement in terms of gender equality

10 Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan for the Province of Misamis Occidental, Main Report, joint project of JICA and DILG, CEST
Inc., March 2005
11 Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan for the Province of Misamis Occidental, Main Report, joint project of JICA and DILG, CEST

Inc., March 2005

Chapter 1 - 12
and sensitivity in the Province beyond formal or informal trainings. We still have to see these
done in practice.

Gender and development (GAD) should be fully integrated into the mainstream of any
FOCAS project. It is recommended that GAD should be discussed in detail and applied in
any project and capacity building activity of Governance Committees, project proponents and
implementing teams, respectively.

4. Project Budget Summary and Project Time Frame

PACAP earmarks about PhP86 Million for Misamis Occidental FOCAS areas in a period of
five years. With four FOCAS Areas, the amount was equitably distributed at PhP21.5 Million
per FOCAS area. These were consulted, discussed and approved by the respective FOCAS
Management Committees (FMCs) and the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC).
Details of each project will be discussed in separate proposals that will be developed by
FOCAS member proponents relative to the period of their implementation.

5. Report Composition

This report consists of five (5) main chapters, namely, the Provincial Information and the four
(4) FOCAS Areas of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project, Save Labo
River Project, Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management and Development Project and the
Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project. Other pertinent data are included
as attachments.

Chapter 1 - 13
References:

1. Misamis Occidental Provincial Development Plan, PPDO, 1995 – 2000 (Under
Governor Chiongbian); and Misamis Occidental Provincial Development Plan, PPDO,
1999 - 2004 (Under Governor Clarete)
2. Misamis Occidental PDP, 1995 – 2000 and
3. New PACAP Operations Manual, 2005
4. Ozamiz City Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan (OCISWMP), Ozamiz City
Solid Waste Management Project Technical Working Group, August 2003
5. Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan for the Province of
Misamis Occidental, Main Report, joint project of JICA and DILG, CEST Inc., March
2005
6. Provincial Website, www.misocc.gov.ph, downloaded June 2005
7. “The Mt. Matutum Integrated Conservation and Development (MICADEV) Program”,
South Cotabato, CSDO, 1998
8. Updated KFC Strategic Development Plan of Misamis Occidental (2005-2008),
August 2005, PATSARRD

Chapter 1 - 14
CHAPTER 2
MT. MALINDANG RANGE NATURAL PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
STRATEGIC PLAN

I. BACKGROUND / RATIONALE

A. Situationer

Mt. Malindang Range was originally proclaimed as national park and watershed
reserve on June 19, 1971 through Republic Act No. 6266 with an area of about
53,262 hectares. With the passage of the NIPAS Act of 1992 (R.A. 7586), the said
national park became an initial component of the National Integrated Protected Areas
System or NIPAS. Pursuant to the provisions of the NIPAS Act, Mt. Malindang was
processed, through the assistance of two foreign-funded projects namely the National
Integrated Protected Areas Programme (NIPAP) and the CARE Philippines
AWESOME Project, into an integrated protected areas system (IPAS). On July 30,
2004 a law (R.A. 9304) was finally approved declaring the said mountain range as Mt.
Malindang Range Natural Park. The proclamation covered the core zone of about
34,694 hectares and a buffer zone of 18,334 hectares. The core zone is the
remaining forest vegetation while the buffer zone is composed of the open and
cultivated portions of the park already occupied by the indigenous people and the
tenured migrants.

Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park plays an INDISPENSABLE ROLE in sustaining
the total well-being of the entire province of Misamis Occidental. As watershed, it
supplies potable water mainly for domestic and agricultural uses of the inhabitants
both in the upland and lowland areas. The fresh water also promotes diversity and
production of fish and marine resources. The forest in the park enhances formation
and collection of rainclouds promoting regular rainfall that sustains agricultural
productions in the upland areas. Its forest prevents landslide, serves as carbon sink
and oxygen producer. It also provides beautiful scenery and wholesome atmosphere,
habitat of diverse species of plant and animal life and the dwelling place of the
indigenous people. The mountain range serves as barrier that protects the entire
province against strong winds and storms.

The mountain range also contains other important natural resources that could boost
the progress of the province. This resources include 15 major rivers and 17 smaller
rivers potential for generation of cheap energy through mini-hydro power plant,
commercial water utilization and irrigation systems. There are also potential sites for
ecotourism development.

There are more or less 4,000 families residing within the boundary of the natural park.
About 57% of the total number are members of the Subanen tribe. They are mostly
marginal and sub-marginal farmers and vulnerable groups and rarely reached by
basic services of the government.

B. Problem Statement

The main problem in Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park is the continuous degradation
of its natural resources due to the economic activities of the inhabitants in the area.
There are about 3,800 to 4,000 families of marginal and submarginal farmers living
inside the park whose income cannot meet the needs of their families. Most of them
depend on the resources of the park for firewood and construction timber. When they

Chapter 2 - 1
are in dire needs of cash especially when members of their families are sick, they
would gather resources from the park for additional cash. Others gradually encroach
the protected area by clearing narrow strips or small patches of forest for agricultural
production. Because of poverty, the children of this protected area occupants have no
chance to get higher education so they will grow up to become forest dependents in
the near future.

The degradation of the resources in the park has already caused several
environmental disturbances that adversely affect other ecosystems and most
inhabitants in the province. This include shortage of potable water during dry months,
destructive floods during rainy season, degradation and loss of soil fertility, siltation
and sedimentation of rivers, irrigation systems and coastal areas, changes in rainfall
or climatic pattern and degradation of the quality of air and water. The miserable living
conditions of the protected area occupants, if not attended, will totally destroy the
resources in the park and may trigger occurrence of environmental catastrophes in
the entire province.

C. Problem Analysis

Low No alternative Lack of Development
Income Livelihood Programs

POVERTY
(UPLAND DWELLERS)

Illegal cutting of Kaingin / Illegal Hunting &
Timber/Un- Crude Farming / Gathering of NTF
sustainable use Land Conversion

DEGRADATION OF PROTECTED AREA /
WATERSHED

Water Decrease Floods / Environment Loss of Potential
Shortage FOOD Calamities Related Resources /
Production Illness Opportunities

POVERTY
(PROVINCE WIDE)

Chapter 2 - 2
D. The Importance of PACAP Project

The most alarming problem that poses as threat to the lives of all inhabitants in Misamis
Occidental is the continuous degradation of the watershed and protected area. The root
cause of this problem is the poverty of the people living within and surrounding the protected
area. The Local Government and National Agencies in the province lacks the necessary
resources to address this problem considering the financial crisis suffered by the country at
present. If this problem will not be checked soonest, degradation of the park would become
serious that might result to destructive calamities or catastrophes in the future, as
experienced by other areas in the country. Besides this point, experiences teach us that
rehabilitation of denuded forest ecosystem is very difficult, expensive and yield insignificant
results.

The FOCAS Project under PACAP Program could be the answer to the prayer of the
alarmed stakeholders of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park. The objective of the program
aims to cure the very root cause of the problem prevailing in the said protected area.
Although some important and direct aspects of biodiversity protection and conservation is
not actually targeted by the program, this could be used as leverage to generate the active
participation of the people in the locality, particularly the program beneficiaries, in protecting
the park and watershed area against destructive activities of other individuals or groups.

E. Significance To Provincial Development Programs

The general development strategy of the provincial government of Misamis Occidental is
capsulized as CHAMPS which means:

C - Competency
H - Health
A - Agricultural Production
M - Maintenance of Peace and Order
P - Protection of Environment
S - Social Services

Each of these programs would certainly fail if the most vital ingredient is absent. This
vital ingredient is water which is the primary function of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park
being a prime watershed area. Therefore, any measure geared towards addressing the
problem in Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park no matter how big or small it is would support
the development progress of the provincial government.

F. Other Programs in MMRNP

Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park has been a recipient of several foreign funded programs
and projects. These include the following:

1. National Integrated Protected Areas Programme (NIPAP) – This was a special
program of the DENR funded with grant assistance from the European Union. It
was implemented on July, 1996 until March, 2001. This project was mainly aimed
at establishing the protected area following the provisions of the NIPAS law or
Republic Act No. 7856. The Project was responsible in delineating the protected
area boundary, strengthening the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB),
having the area proclaimed by the President as NIPAS Area, preparing the
General Management Plan, constructing the Protected Area Office, implementing
intensive information and education activities, linkaging with various Local and

Chapter 2 - 3
National Government Agencies and intensifying the protection of the biodiversity
of the protected area.

2. AWESOME Project of CARE Philippines – AWESOME which means Agencies
Working for the Ecological Sustainability of Mt. Malindang and Environs was
designed to continue the activities left by NIPAP on the legal establishment of the
protected area and provide livelihood assistance to the protected area occupants.
It was funded with a grant from the Royal Netherlands Embassy and
implemented starting January, 1999 to December, 2004. Some of its notable
achievements were its assistance in the congressional act that proclaimed the
mountain range as Natural Park, the monumenting and vegetative demarcation of
the protected area boundary, the delineation of various management zones,
organization of several people’s organization, assistance in the issuance of land
tenure instruments to seven (7) PO’s, implementation of agroforestry (coffee and
abacca plantation) projects covering few hundreds of hectares within the buffer
zone, rehabilitation of about 300 hectares of denuded area, inventory of flora and
fauna in Don Victoriano, linkaging with other NGO’s and different government
agencies, information and education program and assistance in forest protection
and law enforcement.

3. BRP-SEARCA – is the Biodiversity Research Program for Development in
Mindanao focus on Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park which was jointly
implemented by the Southeast Asian Regional Center for Research in Agriculture
based at UPLP and a group of Dutch researchers, the project was funded by the
Dutch Government. It started in 1999 and ended on May, 2005. it was mainly a
research project covering the northern portion of the protected area and the
province forming like a wedge.

4. PALS – the Philippines Australia Local Sustainability program only covers
insignificant portions of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park particularly in
communities inside the buffer zone. At the start of the project the Protected Area
Office was involved in some activities but as the project goes on, our involvement
gradually phased out. The Mt. Malindang PAMB through resolution was even
requesting the project management office for brief informations about the projects
proposed to be implemented within the communities inside the protected area to
prevent possible environmental impacts but no response was made.

II. FOCAS STRATEGY AND LOGFRAME

A. Vision

The project envisions a healthy and abundant protected area surrounded by
economically developed, ecologically conscious and socially bonded communities
working for the protection of biodiversity and conservation of natural resources.

B. Mission

To uplift the living condition and raise the ecological awareness of the people living
within and around Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park to generate their active
participation in the protection of biodiversity and conservation of natural resources of
the protected area and sustain its life-support services for the present and future
generations.

Chapter 2 - 4
C. Objectives:

1. To improve the living condition of at least 20% of the protected area occupants
within the FOCAS Site by 2010 onwards.

2. To reduce the dependency of the park occupants on the resources of the park by
year 2008 onwards.

3. Increase the forest cover of the park by about 260 hectares and reduce soil
erosion from the area by year 2010.

4. Enhance the ecological awareness of about 20% of the upland dwellers by year
2010 and make them active conservation advocates and protectors of the park.

C.1 Impact on Income of Park Occupants

The low income of park occupants directly effects the rate of destruction of the biodiversity of
the protected area. About 90% of the park occupants in the area are marginal and sub-
marginal farmers. Their monthly income ranges from P1,500 to P3,000 monthly. With this,
they could hardly send their children to school to get higher education. Without attaining
higher education, their children would end up becoming park dependents in the future
adding to the mounting pressure against the park. In times of dire needs, they would usually
gather resources from the park for additional cash.

C. 2 Effects on Dependency of the Park

At present, there are about 19,000 families that are considered immediate threats to Mt.
Malindang Range Natural Park. Roughly 4,000 of these families are living inside the park
particularly in the proclaimed buffer zone and designated multiple-use zones of the protected
area. About 57% of these are living within the FOCAS site. Most if not all of this family-
inhabitants or park dwellers depend on the park’s resources for firewood and lumber
materials for the construction or repair of their houses. For firewood alone, about 10,000
cubic meters of wood are removed from the park monthly or 120,000 cubic meters of wood
removed every year. With the prevailing market price of P100 per cubic meter of firewood,
the amount lost would reach to P12,000,000 yearly. If the ecological and aesthetic value of
the trees cut will be considered based on the value of every tree in MMRNP set by PAMB,
the total value of loses from the government would amount to P120,012,000,000 yearly.

The cutting and gathering of timber for construction materials is another serious threat to Mt.
Malindang Range Natural Park. The pressure is coming from the inhabitants outside the
park. At present there are only two (2) concerned areas in MMRNP where illegal cutting of
timber has not been solved. Rough estimates show that about Forty (40) cubic meters are
cut and removed from this 2 barangays every month or about 480 cu. m. yearly. At an
average of 1.5 cubic meters per tree, this would give an average of 26.6 trees felled down
every month or 319 trees yearly. Assuming that one tree of the same size is cut in each of
the remaining 63 barangays (there are 65 barangays inside the park) within MMRNP every
month, this would make a total of 1075 trees or 1,212.5 cubic meters of timber removed form
the park yearly. Given the prevailing market price of P5,000 per cubic meter of hardwood,
the value of timber lost is P6,062,500. Adding this to the ecological value of big trees at
40,000 each, the total loss would amount to Forty Eight Million, Sixty Two Thousand Five
hundred (P48,062,500) pesos. If this amount will be added to the value of firewood lost, the
government will lose about One Hundred Twenty Billion, Sixty Million, Sixty Two Thousand
Five Hundred (P120,060,062,500) pesos worth of precious natural resources.

Chapter 2 - 5
Another activity of the people in the area that contributes to the degradation of the park is
illegal hunting and gathering of non-timber forest products. No estimate has ever been made
on the amount of damage resulting from this activity but the impacts are readily observable
such as the decrease in population of important fauna and flora. There are even few species
of wild animals such as Parrots and Cockato which are already extinct in the area. Several
species of flora such as Apitong, Almaciga and Rattan are already endangered.

C. 3 Soil Erosion Problem

The biggest factor that cause soil erosion is the lost of forest vegetation or soil cover
resulting from illegal cutting of timber and slash-and-burn method of farming into the park.
The adverse effects of this phenomenon are not only limited to the locality but extends to
other ecosystems. This includes denudation or even desertification of the soil, pollution of
water sources, sedimentation of siltation of river beds, lowland farms and marine sanctuaries
and destruction of potable water and irrigation systems. The value of damage that may result
from this phenomenon would be enormous and sometimes shocking on the part of the
government, but up to now no study has been made regarding this concern.

C. 4 Advantages on Ecological Awareness

Cultivating the awareness of the people about the importance of biodiversity and natural
resources is difficult. Most people, especially the upland dwellers, would equate ecological
awareness program as strategy to deprive them of their believed right to use the resources
of the protected area. Consistency, credibility, patience and time are the most important
factors for the success of an ecological awareness program but its effect would help sustain
the beneficial functions of the protected area.

D. Strategies

1. Design and implement agro-forestry projects within the buffer and multiple-use
zones that would prevent further degradation of the soil and maximize land
production to raise the family income of park occupants and hillside farmers.

2. Identify and develop natural-resource-based cottage industries that can generate
income for the vulnerable groups particularly the women, the elderly and the
indigenous people.

3. Develop and utilize renewable natural resources such as water that would
enhance production, promote industrial activities and support other development
programs in the communities.

4. Design and implement appropriate ecological awareness program that would
raise the level of consciousness of the people in the locality and generate their
active participation in the total protection of the park and other ecosystems.

5. Rehabilitate ecologically critical portions of the park that would enhance
regeneration of biological diversity and improve the life-support functions of the
protected area.

6. Regularly supervise and monitor the different programs and evaluate the
progress of every activity in order to assure success of the project.

Agroforestry, as used in this plan, would mean planting suitable combination of short term,
medium term and long term agricultural crops and forestry crops on the same piece of land
to maximize production and assure sufficient land or soil cover that would prevent or stop

Chapter 2 - 6
soil erosion. Cultivating seasonal cash crops like corn or camote may not necessarily be part
of the project but would be helpful to enable the farmer to recover the cost of land
preparation and the cost of maintaining the short-term and long-term crops during the first
two years of project development. The medium-term and long-term crops to be planted
should be those that have been found to be suitable in the project site, have ready market
and could give higher income to farmers.

Developing cottage industries using renewable natural resources available in the area such
as bamboo, abaca fiber, tiger grass, vines and climbing ferns could generate additional
income for the family. This could be more appropriate for women and elderly people who
may no longer be capable of doing strenuous activities in the field.

Utilizing water resources through potable water system and small water impounding system
would help much in improving the living condition of the upland dwellers. This would
enhance production of crops and livestock which would could increase income to farmers.
This would also promote sanitation and good health to beneficiaries thereby reducing if not
eliminating the cost of illness and medicines. Potable water when properly manage could
generate income for the peoples organization and part of it may be used for the protection
and development of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park.

Ecological awareness program is considered the most effective tool in biodiversity protection
and conservation of natural resources. Although this has been found to be difficult and
expensive due to man’s resistance to change, the effect is lasting which can be gauged
through the change in behavior of an individual. It therefore promotes built-in sustainability of
the program. This strategy may include information dissemination, distribution of reading
materials, installation of billboards and signages and conduct symposia of fora. Audio or
audio-visual programs over the radio and television my be included when deemed
appropriate or necessary.

Rehabilitation of denuded or ecologically critical parts of the protected area would help
reduce the volume of soil eroded from the site. This will have beneficial effects not only to
the protected area in terms of conserving the soil and regenerating the biodiversity but also
in other ecosystems such as reducing the siltation in rivers and coastal areas. Pollution of
water is also reduced through this activity.

Supervision and administration of the project implementation and monitoring and evaluating
the progress of various components or activities are the most important and critical factors
that would generate success of any project. For this purpose a technical working group of
the PAMB which is equivalent to the FOCAS Management Committee has been organized
to facilitate preparation and approval of project proposals while the Protected Area Office of
the PAMB under the PASu will facilitate implementation of project activities in the field.
Necessary financial and logistic supports are necessary for the purpose.

Project Components:

The realization of the foregoing strategies would involve the designing and implementation of
several detailed projects, such as the following:

1. Agro-forestry Development
1.1 Agricultural Cash/Perenial Crops development
1.2 High-value Fruit Trees Plantation development
1.3 Industrial Tree Plantation development

2. Reforestation of Ecological Critical Areas

Chapter 2 - 7
3. Livestock Production
4. Cottage Industry Development
5. Resource Utilization
− Potable Water System Development
− Small Water Impounding System Development
6. Ecological Awareness Enhancement Program
7. Administration / Supervision, Monitoring and Evaluation.

The Target Goal, Location, Time Table and the corresponding budgetary requirement for
each of the above-listed projects are indicated on Table I.

E. Participation of LGU’s and Key Stakeholders

The Local Government officials from the municipal down to the barangay level shall be made
to undergo orientation and promotion programs so that they would be able to fully
understand and appreciate the project considering that its objectives are geared towards
further development of their areas of jurisdiction. Their understanding and appreciation of the
project would be used as toll to push them to actively involve in the project implementation
by overseeing and monitoring the progress of project activities.

Other key stakeholders such as environmental NGO’s and government agencies shall also
be included in the process. The DENR and PAMB being the administrator and manager of
the protected area where the FOCAS site is located shall take the lead role in coordination
the ENR Office of the Provincial Government.

F. Stakeholders Analysis

The FOCAS Site being a proclaimed natural park and a prime watershed area has a very
wide range of stakeholders. They include the inhabitants of the park both indigenous people
and tenured migrants, lowland and coastal communities, various government agencies
dependent on or utilizing the water generated from the watershed, and environment
enthusiasts both coming from within or outside Misamis Occidental. Each group has its own
particular interest on the park or forest, but the most focus is the interest of the park
occupants who consider the park as their dwelling place and source of living. The economic
activities of this group greatly affect the condition of the park. Most members of this group
are the poorest of the poor who are farming marginal and sub-marginal lands. Their income
could hardly meet the needs of their family so in times of dire necessities, they would turn to
the resources of the park for additional cash. Their activities therefore adversely affects the
interest of other groups, hence the need for a program that would address this unique and
complicated problem.

It is also important to note that Mt. Malindang is the home of the very vulnerable Indigenous
Peoples’ Group – the Subanoen. The Subanoen, as documented by the National
Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), are the original settlers of Mt. Malindang
protected area. These groups ran powerlessly towards the forest when Christians and other
settlers invade the lowlands. At present, these tribal peoples are still observed to practice
their traditional cultures. Although they only represent lower than 5 percent of the total
affected population, it is still worthy to consider them in project implementation anywhere in
Mt. Malindang where they live.

The primary beneficiaries of the project would be the forest occupants within the FOCAS
site. The project site could cover eleven (11) barangays of Don Victoriano, fourteen (14)
barangays of Concecpcion and five (5) barangays of Bonifacio. Within this barangays, there
is a total of about 2,401 household occupied by about 11,575 individuals per survey and
registration of protected area occupants conducted by the DENR Protected Area Office and
Chapter 2 - 8
CARE Philippines in 2000. Of the total protected area occupants, about 57% belong to the
indigenous people. The number of protected area occupants-households and gender class
is indicated on the following Table to wit:

FOCAS Site Total Total Male Female
HH Occupants
A. Don Victoriano
1. Napangan 183 886 444 442
2. Gandawan 51 254 130 124
3. Mara-mara 34 173 94 79
4. Petianan 89 438 219 219
5. Liboron 42 192 101 91
6. Nueva Vista 226 1,094 578 516
7. Tuno 172 834 421 413
8. Bagong Clarin 93 443 223 220
9. Lampasan 195 976 505 471
10. Lake Duminagat 55 282 146 136
11. Lalud 394 1,786 844 942
TOTAL 1,534 7,358 3,705 3,653
FOCAS Site Total Total Male Female
HH Occupants
B. Bonifacio
1. Mapurog 202 1,055 565 490
2. Anonang 36 193 104 89
3. Kanao-kanao 96 498 248 250
4. Buenavista 5 23 8 15
5. Montol 36 176 95 81
TOTAL 375 1,945 1,020 925
FOCAS Site Total Total Male Female
HH Occupants
C. Concepcion
1. Upper Salimpuno 60 254 132 122
2. Lingatongan 47 163 85 78
3. Pogan 15 81 39 42
4. Virayan 48 197 114 83
5. Marugang 33 147 86 61
6. Small Potongan 42 226 114 112
7. Upper Dapitan 38 195 94 101
8. Upper Dioyo 5 31 14 17
9. Upper Putongan 20 90 42 48
10. Poblacion 21 123 60 63
11. Capule 24 115 59 56
12. New Casul 22 100 53 47
13. Guiban 29 110 60 50
14. Bagong Nayon 88 440 217 223
TOTAL 492 2,272 1,169 1,103

G. Park Protection Program

The primary beneficiaries of the project would be required, as a condition of the project, to
protect the resources of the park within their respective barangay. Each barangay must
recruit, train and deploy a team of at least five (5) bantay kinaiyahan volunteers who will
check all who have adverse intentions. The team shall also conduct regular patrol inside the
forest within their barangay. The team members may be provided incentives such as
accident or health insurance by the project.

Secondary beneficiaries such as the water users outside the protected area shall be
required to pay water-users fee. The amount collected shall be deposited with the PAMB or

Chapter 2 - 9
the Barangay as Trust Fund. This will be used to sustain the park protection activities after
the termination of the project.

H. Organizational Structure/Roles and Functions

Mt. Malindang Range was proclaimed a protected area under the category of a natural park
through Republic Act No. 9304 on July 30, 2004 pursuant to the provisions of the National
Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Act of 1992 which is RA 7586. As such, the
park is managed by a Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) a multi-sectoral body
organized pursuant to RA 7586 and RA 9304. Most of its functions are planning and policy
formulation. The Protected Area Superintendent (PASu) who is designated by the said laws
as the chief executive officer of the Protected Area executes the plan and implements the
policy formulated by the PAMB.

For the purpose of facilitating the implementation of PACAP in Mt. Malindang range, the
Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) on May 12, 2005 execom meeting, organized a
technical working group which would serve as the FOCAS Management Committee of the
project. The committee composed of the following:

1. PASu Rolando S. Dingal - Chairman
2. Timo-ay Ruben Da. Baliton - IP representative
3. Mrs. Carmelita Ason - PO representative
4. Mr. John Pelare - NGO representative
5. Mrs. Evelyn Dumanjug - LGU Bonifacio representative
6. Mr. Carmelito Semilla - LGU Concepcion representative
7. Mrs. Melquicedes Lagas - LGU Don Victoriano representative

Initially, the office of the Protected Area Superintendent was designated as the FOCAS-MC
Secretariat but later on due to problem on qualification per PACAP criteria, the secretariat
work was transferred to the Misamis Occidental Federation of Cooperatives. The transfer
was made through resolution passed by the PAMB Technical Working Group during a
meeting held on August 5, 2005. The secretariat is primarily responsible in overseeing the
execution of the project. The FOCAS management committee shall be mainly responsible in
assisting preparation of projects proposals by proponent organizations and deliberating the
same for submission or endorsement to the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC). The
structure of the FOCAS MC is presented on the following table:

Chapter 2 - 10
Structure of Mt. Malindang FOCAS-MC

PASu, MMRNP
FOCAS MC Chairman

FOCAS MC
Secretariat
(MOFECO)

LGU Rep. LGU Rep. IP Rep. Women’s PO Rep. LGU Rep.
Bonifacio Don Victoriano Don Vic. Rep. (KATAWHAN-MO) Concepcion

Project
Proponents &
Implementations

I. Risk Assessment and Mitigations

As experienced in the previous projects and management operations in Mt. Malindang
Range Natural Park, the risk encountered were man-made and natural phenomena. Man-
made destructions include occurrence of forest fires and breakdown of peace and order in
the remote areas. Natural phenomena include drought and prolonged intense rainfall.

Occurrence of forest or grass fire is often associated with long dry season and carelessness
in burning agricultural wastes. This problem can be prevented through information and
education program which would give due emphasis on the zero-burning of agricultural
wastes and instead convert them to organic fertilizers. In addition, the project beneficiaries
shall be required to organized and train a fire brigade who will suppress accidentally
generated fire.

Break down of peace and order and objection of the community people were usually
experienced in areas where people needing basic government services were not punctually
attended. The project itself would be used to deter the problem through intensive information
and education program. During the process, the advantages and disadvantages of the
project shall be discussed vis-à-vis the development programs of the government.

Natural phenomena such as drought is experienced in the site every seven (7) to eight (8)
years, however, areas near the edge of the forest of Mt. Malindang would not be seriously
affected due to the moisture (fogs) coming from the forest. Preventing further degradation,
through illegal logging or kaingin-making, of the forest would help solve the problem. The
beneficiaries would be the effective protectors of the forest in the barangay.

Chapter 2 - 11
The impact of prolonged intense rainfall in the mountainous or hilly areas would be on soil
erosion and possible landslide which is caused mainly by the velocity and volume of surface
runoff or overland flow. Constructing canals along the contour which would safely discharge
surface runoff to the gullies and creeks would minimize soil erosion and reduce the risk of
landslides.

J. Failure and Successes of Previous Projects

The previous projects implemented in the protected area such as NIPAP (1997-2001) and
AWESOME Project of CARE Philippines (1999-2004) experienced delay in the initial
implementation of the project due to misconceptions and mis-informations which triggered
resistance from several interest groups. However, with the intensive advocacy and
promotion, the problem was addressed but lot of time was consumed before the projects
finally took-off. Another problem encountered was the sustainability of the projects when
they phased out. The DENR and the LGU’s despite their commitments, particularly on
NIPAP, failed to sustain the project. The AWESOME project on the other hand got no
commitment for sustainability from the DENR because of the tight financial condition of the
said agency. Despite the problems some of the project beneficiaries managed to continue
some of the project activities like maintaining the areas/plantations that would provide them
income or assurance of better future.

K. Budget Summary

The total estimated budget from PACAP for 4 years for the Mt. Malindang Range Natural
Park Development Project is about P 21,500,000. This amount include the budget of FOCAS
MC Secretariat in the amount of P3,000,000 for three years. The items, activities and
budgetary requirements are indicated on Table 3. The counterpart of PAMB includes
building, vehicles, equipments and manpower that would be used for the implementation of
the project.

L. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework

The detailed activities and the target goal indicated on Table 2 shall be used as the
barometer in measuring the total success of the project. However the progress of the
individual project shall be gauged using the detailed project proposal submitted by the
proponent and approved by the PACAP authorities for the purpose. The FOCAS-MC
Secretariat shall regularly undertake monitoring activities to detect deficiencies and
recommend appropriate corrective measures.

M. Sustainability Plan

Sustainability is an important factor for the total success of the project. Considering the
limited implementation period of PACAP FOCAS Project in Mt. Malindang Range,
sustainability program shall be pushed in all project activities such as getting the
communities of the project beneficiaries and generating support from other stakeholders’
awareness. The PAMB and FOCAS management committee shall also leverage the project
with the Local Government Units, DENR and other government agencies and non-
government organizations. Local legislations for the conservation of the park and collection
of user’s fee for water generated by the project shall also be considered as source of
financial resources that could be used in sustaining the protection of the watershed

Chapter 2 - 12
N. Attachments/Supporting Information (Left at the PACAP Provincial Office)

Tables:

1. Table 1 – FOCAS Logical Framework
2. Table 2 – Proposed Projects/Activities and Budgetary Estimates
3. Table 3 – Proposed 5-year Budget for MMRNP FOCAS-MC Secretariat

Appendices:

1. List of Barangay and its Barangay Chairman within the FOCAS Project
2. Names of Local Government Officials of the municipalities covered by MMRNP
FOCAS Project.
3. Summary of Protected Area occupants
− Land Classification Map
− Land Use Map
− Barangay Map
− Road Network Map
− Vegetation Map
− Contour Map
− Slope Map
− Water Sources Map
− Suitability Map for Corn
− Suitability Map for Durian & Rambutan
− Suitability Map for Abacca
− Suitability Map for Coffee
− Erosion Map

Chapter 2 - 13
Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project
Logical Framework

Table I. Logical Framework of MMRNP Development Project
GOAL / Objectives Strategy / Input Objectively Verifiable Means of Verification Important Assumptions
Indicators (OVI) (MOV)
Goal: Sustain or improved the watershed
functions and other life-support
services of Mt. Malindang Range
Natural Park by implementing an
Integrated Protected Area
Management, promoting
environment-friendly farming
practices and enhancing
stakeholders participation.

Objective No. 1

Improve the living condition of the Plant short term, − 60 hectares planted to cash crops − Monitoring and − Funding Support
10% of the protected area medium term, and long - 310 hectares planted to high-value crops evaluation report − Peace and order maintained
occupants within the FOCAS Site term high-value crops. − 30 hectares planted to high value fruit − Maps, pictorials or − LGU Support
by 2010. trees documentations of the − Climate favorable
Develop potable water − 150 hectares of denuded watershed projects
system and Small Water reforested − Survey and assessment
Impounding System − Three potable water systems or SWIS report
(SWIS). established and operational
− 1000 families benefited by potable water
Develop other IGP’s ie. supply or SWIS
Cottage industry and
livestock-raising

Chapter 2 - 14
Objective No. 2
Reduce the dependency of the Advocacy − Project participants stopped gathering − Survey and assessment − Peace and order maintained
protected area occupants on the firewood from the PA. report − LGU Support
resources of the park. Information and − Hunting and gathering of NTF’s in FOCAS − Monitoring and evaluation − Funding support.
Education Campaign Site Stopped report
− Absence of illegally cut timber or traces of − Pictorials and
Leveraging with illegal cutting in the area. documentations
beneficiaries − Absence of kaingin or slash & burn farming. − Testimonies of local
officials

Objective No. 3
Establish Production − 150 hectares planted to Industrial Trees − Project monitoring and − Funding Support
Increase the forest cover of the Forest − 150 hectares of denuded area reforested evaluation report − Climate favorable
area by about 260 hectares by with indigenous tree / plant species − Maps, pictorials and − Peace and order maintained
2010. Rehabilitate denuded documentation
areas

Objective No. 4
Conduct training, − At least 400 families practiced agro-forestry − Monitoring and evaluation − Funding Support
Enhance the ecological seminars, symposia and farming systems. report − Peace and order maintained
awareness of about 20% of the educational trips − At least 5 Bantay Lasang Volunteers are − Survey and assessment − LGU Support
PA occupants within the FOCAS designated/appointed and deployed in report
site and make them active Produce & Distribute every barangay within the FOCAS area. − Accomplishment report
conservation advocates and reading information − At least one (1) fire brigade organized in − Barangay Checkpoints
protectors of the park. materials every barangay within FOCAS project site
− 80% of the population in FOCAS project
Conduct environmental knew the importance of biodiversity and
radio/TV program watershed area to their own lives and lives
of other people in the surrounding areas.
Environmental Video/Film
showing

Project leveraging

Chapter 2 - 15
Table 3. Mt. Malindang Proposed Projects / Activities and Budget Estimate (Revised 14 October 2005)

PROJECT / ACTIVITY LOCATION (MUN. / BRGY.) TIME FRAME BUDGETARY REMARKS
REQUIREMENT
1. Agri-cash Crops Production (Lutya, Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area Aug. 2006 to Dec. 50,000 Cost include purchase
Chayote) 5 has. 2006 propagules, planting &
maintenance
2. High-value Crops Plantation Dev. Don Vic – 30 has. Abaca, 20 has. Aug. 2006 to July. 3,000,000 Cost include purchase
( Abaca – 70 has. Banana-60 has.) Banana; Concepcion – 40 has. Abaca, 2008 propagules, fertilizer,
10 has. Banana; Bonifacio-50 has planting & maintenance
Banana
3. High-value Fruit Trees Plantation Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area- 10nhas. June 2006 to Dec. 300,000 Cost include purchase
Development (Don vic – 4 has., Concepcion-3 has., 2007 propagules and fertilizer,
Bonifacio-3 has.) planting & maintenance
4. Small and Large Livestock Production Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area (200 hh) Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2,000,000 Cost include purchase of
36 hh – Bonifacio; 50 hh – Concepcion’ 2007 stocks & construction of
114 hh – Don Victoriano shed
5. Industrial Tree Plantation Development Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area (130 has.) Jan. 2007 to Dec. 4,000,000 Cost include purchase
( Falcatta and Rubber ) Concepcion- 45 has., Bonifacio- 45 has. 2008 propagules, fertilizer,
Don Victoriano- 40 has. planting & maintenance
6. Reforestation of Denuded areas Don Victoriano & Concepcion (130 has.) June 2007 to Dec. 1,000,000 Cost include purchase
Integrated with potable water system 2008 propagules and planting.
7. Indigenous-resource based cottage Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area Jan. 2008 to Dec. 250,000 Cost include training and
Industry Dev. (Handicraft) ( 100 households) 2008 initial purchase of raw
materials
8. Ecological Awareness Program Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area July 2005 to June 600,000 Cost of construction
2008 materials
9. Potable Water System Dev. or Small Don Victoriano – 2,000,000 July 2006 to June 3,000,000 Level 2 water system
Water Impounding System Concepcion – 1,000,000 2007
10. Microfinance Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area July 2006 beyond 2,000,000 Revolving Fund
11. Personnel and Admin Cost Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area July 2005 to June 2,300,000 Admin cost
2009
12. Supervision / Administration , Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area July 2005 to June 3,000,000 For three years
(FOCAS-MC Secretariat) 2009
TOTAL 21,500,000

Chapter 2 - 16
CHAPTER 3
SAVE LABO RIVER PROJECT
STRATEGIC PLAN

Definition of Terms

ABC - Association of Barangay Captains
ATRE - Alternative Technology Resource Center
ARC - Agrarian Reform Community
AWESOME - Agencies Working for Ecological Sustainability of Mt. Malindang and
its Environs
CBO - Community Based Organization
CSO - Civil Society Organizations
DA - Department of Agriculture
DENR-CENRO - Department of Environment and Natural Resources City Environment
Natural Resources Office
DENR-EMB - Department of Environment and Natural Resources Environmental
Management Bureau
DENR-PAO - Dep’t of Environment and Natural Resources Protected Area Office
DLR - Department of Land Reform (formerly DAR)
DSWD - Department of Social Welfare and Development
FOCAS - Focused Community Assistance Scheme
GEMPCO - Green Earth Multi-Purpose Cooperative
IAD - Integrated Area Development
IEC - Information Education and Communications
ICC - Immaculate Conception College
KATAWHAN- MO - Kwalisyon Alang sa Tinuod ug Walay Hunong Alayon Pangkatawhan
sa Misamis Occidental, Inc.
LGU - Local Government Units
MAMA - Malindang Mountaineers Association
MAO - Municipal Agriculture Office
MC - Medina College
MIT - Misamis Institute of Technology
MOFECO - Misamis Occidental Federation of Cooperatives
MOELCI 11 - Misamis Occidental Electric Cooperatives 11
MOWD - Misamis Occidental Water District
MPDO - Municipal Planning and Development Office
MU - Misamis University
MUCEP - Misamis University Community Extension Program
NIA - National Irrigation Administration
NGO - Non Government Organization
OCIADP - Ozamiz City Integrated Area Development Plan
OCPDO - Ozamiz City Planning and Development Office
OCSUDA - Ozamiz City Subanen Development Association
PACAP - Philippines –Australia Community Assistance Program
PALS Program - Philippines-Australia Local Sustainability Program
PMO - Project Management Office
TCPDO - Tangub City Planning and Development Office
TLDC - Technology and Livelihood Development Center
TWG - Technical Working Group
SLRP - Save Labo River Project
1. BACKGROUND / RATIONALE

A. General Information

Misamis Occidental in Region X is situated in the northeastern tip of the Zamboanga
peninsula, Mindanao. It has an area of 1, 932.32 sq. km. with a projected population of 516,
000 this year 2005. 1 It has 17 political subdivisions with three Cities and 14 municipalities.
At the heart of the province lies the Mt. Malindang Natural Park (R.A.9304) covering 53,254
hectares protected area . The province is blessed with 18 major watershed catchments and
32 rivers serving water to the three provinces of Misamis Occidental, Zamboanga del Norte
and Zamboanga del Sur. In the last twenty years, Misamis Occidental lost more than 60% of
its lush forest cover and is now reduced to a core of 34,694 hectares. Mt. Malindang and its
rivers are threatened by mostly human made development activities like: land conversion,
logging, agriculture, and migration into the upland areas and river slopes for settlement &
agriculture due to the socio-economic & population pressures in the lowlands. Further, the
increasing demand for water (agriculture & domestic uses), timber, sand & gravel for
household & commercial construction materials aggravates the situation.

Within the province, the most threatened rivers and its watersheds are Labo River in Ozamiz
City, and Layawan River in Oroquieta City. These two rivers served the two cities where
population pressure and watershed degradation is high. Previous programs in the province
and funded studies, initiated by the DENR, Misamis University Community Extension
Program (MUCEP), Local Government Units (LGUs) & CARE indicated interventions were
limited. In comparison, Layawan River was recognized as one of the cleanest river of
Region 10 and Oroquieta City a hall of fame awardee as the cleanest and greenest city.
The recognition is for the still relatively good condition of Layawan River and its watershed.
In comparison, Labo River needed immediate intervention owing to its importance as source
of water supply for the domestic, agricultural and commercial needs for the more than 150,
000 residents of Ozamiz City, Tangub City and the Municipality of Clarin.

Labor River and its Watershed is located at the southeastern side of the province of Misamis
Occidental. It covers an approximate area of 11, 900 hectares from the boundaries of Don
Victoriano in the upland headwater, 46 barangays in the whole or part from the municipality
of Clarin, Tangub City and Ozamiz City which land area covers one half of the watershed.
Studies that characterized Labo River initiated by the DENR-CENRO, and other studies
funded by CARE-Philippines’ AWESOME Project indicated that livelihood, trainings and
reforestation through MUCEP were initiated. Alternative livelihood assistance and
sustainable upland farming technologies reforestation and forest protection were also
implemnted by the AWESOME project in the barangays of Hoyohoy, Banglay (Tangub City),
Gala & Guimad (Ozamiz City). Figure 1 below shows Labo River Location Map.

1
NSO-PPDO 2000 Census.

Chapter 3 - 2
Figure 1. Labo River Location Map

The LGUs placed priorities to the conservation, protection and rehabilitation of the river as
indicated in their Municipal/City Development and Annual Investment Plans. However,
funding problems and other equally beneficial development priorities hindered efforts on
conservation, protection and rehabilitation. The DENR through the PASu and the PAMB
placed importance on the protection of the headwaters of Labo River, but, also faced
funding difficulty to sustain the interventions. Given the veracity and the complexity of the
problem confronting the Labo River, the Save Labo River Project FOCAS Committee seeks
to address the gaps, strengthen and complement the development initiatives by working in
partnership with the Labo River key stakeholders. Thus, given the relative importance of
Labo River catchments area that covers the Cities of Tangub and Ozamiz and the
Municipality of Clarin, it is deemed urgent that Save Labo River Project be implemented.

B. Problem Statement

The “Poor living conditions of people and the continuing decline & loss of forest in Labo River
Watershed catchments area and adjacent communities” brought about by a complex web of
problems, conditions and underlying causes that needs an integrated area approach and
concerted participation, collaboration & political will of duty bearers. (see fig. 1 – problem
analysis)

The core problem of Labo River Watershed was due to several factors. Among the
underlying causes are: limited ability of service and resource providers resulting to weak
governance and thinly spread budget among the many services that also need to be met,
the effect is weak law enforcement specially on environment protection. The rapid population

Chapter 3 - 3
growth which caused the high demand for household and commercial use of sand, gravel
and other natural resources of Labo River Watershed further contributed to the degradation
of the area. The perceived high incidence of crime, illegal drug trade & use issues continue
to be unfavorable for investments contributing to unemployment and under employment.
The continuing demand for construction sand & gravel, extraction of water for agriculture &
household consumption, continuing wildlife hunting/gathering, cutting of forest trees,
unsustainable farming practices, occupation of riverbanks for agriculture further results to
soil erosion, siltation, low level of productivity and therefore low income among families. The
conditions are coupled by the low level of awareness of people of the importance of the
watershed and indiscriminate dumping of waste adds to the decline of water quantity &
quality.

Only modest improvements were seen in the economy over the last few years despite
increased budget allocations because these are overtaken mainly by increase of migration &
population in the urban, upland and critical areas on the watershed.

The foregoing causes of the poor living conditions of people and continuing decline and
loss of forest in Labo River Watershed catchments area and adjacent communities was
identified by the concerned NGAs, LGUs and CSOs in the area prior to the arrival of
PACAP. The DENR-CENRO of Ozamiz City took the lead in the preparation of Labo
Watershed Development Plan in 1999. Among the CSOs in 1999 also, a MOA was signed
by the Misamis University, CARE-Philippines AWESOME Project, the LGU of Misamis
Occidental and DENR for the Save Labo River Project (SLRP). The project’s original goal
was to establish a system to protect and conserve the Labo Watershed in accordance with
the social and economic aspirations of the people along with the biophysical and legal
considerations. In the case of the LGUs, Ozamiz City included in the city’s Comprehensive
Land Use Plan (2000) and Feasibility Study for the Ozamiz City Integrated Area
Development Project (OCIADP-2001) projects for the watershed, among others Hinterland
Greening, Guimad Eco-Village, Livelihood and Institution Building. Tangub also included in
their Development Plan, preparations for Hoyohoy Highland Park and Botanical Garden,
while the Municipality of Clarin, reforestations.

Despite the DENR-CENRO Labo Watershed Development Plan, and although included in
the development plans of the LGUs of Ozamiz, Tangub, and Clarin, budgetary constraints
and priorities both in the national and local level, not only among the NGAs and LGUs, but
also among the CSOs, resulted to modest implementation of SLRP activities. Thus, the
problem of Labo River Watershed remained.

The identification of Misamis Occidental as AusAID FOCAS area, and the arrival of PACAP
in the province, and eventual identification of Save Labo River Project as a FOCAS area, is
timely and godsend. The poor living conditions of people and continuing decline and loss
of forest in Labo River Watershed catchments area and adjacent communities must be
responded, thus, based on the analysis made, the SLRP FOCAS MC during the strategic
planning meeting developed the Vision, Mission, Goal and Objectives for SLRP.

Chapter 3 - 4
C. Problem Analysis:
Rapid Weak law Weak Unfavorable Rapid
Underlying Causes High
population and policy governance investment increases
increase enforcement Unaligned incidence climate, high in prices
of graft &
esp. in rural on priorities un- of oil &
corruption
agricultural environment and thinly employment cost of
areas protection spread & living
budget under
allocations employment

HH and Weak & Presence Inactive Low Poor Upland
lack of of illegal River income infrastruc migration,
comme Mgt. lack of riverbank
active cutting of ture
rcial
Primary & Secondary Causes

Council. capital, occupatio
communi trees & (water,
demand Need of Low n and
ty & wildlife adoption product
systems, Land
for people’s gathering of Labo ivity & post Tenure
sand organizat River lack of harvest insecurity
and ions Watershed alternati facilities
participat Mgt Plan ve &
gravel ion liveliho market)
od

Irrigation Heavy Unsustainable Improper Low
Quarrying
for water use farming solid awareness
agriculture among HH practices waste levels
& (kaingin), Soil disposal
institutions erosion

CORE Poor living conditions of people and the continuing decline & loss of forest in Labo
River Watershed Catchment areas and adjacent communities.
PROBLEM

Poor health, Worsening Loss of Further in- Floods &
sanitation, mal- degradation of the riverine & migration & loss of
Effects & Consequences

nutrition, environment coastal encroachment properties
morbidity, & (siltation, decline biodiversity of forestlands
child mortality in water quality & riverbanks
& quantity)

Further stagnation of socio- Further widening of Increase in the incidence
economic conditions disparities of rural, of crime & worsening of
urban & coastal peace & order conditions
communities

Figure 2. Problem Analysis – Causal Relationship

Chapter 3 - 5
D. Importance of PACAP Intervention

PACAP technical and financial support to the Save Labo River project will facilitate the
implementation of the following based on SLRP objectives:

Capability building programs for the CSOs, implementing the SLRP, as well as LGUs and
NGAs who will benefit from the training attended by their representatives in the SLRP
FOCAS MC, and those who will also become members of the proposed re-organization of
Labo River Management Council.

Implementation of sustainable alternative livelihood projects to increase production and
income of households, thus, reduce poverty and improve the standard of living of the
residents of Labo River Watershed and adjacent areas.

Area development projects and mobilization of stakeholders and resources for the effective
conservation, protection, development and management of Labo River Watershed using the
integrated area development approach.

Moreover, PACAP intervention and experience and expertise in Integrated Area
Development will ensure greater success of the SLRP in augmenting livelihood of the
residences sustainable use of resources of Labo River Watershed, and sustain the gains
made by the SLRP preliminary projects. PACAP fund will also be used as leverage for more
investment and as counterpart for LGU budget allocations for the proposed SLRP. The
proper use and utilization of the fund would enable the proponents to gain experience,
expertise and credibility to access other fund sources-local and foreign for Labo River
Watershed. The creation of Provincial Stakeholders Committees and FOCAS Management
Committees as one of the PEF will also hasten the partnership and involvement of multi-
sectoral and inter-agency participation in solving the complex web of problems, conditions
and underlying causes of Labo River Watershed problems.

E. Significance of PACAP Intervention to Provincial Development Plan

PACAP intervention in terms of technical expertise and experience, and financial grant
will support the Misamis Occidental Provincial Engagement Strategy “ to reduce poverty in
the region and improving the quality of life of its people by a) augmenting traditional and/or
providing alternative livelihood through agri-aqua base food, raw materials, and industrial
finished products, b) utilizing reasonably and sustainably the natural resources, and c)
considering prominently the rehabilitation, protection, and preservation of the province’s vast
watershed area and its coastal resources. Likewise PACAP intervention for Labo River
Watershed SLRP will help the province achieve the vision of “Misamis Occidental a major
provider of agri-based food, raw materials, industrial, finished products and one of the
tourism center in Mindanao through optimum and responsible utilization of resources”.

Furthermore, PACAP intervention for Labo River Watershed SLRP is in accordance with
PACAP Goal : To reduce poverty and improve the standard of living of poor communities
through sustainable economic and social development”. The alternative livelihood,
capability buildings and Labo River Watershed strategy to undertake area development
projects for the conservation, protection and sustainable development of Labo River
Watershed, as well as the strategy to implement environmental protection advocacy
activities including Information Education and Communications programs firmly adheres to
both PACAP Obligatory and Discretionary strategies.

Chapter 3 - 6
F. Previous Programs and Projects in Labo River Watershed :
Proponent Time Brief Description Coverage/ Area Current
and Program/ Frame Status
Project
1. LGU of 2003 - constructed all- ARC of Kinuman On-going
Ozamiz City weather farm-to-market Norte
and concrete bridge
with NIA, DLR - proposal for another DALICAPAN Planning
all-weather farm-to- ARC stage
market
2. LGU of 1998- -Implemented eco- Hoyohoy, On-going
Tangub City present tourism and Tangub City
reforestation initiatives
in the identified eco-
tourism site of the city
3. LGU of 2000- -Reforestation activities Clarin On-going
Clarin present
4. DENR- 1998- -Social Forestry -Hoyohoy,
CENRO present projects Tangub City
-Guimad and
Guingona,
Ozamiz City
5. CARE- 200- -Coffee, Abaca Hoyohoy, Tangub Finished
Philippines 2004 plantations City
AWESOME -Capability Building -Guiad, Ozamiz
Project -Agro-Forestry City
-Livelihood-Consumer
store,
-Ginger, peanut and
ube production
-Water system
-Reforestation
6. Misamis 1999- -Barangay Guimad -Guimad Ozamiz On-going
University present Integrated City
(MUCEP) with Development approach
DENR_ (BAGIDA)-Livelihood,
CENRO, LGU Engineering Services,
of Ozamiz City Reforestation, Health-
and Misamis Nutrition-Medical- -Hoyohoy,
Occidental, Dental services, etc. Tangub City
CARE- -Save Labo River -Barangays
Philippines Project :Agro-Forestry- Kinuman Norte,
AWESOME Nursery, Tree planting, Guimad,
Project, PRA, community- Dalapang, Panta-
Misamis based Collect-A-Seed on, Capucao P,
University Campaign and Gala, Ozamiz
Medical Center City

Chapter 3 - 7
7. DLR-NIA- 2000 ARC Development : Barangay On-going
WB -all weather twelve (12 Kinuman Norte
kms. ) farm-to-market
road, one (1) unit
concrete bridge,
technical assistance
livelihood, irrigation
facilitiy, community
organizing, capability Barangay On-going
building Dalapang,
-Proposed Liposong,
DALICAPAN ARC: all Capucao P and
weather farm-to-market Pantaon,
road Ozamiz City
technical assistance
livelihood, irrigation
facilitiy, community
organizing, capability
building
8. -Potable water system Finished
KATAWHAN -Alternative health On-going
-MO Care
-Community
Organizing
-Integrated Organic
Farming
9. PIPULI -Environmental
Foundation/ Education
BEA -Livelihood, Organic
Farming Technlogy

II. The FOCAS STRATEGY AND LOGFRAME

A. Vision
A “life-giving” watershed protected, conserved and sustained by empowered communities.

B. Mission
Mobilize stakeholders for the effective conservation, protection, development and
management of Labo River Watershed using the integrated area development approach.

C. Goal
Conserve, protect and rehabilitate the natural resources of Labo River Watershed and uplift
the socio-economic well-being of household and communities living within the watershed
and adjacent areas.

Chapter 3 - 8
D. Specific Objectives

At the end of four (4) years the following specific objectives will be met:
1. Reorganize Labo River Watershed Management Council actively participated by
concerned Local Government Units, key stakeholders from National Government
Agencies (NGAs), Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), Academe and Private
Sector implementing sustainable development program.
2. Implement sustainable alternative livelihood to increase production and income of
households.
3. Undertake area development projects for the conservation, protection and
sustainable development of Labo River Watershed.
4. Implement environmental protection advocacy activities including Information
Education and Communications programs, policy studies and legislations .

E. Strategies
Conservation & Protection of the River
Watershed Area and Poverty Reduction,
Improvement of the Household Livelihood
Security (Quality of Life) of vulnerable
groups/communities

Capacity Building & Agri-Forestry Alternative Livelihood Conservation
Empowerment of Key Development & Development & (Environment
Agencies, Stakeholders & Sustainable increasing the Household Rehabilitation,
Community Organizations Resource Reforestation &
Livelihood Security
Utilization Protection)

Integrated Area Development Approach

LGUs, Gov’t
IPs Women Vulnerable Groups
Line NGOs

Agencies Private POs Other Disadvantaged Communities

Figure 3. Sustainable Development Strategy Diagram

The strategy is to attain socio-economic and sustainable natural resources management
thereby improving the overall household livelihood security of communities through:

a. Increasing the capacity and empowerment of community organizations and Labo River
Management Council/advocacy group or network of SLRP concerned entities thereby
improving the service delivery systems.

Chapter 3 - 9
b. Agro-forestry development and sustainable resource utilization.

c. Providing alternative livelihood opportunities through on-farm and off-farm economic
activities.

d. Conservation, protection and rehabilitation of watershed and other critically denuded
areas through IEC, law enforcement, policy advocacy, and area development activities.

The Reorganization of Labo River Watershed Management Council (LRWMC)/advocacy
group or network of SLRP concerned entities is envisioned to act as catalyst, mobilizing the
appropriate concerned National Government Agencies (NGAs), as well as those from the
Civil Society Organizations e.g NGOs POs, those from ther Private Sectors-Business,
academe, other groups, entities and other stakeholders for the implementation of sustainable
development program for Labo River Watershed. The LRWMC shall become the policy-
making body/organization/structure asked to oversee the protection of Labo River
Watershed.

Livelihood intervention is one of the strategies since studies 2 and previous experiences show
that in protecting the environment the people should be a priority, and their economic needs
should be addressed. The sustainable livelihood that will be implemented refers to agro-
forestry, agro-ecotourism and other environment–friendly farm and off-farm alternative
means of income for the residents of Labo River Watershed. Short, medium, and perennial
agricultural crops shall be utilized by the project alongside fruit and timber trees to ensure
long term capacity of Labo Watershed to sustain life.

Area development projects mean the implementation of vegetative (agro-forestry) and non-
vegetative measures for the conservation, protection and sustainable development of Labo
River Watershed. The construction of gabions, small water impounding projects, mini dams
together with reforestation activities will be applied for Labo Riverbank and Watershed
rehabilitation.

The commitment and involvement of Labo River Watershed stakeholders shall be obtained
through the implementation of intensive environmental protection advocacy activities
including Information Education and Communications programs, policy studies and
legislations. Ordinances and other legislations shall be enforced, together with strengthening
of Community-Based Organizations (CBOs). The involvement and partnership of the
government agencies and the private sector in all phases of SLRP shall be made certain,
and ensured that it will be institutionalized even after PACAP support, one venue would be
the LRWMC.

The integrated areas development approach is a prime project approach in these strategies
in order to implement area specific socio-economic and natural resources management
projects with equity resources allocation. Cutting across all program component strategies
are the Gender, Equity & Diversity and Capacity Building of key agencies, stakeholders and
community empowerment. All project activities is through collaboration between NGOs,
LGUs, NGAs, POs, Private Sectors and participation of the indigenous peoples (Subanen &
others), vulnerable and disadvantaged group in the community. Indigenous people (IP) in
the area are concentrated in Barangay Guimad-highest with more than 90 % of the

2
United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Geneva, Switzerland.1994

Chapter 3 - 10
residents 3 , and also in Barangays Guingona and Trigos all in Ozamiz City. The IPs role in
SLRP shall be enhanced in particular as implementer of forest protection, livelihood and
capability building projects. IP and migrant residents in Guimad and in the other two
barangays of Ozamiz City are mainly farmers planting corn and root crops, they also raises
upland vegetable-carrots, pechay, cabbage, ginger, and sayote. Vegetable cultivations in this
barangays particularly in Guingona are already in the buffer zones. Market for their products
is Ozamiz City.

Project Components:

The foregoing strategies shall be implemented through the following proposed projects:
1. Capacity and Institutional Building
2. Agro-Forestry
3. Area Development Projects
4. Advocacy and IEC activities

F. Stakeholder Analysis

In identifying the Labo River Watershed stakeholders, this stakeholders’ analysis framework
was used:

Stakeholders Analysis Matrix (SAM)
(A) (B) Key Stakeholders
Important Important & Influential
(1) Primary
Stakeholders of high importance, Stakeholders appearing to have -LGU
but with low influence. This implies a high degree of influence on -NGOs/POs
that they will require special the project, who are also of high --Religious Sectors
initiatives if their interests are to importance for its success. This -Academe
be protected implies that the project will need -ABC
-NGAs to establish good working -MOWD
-Religious Sectors relationships with these -NIA-Irrigators, farmers, etc.
-Individuals – old families stakeholders to ensure and -DECS
-Private Sectors-business effective coalition for the project -IPs
- Private and semi-government -LGU -Private Sectors: Rotary,
/GOCCS: -NGAs Jaycees, business, etc.
NIA-Irrigators, farmers -Religious Sectors
DECS -NGOs
-IPs -Academe
-ABC
-Communities
-GOCCs-MOWD, MOELCI
(C) (D) (2) Secondary
Not So Important But Influential Not Important/Not Influential
- It was agreed that all
Stakeholders with high influence, Stakeholders with low or have sectors are Lbo River
who can therefore affect the no influence on, or importance Watershed stakeholders
project outcomes, but whose to project objectives and may owing to the fact that
interests are not the target of the require limited monitoring and everybody is dependent and

3
BAGIDA Document. College of Arts and Sciences, Misamis University, Ozamiz City

Chapter 3 - 11
project. This conclusion implies evaluation. They are unlikely to will be affected by Labo
that these stakeholders may be a be the subject of project River Watershed situation
source of significant risks, and activities or management. and activities therein.
they will need careful monitoring
and management.

Parameters for Assessing Stakeholders’ Degree of Importance and/or Influence
Parameters Specific Variables
Full (legal) authority and control over the study area
MANDATE/VMG Supportive to the Save Labo Project
Protection/ conservation focus VMG / mandate

-LGUs, NGAs, Academe, Religious Sectors , NGOs, POs, GOCCS-
MOWD
Provides balanced environmental conservation and economic
PROGRAMS & development related interventions in the area
SERVICES Consistency with its mandate and VMG
Significant impact/or with direct link to Save Labo River Project

- LGUs, NGAs, Academe, Business ( as users, others negative-
quarry), GOCCS-MOWD
Geographic focus within the study area
COVERAGE Clienteles: directly affected and significant in number.

- LGU, NGAS, Academe, Private Sector Organizations
Quantity
IMPACT ON WATER Quality
RESOURCES Access

- All sectors-concentrate on NIA, HHs, industries-water-MOWD
Moral and ethical peer pressure
INFLUENCE Strong opposition/support
Leadership (economic and political clout)

-Academe. Religious Sectors, CSOs-NGOs, POs, Rotary,
Jaycees, etc.

Based on the results of the initial stakeholders’ analysis, the following were initially identified
for the proposed re-organization of LRWMC. Table 3 - Proposed LRWMC Sectoral
Representatives:
Sector Representatives
LGU Provincial, Municipality/City LGUs, Barangays-ABC and
communities
NGA DENR-PAO, NIA, DAR, DA, DSWD
NGO KATAWHAN-MO Group, MOFECO, AWARD, ATRE
PO NIA Irrigators’ Ass’n., Farmers Ass’n., MAMA, WOMENS, youth
etc.

Chapter 3 - 12
ACADEME MU, MIT, ICC, Medina College, Local DECS
IPs Tribal Chieftains
GOCC MOWD, MOELCI, etc.
Private Chamber of Commerce, Land Bank, etc.
Religious Parish Pastoral Council, Baptist, 7th Day Adventist, etc.

G. SLRP Four-Year Project Logical Framework

PROJECT DESCRIPTION PERFORMANCE MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS
INDICATORS VERIFICATION
GOAL

Conserve, protect and Labo River Watershed Labo River
rehabilitate the natural Management Plan Data from Watershed
resources of Labo River developed by LRWC Community-Based stakeholders will
Watershed and uplift the and adopted by the Monitoring Teams understand the
socio-economic well-being LGUs concerned monitoring records of importance and
of household and At least 50 Household control plots/areas necessity of the
communities living with the /year adopting PRA and Baseline protection,
watershed catchments and sustainable farming Data conservation and
adjacent areas. practices. Income and rehabilitation of
Rehabilitation of at Household Livelihood Labo River
least 150 has in Sustainability Watershed.
selected Labo River monitoring data Residents of
Watershed denuded Number of patrol Labo River
areas. works Watershed
increased incomes of needs additional
at least 500 HHs from on-farm and off-
improved agriculture, farm additional
new crops, livestock means of
management. livelihood
Sustained Networking
of CBOS, Women’s
Assn., LGU, NGAs
OBJECTIVES Legal registration
Strong and viable Labo papers (SEC, CDA,
1. Re-organize Labo River Watershed BRW, etc) LGUs/CBOs,
River Watershed Management Council, LGUs actively agrees/enters in to
Management Council and CBOs, BDCs participating and MOA with LRWMC
strengthen key implementing programs resource/budget are project
stakeholders: NGO, NGAs, and services allocated for LRWMC
Academe & Private Sector LRWMC Organized Project Management
to implement sustainable Labo River Watershed and Implementation
development program Management and prepared projects
Development Plan funded and
(LRWMDP) adopted by operational
LGUs LRWMDP
Environment Agenda Documents
drafted and adopted. CBOs, Long Range

Chapter 3 - 13
PROJECT DESCRIPTION PERFORMANCE MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS
INDICATORS VERIFICATION
LGU LRWMDP budget Development Plan
allocations CBO Policies and
Water Resource Plan Operating Systems
Developed documents/
Manual

2. Implement sustainable Intensive agricultural Actual Verification of Financial and
alternative livelihood to production of cash and SALT and other other institutional
increase production and tree crops, and sustainable practices investors e.g. Land
income of households alternative income- and structures Bank of the
generating enterprises Farm Plan Philippines,
in high priority Documents Quedan Cor
communities, as an GCUS Region 9 agrees
alternative to Monitoring Reports and enters into
dependency on the CBRMP, MOA, etc. MOA with CBOs,
forest or shifting Curriculum Women’s Assn.,
cultivation in Labo Developed, Training for SLR Projects
River Watershed s and Design completed,
the adjacent areas. Training reports by
Agroforestry, trainers and
Agribusiness/ consultants
Enterprise NGAs MOA with
Technologies Adopted SLRP for technical/
Agro-eco tourism financial partnership/
facilities constructed assistance
and enterprise created

3. Undertake area Soil and water No of has.
development projects for Conservation projects: reforested
the conservation, Vegetative : No of kms of
protection and sustainable reforestation and riverbank
development of Labo riverbank rehabilitation rehabilitated
River Watershed Non-vegetative: Approve infra
Gabions, small water designs, budget and
impounding projects actual construction
reports

4. Implementation of IEC and advocacy M & E reports
environmental protection activities in order to No of IEC materials
advocacy activities raise the level of produces
including IEC programs awareness and take No of broadcasts/ Air
and policy studies action to support these time receipts
efforts Approve IEC plan

Chapter 3 - 14
III. Project Components

PROJECT COMPONENTS
Community Based Envi
Area Development Projects: Soil
Livelihood Protection Program and
PRIORITY and Water Conservation Projects
Advocacy
BARANGAYS
Non-vegetative
Eco- Micro Vegetative / /Infrastructure- Forest
Agro-Forestry Water system IEC
tourism finance Reforestation gabions, protection
SWSIP
Tangub City:
Hoyohoy x x x x x x
Ozamiz City:
Guimad x x x x x x x
Guingona x x x x x x
S. Abordo x x x x x
Trigos x x x x x
Kinuman Norte x x x x x x
Gala x x x x x
Dalapang x x x x x
Capucao P x x x x x
Sangay Daku x x x x x
Embargo x x x x x
Panta-on x x x x x
Calabayan x x x x x x
Mentering x x x x x
Kinuman Sur x x x x x x
Cogon x x x x x x
Bagacay x x x x x x
Cavinte x x x x x x
Balintawak x x x x x x
Manaka x x x x x x
Litapan x x x x x x
Labinay x x x x x x
Clarin:
Kabungahan x x x
PROJECT COMPONENTS
Community Based Envi
Area Development Projects: Soil
Livelihood Protection Program and
PRIORITY and Water Conservation Projects
Advocacy
BARANGAYS
Non-vegetative
Eco- Micro Vegetative / /Infrastructure- Forest
Agro-Forestry Water system IEC
tourism finance Reforestation gabions, protection
SWSIP
Gata Diot x x x
Lapasan x x x
Gata Daku x x x

Budget 1,000,000 1,000,000 9,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 200,000 800,000

Total budget 13,500,000 4,000,000 1,000,000

Budget for Project Components = P18,500,000
Budget for FOCAS Secretariat = P 3,000,000
-------------------
Total Budget for SLRP FOCAS = P21,500,000
===========

Chapter 3 - 16
IV. Organizational Structure/Roles and Functions

Labo River
Watershed
FOCAS MC

FMC

Livelihood Area Dev't Projects Capacity Building Advocacy
NGO/PO/CSO/PSO NGO/PO/CSO/PSO

The proponents that will undertake SLRP livelihood, area development projects, and
environmental protection and advocacy activities shall be the CSOs-NGOs, POs in
partnership with NGAs, LGUs, and those from the Private Sector Organizations. The
proponents will submit a proposal based on the priority projects identified by the SLRP
FOCAS Management Committee (MC).

The selection of the SLRP FOCAS MC was made during the PACAP organized
preliminary meeting 4 of CSOs-NGOs and POs, LGUs, and NGAs concerned and identified
to be involved with various programs and projects in Labo River Watershed area. In the
selection of SLRP FOCAS MC, participants agreed to have nine (9) members composed
of three (3) members from the LGUs of Ozamiz and Tangub cities, and from the
Municipality of Clarin , three (3) members from the NGAs with considerable programs in the
area: : DENR-CENRO, DLR and NIA. The remaining three seats were allocated for:
NGOs-one, POs-one and academe-one. The NGOs, POs elected among themselves who
will be their SLRP FOCAS MC representatives and the academe was represented by
Misamis University.

The elected and designated FOCAS Secretariat is Misamis University through its extension
arm the MUCEP given the fact that it initiated SLRP prior to PACAP arrival in the province.
MUCEP shall facilitate the activities of the SLRP FOCAS MC, conduct preliminary
assessment of maturity of POs, facilitate linkages and collaboration among institutions,
oversee the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of the SLRP, prepare M & E reports
to the PACAP Provincial Action Officer through the Provincial Stakeholders Committee
(PSC).

V. Promotion of Sound Environment Practices

The SLRP proponents of which MUCEP shall be the lead CSO will implement projects that in
itself will mobilize stakeholders for the effective conservation, protection, development and
management of Labo River Watershed using the integrated area development approach.
The goal and the specific objectives of the project are geared towards reorganizing a council
for Labo River Watershed, sustainable alternative livelihood, area developments for the

4
1st SLRP FOCAS MC Meeting. May 9, 2005, Function hall, Misamis University , Ozamiz City
conservation, protection and sustainable development of Labo River Watershed as well as
implement environmental protection advocacy program.

VI. SLRP Sustainability Plan:

Sustainability of the SLRP is assured through the following:

Re-organization and strengthening of Labo River Management Council/ advocacy group or
network of SLRP concerned entities that will assume the policy-making and management
functions of SLRP, including legislations and ordinances.

Thorough assessment of partner CSOs/project implementers and feasibility of projects.

Involvement and participation of all stakeholders-LGU, NGAs, NGOs, POs, Private Sector
Organizations in project planning, implementation and management.

VII. Attachments/Supporting Information (left at PACAP Provincial Project Office)
- Chronology of Events Prior to PACAP Entry
- PACAP Entry and Identification of SLRP as one of Misamis Occidental FOCAS
area.
- Statistical Annexes
- Local Legislations and Ordinances
- SB Resolutions supporting PACAP Program
- Cooperating Organizations Executive Brief
- FMC Resumes

Chapter 3 - 18
CHAPTER 4
ILIGAN BAY COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT
STRATEGIC PLAN

Glossary of Terms
AusAID - Australian Agency for International Development
BAT - Bio-resource assessment Team
BDP - Barangay development Project
BFARMC - Barangay Fisheries and Agricultural Resource Management Council
BOT - Board of Trustees
CBU - Capital Build-Up
CCPL - Coastal Community Problem Loop
CRA - Coastal Resource assessment
CRM - Coastal Resource Management
CRMDP - Coastal Resource Management and Development Project
CSO - Civil Society Organization
FGD - Focus Group Discussion
FMC - FOCAS Management Committee
FOCAS - Focus Community Assistance Scheme
IAD - Integrated Area Development
IBICRMDP – Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management & Development Project
ICM - Integrated Coastal Management
IEC - Information Education Communication
IECP - Information Education Communication and Promotion
LGU - Local Government Units
MDP - Municipal Development Project
MFARMC - Municipal Fisheries and Agricultural Resource Management Council.
MMNRP - Mt. Malindang National Range Park
NGA - National Government Agency
NGO - Non-government Organization
ACAP - Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program
PES - Provincial Engagement Strategy
PO - People’s Organization
RAS - Responsive Assistance Scheme
SGF - Strategic Guidance Framework

Chapter 4 - 1
I. Introduction

As defined by Coastal Resource Management experts, Alan White and Nelson Lopez in
1991, Coastal Resource Management (CRM) comprises those activities that achieve
sustainable use and management of economically and ecologically valuable resources
in the coastal areas which consider interaction among and within resource systems as
well as those of humans and their environment.

One reason for instituting Coastal Resource Management (CRM) in Misamis Occidental
is its geographical location. The province located in the northwestern part of Mindanao is
proximate to important bodies of water. It is bounded on the northeast by the Mindanao
Sea, on the east by the Iligan Bay and on the southeast by Panguil Bay. On its western
side of the province a mountain range (with peaks as high as Mt. Malindang and Mt
Ampiro, approximately 2,425 meters and 1,532 above sea level, respectively) and its
rugged terrain that drops, rolls and stretches into plains up to the coast line , where 11
municipalities and 3 key cities with a rapidly increasing population.

Another compelling ground for implementing CRM in the province is the development
direction of Misamis Occidental as written in its Provincial Development Plan from 1999
to 2004. Misamis Occidental is envisioned to be “a major provider of agri-based food,
raw materials, industrial finished products and one of the tourism centers in Mindanao
through optimum and responsible utilization of resources.” Set as goal in the same
document is the “measurable improvement in the quality of life of the citizenry.” The
province can obtain success in its food security and poverty alleviation program, only by
expanding its development perspective in the coastal areas beyond fisheries production
and by reversing the open access regimes (situation where virtually there is no control in
fishing and other activities in the coastal area.)

A more recent impetus for putting CRM into action is the results of the Coastal Resource
Assessment conducted by the Save Nature Society, Incorporated (SNS) in the past
year. The study reveals that indeed the major fishing grounds of the province are
severely depleted. The resource base of its fisheries production and other sea-based
economic activities like tourism is in a precarious state. Coastal habitats like corals and
seagrasses are destroyed, a loss estimated to be at least fifty percent (50%) in the live
hard coral cover as well as in the seagrass cover in about 7 to 8 LGUs. There are only
about 2 to 3 LGUs that have mangrove areas characterized by abundance of mature
trees with large diameters (at breast height) as well as by abundance of seedlings and
saplings ensuring regeneration of the mangrove stands.

Coastal dwellers in 86 of the 106 coastal barangays visited by the Socio-economic
Assessment team complain of economic difficulties. In a great majority of these coastal
barangays, respondents of the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) perceive the lack, if not
the absence, of the services of the LGUs and the NGAs, particularly in providing
answers or resolutions to problems related to their economic welfare. Also observed in
these villages was the greater reliance of fishers, farmers and small enterprise owners
on private lending companies than on government credit institutions.

With the complexity of issues in resource management, a broad base of support is
required to make CRM work. No one organization can effectively address the multi-

Chapter 4 - 2
dimensional and multi-sectoral issues that CRM encompass. The coastal communities,
LGUs and national government agencies must thus learn the value of collaboration.

While success in resource management is usually attributed to the participation of key
stakeholders like coastal communities, the role of LGUs must also be recognized. CRM
must be seen as a governance responsibility. The 1991 Local Government Code has
devolved to the municipal government a number of functions related to CRM. Most
municipalities in Misamis Occidental, however, are constrained by meager budget and
lack of technical expertise and trained manpower.

In the face of these constraints at the municipal level, the Provincial Government is
determined to serve as coordinator of CRM by providing a mechanism for collaboration
among and between LGUs, NGAs and NGOs, by leveraging funds and technical
expertise to capacitate municipalities meet responsibility for the management of the
coastal environment and by increasing public awareness on the importance of coastal
resources.

II. ANALYSIS -BACKGROUND/RATIONALE

a. Description of the problem in the FOCAS area

Rapid increase in population growth along the coastal areas exerts great pressure on
various resources. A big percentage of the current populations are found along the
coastal areas. As a result coastal habitats are under considerable strain from human
activities. Domestic waste, bio-degradable and non-biodegradable materials are dumped
indiscriminately causing pollution. Threats due to oil, petroleum and grease pollution
from shipping operations in Jimenez contribute to pollution. Continued denudation of the
remaining forested patches in the upper water catchments area due to logging is
causing increased soil erosion. A water discoloration is observed in the mangrove areas
whenever rains come and the resulting runoff increases the sediment load of coastal
waters. Soil erosion leads to increased siltation of creeks, rivers, estuarine waters and
the coastal areas. Sedimentation is manifested by the presence of sand dunes in
Sinacaban and Jimenez. Mangrove forest conversion into aquaculture ponds,
reclamation for housing purposes, wharves, piers, dikes and other infrastructures
obstructing the waterways, over-exploitation of the mangrove trees (firewood, fish traps
and construction) cause disturbance to and threaten the viability of mangrove areas.
Blast fishing is one of many illegal ways of fishing which caused damaged to the coral
reefs of Tudela, Sinacaban and Panaon. Another consequence is the depletion of fishes
in shallow-water environments. Abrasive wave movement is a major threat in the
shoreline areas of Panaon and Jimenez. Erosion of mainland soil and the consequent
uprooting of trees along the shore are quite alarming.

Chapter 4 - 3
b. Problem analysis/sector analysis and needs/concern

Underlying Causes Environmental Social

Rapid increase Increased Lack of Funds for fishing development
in population sediment load of
coastal waters
Weak due to runoff Presence of many intermediary
implementation traders
of coastal
waters laws and Illegal logging in
policies mountain areas Financier-labor relationship

Mangrove forest Pollution from
Secondary Causes

Attitudinal problems of fisher folks
conversion domestic &
Primary &

industrial waste
Illegal fishing Less support on marketing
infrastructure
Pollution from
Waterways shipping
obstruction operations Lack of alternative livelihood

Depletion of Continued Over dependence on coastal
CORE PROBLEMS

fishes in denudation of resources
shallow-water the remaining
environments forested
patches Less opportunity to increase income
from traditional fishing
Sedimentation
Over-
Increased exploitation of Lack of improved technology
siltation the mangrove

Major threat in Habitat loss for Poverty
Consequen- ces

the shoreline breeding and
Effects and

areas spawning
grounds

Uprooting of
trees along the Water
shore discoloration

Figure 1. Coastal Community Problems Cause-Effect Relations

Chapter 4 - 4
In coastal areas and for families depending on the coastal resources, poverty is often
caused by low income and lack of employment opportunities. There also exists the
traditional attitude of fishing and so much dependency on coastal resource extraction.

Rural fisher folks find it difficult to venture into a more productive integrated fishing and
marine product processing because of the lack of technology and networking
information. The fate of the local fishing industry is even bogged down by inefficient and
ineffective implementation of the national and local policies and fishery laws.

Both problems on environment degradation and concern on the livelihood of the coastal
population should be addressed simultaneously. Providing the people with sustainable
livelihood would give the environment a better fighting chance. The same people who
abused and overused the coastal resources will also take care of the rehabilitation and
protection of the environment if they will be given the proper information. If necessary,
adapting the lesson from successful mangrove rehabilitation in Aklan, people will be
compensated to take care of the coast, on and off-shore.

d. Previous coastal resource development interventions

Coastal waters are considered to be the most productive areas in the marine
environment. The distance between nutrient-rich waters from the bottom and the
euphotic zone is small due to the shallow depth and strong vertical mixing induced by
wind (e.g. upwelling), freshwater runoff and tides (Mann, 1982). The close proximity to
the coast and river systems also makes the coastal seas highly vulnerable to the double
impact of pollution and aquatic resource exploitation. It is only by understanding the
mechanisms which control the behavior of the coastal environment and its biological
communities can the full potential and value as an important food source be preserved.

Current efforts to manage coral-reef areas involve coastal-zone plans, fishery
regulations, and marine parks and reserves. On the whole, these approaches have had
a very minimal impact on the status of the reefs and coastal areas of Misamis
Occidental. However, some example of isolated successes can provide information
useful for future planning. Although several provinces in the country have implemented
restrictions on coastal development in specific areas, through zoning or environmental
impact regulations, integrated coastal-zone management is still in the developmental
stages. However, nationally sponsored reef and coastal environment surveys have been
conducted through the effort of the governor’s program using PALS as funding agency
was successfully done by the Save Nature Society’s group of expertise in the conduct of
Coastal Resource Assessment (CRA) as baseline data for Coastal Resource
Management and Development Plan (CRMDP) in the future. The surveys include the
inventories of fish stocks, seagrasses, mangroves and the coralline areas of the
province as well as the socio-economic status of the people.

In many cases, the scope of this project has been limited to the availability of the
appropriate funds in the national budgets. Recently, however, international funds from
Aus-Aid have become available for work in coastal management, including the coral-reef
resources and more importantly the socio-economic aspect. A major effort in this
direction is the onset of the Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program
(PACAP) to advocate the Coastal Resource Management and Development Project
comprising the municipalities with coastal areas namely: Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez

Chapter 4 - 5
and Panaon as one focus area. This program involves interdisciplinary approach
between the proponent organization and the people’s organization with sustainable
livelihood and environment as the focal point of the task. The CRMDP will use a “bottom-
up” approach, based on sociological, economic, and environmental projects at the
village level, which will lead to recommendations for local control of the resources,
wherever feasible. The integrated approach is particularly necessary when determining
what other occupations might be appropriate for fishermen when fishery resources are
over-utilized. This approach is particularly applicable and also sustainable in the
management of the vast range of coral-reef resources and the coastal zone in general.

e. Possible intervention of PACAP

PACAP’s fund facility of PhP21,500,000 pesos for the project can serve as a starter fund
to pump prime other stakeholders to pool their resources in whatever forms (i.e.
counterpart funds, physical properties, technical support, human resources and others).
PACAP’s learned lessons from earlier AFA areas and IAD approach best practices can
be of great help when replicated in the same or much improved ways for the coastal
waters and communities of Misamis Occidental.

PACAP Program will be an institutional support to provide a mechanism for the
formulation of collaborative strategies and management systems so that the community
and stakeholders can develop a multi-sectoral participation in resource conservation
through integrated strategies in development planning to reduce poverty. PACAP could
also help most by supporting alternative livelihood activities to minimize pressure of the
coastal and marine resources and socio-economic projects geared toward proper
resource use, rehabilitation and or restoration of degraded habitats and ecosystems.

f. How intervention will support the PEF, SGF

The FOCAS Strategy is aligned with the first strategy in the PES which is “augmenting
traditional and/or providing alternative livelihood through agri-aqua based food, raw
materials, and industrial finished products”.

The FOCAS Strategy also is done via the IAD and supports the empowerment and the
protection of the vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of people.

Formulation of an integrated policy and legislative framework in the FOCAS area will
support the Provincial Engagement Strategy and Strategic Guidance Framework. Under
this strategy is the strengthening of the institutional capability particularly local
communities and the provision of alternative livelihood development of resources to
dependent communities.

Chapter 4 - 6
III. THE FOCAS STRATEGY AND LOGFRAME

VISION:
Productive coastal areas in four municipalities properly managed by capacitated local
government units (LGUs) and equally empowered communities towards sustainable
development.

MISSION:
Stakeholders who are deeply committed to implement various socio-economic programs
towards sustainable coastal resource development
GOAL:
Enhance coastal biodiversity of Iligan Bay by adapting an integrated area development
approach, promoting viable and sustainable economic enterprises, developing multi-
sectoral partnership and strengthening stakeholders’ participation.
OBJECTIVES:
™ To increase coastal resource productivity and household income by 20% thru
livelihood opportunities.
™ To equip LGUs and coastal communities with capabilities toward sustainable
environment development.
™ Enhanced coastal biodiversity thru the establishments of marine sanctuary,
mangrove rehabilitation, among others.

DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVELY MEANS OF IMPORTANT
VERIFIABLE INDICATORS VERIFICATION ASSUMPTIONS
(OVI) (MOV) (IA)
Goal
• Enhance coastal • Enhanced Biodiversity • Coastal Resource • Stakeholders
biodiversity of • Environment-Friendly Assessment commitment
Iligan Bay by Economic Enterprise • Project Monitoring and and support
adopting an Implemented Evaluation Report • Fund
Integrated Area • Increased mangrove areas, • BFARMC and commitment
Development sea grass and coral reefs MFARMC minutes of • Biodiversity
approach, • Improved water quality, meeting and attendance enhancement
promoting viable salinity sheet • Sustainable
and sustainable • Decrease Illegal fishing • Financial Reports economic
economic activities • Conduct of seaborne enterprises
enterprises, • Mobilized deputized fish patrol • Reduction of
developing multi- wardens and activate bantay • Fish catch reports illegal fishing
sectoral dagat activities
partnership and • Encouraged stakeholders • Peace and
strengthening commitment and order situation
stakeholders’ participation maintained
participation. • Managed waste disposal
• Viable People’s
Organizations
• Sustained Organizational
Structure and Financial
Management System
Objective No. 1
• To increase • At least 15 types of • FMC Periodic • Stakeholders
coastal resource alternative environment- Accomplishment Support

Chapter 4 - 7
DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVELY MEANS OF IMPORTANT
VERIFIABLE INDICATORS VERIFICATION ASSUMPTIONS
(OVI) (MOV) (IA)
productivity and friendly projects developed Reports
household and sustained by the • Project status reports
income by 20% community • Operations and financial
thru livelihood • At least 15 viable POs are system records and
opportunities organized, strengthen and manuals
registered with the • Monitoring and
authorized registering Evaluation/Project visits
agency • PO registration
• At least 150 members of the certificates
association or cooperative • Minutes of meetings
are classified either residing and activities
in the barangay • Attendance sheets
• At least 1 community • Beneficiaries profiling
organizations per barangay • FGD, GA, one-on-one
for the entire FOCAS area discussions
• Php 450,000 of Capital • Organizational profiling
Build-Up (CBU) generated • PO Financial Reports
by the community and Subsidiary Ledgers
organization

Objective No. 2
• To equip LGU’s • BDP and MDP developed • Copies of BDP and • Stakeholders
and Coastal and adopted MDP Support
Communities • Iligan Bay ICRMDP • Copies of policies, • Financial
with capabilities formulated and adopted in guidelines, and Support
toward consonance with Provincial resolutions
sustainable CRMDP • Copies of Iligan Bay
environment • Five major programs jointly CRMDP
development undertaken by the • Copies of plans,
stakeholders complementary programs including
to the Provincial budget
Engagement Strategy (PES) • Development Plans
implemented
• Minutes of meetings
and documentation of
activities
Objective No. 3
• Enhanced • Increased Biodiversity • Attendance during • Stakeholders
coastal population meetings and Support
biodiversity thru • Existing mangrove, sea assessments • Financial
the grass and corals habitat • Process documentation Support
establishments of maintained of each activities
marine • mangrove protected and • Municipal Ordinance on
sanctuary, rehabilitated the protection of marine
mangrove • Annual Bio-Resource sanctuary areas
rehabilitation, Assessment conducted
among others • degraded sea grass and
corals restored
• Four (4) Bio-Resource
Assessment Teams (BAT)
organized and functional
• Four (4) active and
functional Municipal Multi-
Sectoral Protection
Committees organized and
established

Chapter 4 - 8
DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVELY MEANS OF IMPORTANT
VERIFIABLE INDICATORS VERIFICATION ASSUMPTIONS
(OVI) (MOV) (IA)
• established marine
sanctuary areas enhanced

IV. Stakeholder Analysis Matrix
Key How are they affected by How they solve the problem
stakeholders in the problem
the area
Fishermen and Coastal dwellers and the Coastal dwellers and the
the fisherfolks fisherfolks are directly affected fisherfolks are organizing
by siltation and smothering i.e. themselves into associations and
soil erosion by improper cooperatives to consolidate
forestry, agriculture, mining, or resources and reduce demand for
construction practices; land scarce species by encouraging
reclamation. Loss of shoreline people to eat fish that are more
features like filling and hardy and easier to cultivate.
dredging and land
reclamation, erosion or
accretion due to placement of
shoreline structures and coral
mining and mangrove harvest.
Loss of physical habitat due to
destructive harvest practices
like walking on reefs and
breaking corals, blast fishing,
drive-in nets, use of poisons,
coral or sand mining and
mangrove conversion.
Excessive fishing effort,
hunting of wildlife, illegal and
destructive fishing methods
like poisons, dynamite fishing,
fine mesh nets, drift nets,
trawling and over harvesting
of benthos animals.
Coastal dwellers - Coastal dwellers and the
Most of the coastal dwellers are
fisherfolks are directly
trying their best to capture live food
affected by the declining
fish using hook and line and trap
fisheries in the locality
only and practice resources
affected by discharges of
conservation.
industrial wastes and
domestic sewage, runoff
from urban, agriculture, or
mining areas, waste from
animal and fish farming,
excess agrichemicals and
domestic fertilizer use,
industrial discharges,

Chapter 4 - 9
Key How are they affected by How they solve the problem
stakeholders in the problem
the area
municipal sewage, and
solid waste and oil
exploration and transport.
- Coastal dwellers although
less affected than farmers
are also vulnerable to
unfavorable fish catch and
the market buying price.
Local Local Government Units
Local Government Units
Government (Provincial; City; Municipal &
(Provincial; City; Municipal &
Units Barangays) could generate
Barangays) enact laws that are
(Provincial; City; only less revenue from these
favorable to the coastal resources
Municipal & fishery resources.
management and conservation but
Barangays)
needs willful implementation.
Coastal Coastal Farmers & other - Coastal Farmers and
Farmers People’s Organizations are Fisherfolk Communities &
Associations; the product of unfair and non- other People’s Organizations
Agrarian Reform equitable economic practices consolidate resources to gain
Communities & of the major players in the favorable prices of their
other People’s farming industry. products and access
Organizations, assistance from government
Bantay Dagat line agencies.
- Fisherfolks and peoples
organization ensure forest
protection and rehabilitation
and coastal biodiversity
protected area i.e. marine
sanctuary.
Non-
Non-government Non-government Organizations
government
Organizations involved in involved in helping the coastal
Organizations i
helping the coastal resources resources and conservation
and community development through identifying other means of
activities are concerned- income introduced and promote
based organizations alternative livelihood for fishermen
envisioning conservation and and reef users by emphasizing use
a fair sustainability livelihood. of reefs in the eco-tourism
program.
Other Other vulnerable groups such Other vulnerable groups such as
vulnerable as women and children are women and children help in the
groups such as indirectly affected through the augmentation of their income
women and household income derived through livestocks and hog raising
children from declining fish catch. as an alternative source of income
but practice the waste segregation
and recycling process.

Chapter 4 - 10
Key How are they affected by How they solve the problem
stakeholders in the problem
the area
Fish traders &
Fish traders & marketing - Some fishermen are trying to
marketing
intermediaries are the actual get credit sources that have
intermediaries
beneficiaries of the proceeds lower interest rates while
in the coastal resource others are planning to form
products and not the cooperatives so that their catch
fishermen and the fisherfolks. will not pass through
middlemen who buy it at a very
low price.
- Some members of the family
particularly the wives, peddle
their catch.
Philippine Fisherfolks and the Bantay Dagat
Fisheries abide by the ban on cutting of
Agencies mangroves under RA7161 of 1991
and active in the stewardship in
the coastal resource management.

List of IBCRMDP FMC Stakeholders

1. LGU of Tudela, Municipality of Tudela, Misamis Occidental
2. LGU of Sinacaban, Municipality of Sinacaban, Misamis Occidental
3. LGU of Jimenez, Municipality of Jimenez, Misamis Occidental
4. LGU of Panaon, Municipality of Panaon, Misamis Occidental
5. Save Nature Society, Inc. (SNS)
6. Paglaum Community Development Foundation Inc.
7. Alternative Technology and Resource Enhancement (ATRE & Co.)
8. Tudela Barangay Development Association, Inc. (TBDAI)
9. Peoples Eco-Tourism and Livelihood (PETAL) Foundation, Inc.
10. People’s Organization of the Coastal Communities of Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez
and Panaon
11. Womens Organization of the costal communities of Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez
and Panaon
12. Paglaum Cooperative
13. Katawhan Mo
14. Philippine National Bank (Ex-Officio Member)
15. Rural Bank of Oroquieta (Ex-Officio Member)
16. LeoPataSuccessFoundation, Inc.
17. Department of Environment and Natural Resources-PENRO
18. Sinacaban High School Teachers Environmentalist of Misamis Corp.
(SINAHSTEMCO)
19. CEPAS
20. SPSO
21. DLR
22. Mindanao State University –Naawan
23. Marine Science Institute – U.P. Diliman

Chapter 4 - 11
V. Organizational Structure/Roles and functions

FMC

FOCAS
SECRETARIAT

STAKEHOLDERS

PIT PIT PIT PIT PIT

To ensure implementation of IAD in Iligan Bay, stakeholders organized a technical
working group that would serve as the FOCAS Management Committee of the project.
The selection of the IBCRMDP FOCAS MC was made during the first meeting of CSOs-
NGOs and POs, LGUs, and NGAs concerned and known to have programs and projects
in Iligan Bay. Among the present were the NGAs, LGUs of Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez
and Panaon; Non-government organizations like SNS, ATRE and KATMO; and People’s
Organizations such as PAGLAUM, TBIDAI and MOFECO. The participants agreed to
have nine members composed of 4 representatives from the LGUs of Tudela,
Sinacaban, Jimenez and Panaon, 2 POs, 2 NGOs and 1 NGA represented by PASU
Exequiel Barillo who was also designated as the FMC chairman. The FMC shall be
responsible in assisting preparation of projects proposals by proponent organizations
and deliberate it for endorsement to the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC).

The Save Nature Society, Inc. surpassed the criteria for the selection of the lead
organization; hence elected as the Secretariat of the FMC – Iligan Bay. The secretariat
is primarily responsible in facilitating the activities of the IBCRMDP FOCAS MC,
overseeing the execution of the project, conduct preliminary assessment of maturity of
POs, facilitate linkages among institutions and prepare M & E reports to the PACAP
Provincial Action Officer through the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC).

VI. Risk Assessment

The increasing population in the communities within the coastal communities will
threaten the coastal resources and protected area. For example the municipality of
Tudela, Sinacaban and Jimenez, most of their coastal communities has encouraged
entry of upland migration. These people usually engage in destructive fishing practices.

Chapter 4 - 12
Which, if not properly managed, given the IEC, would result to coastal resource
destruction.

When majority of the people seeming apathy and lack of cooperation could attribute to
the erroneous information dissemination by some NGOs, if the coastal fisherfolks will
gradually claim the opportunity to fish and deprive them of their vested rights. This must
be aggravated by the program without conflicts and overlaps among fisherfolks.

The presence of armed elements believed to be members of some subversive groups
could threaten in the implementation of the project and might be the reason for a
temporary suspension of the program.

Traditional practices among the fisherfolks during fiesta and use the coastal waters for
their activities like banca riding contest, fluvial float contest, fish hunting contest and
many more cultural events based on their beliefs could attribute waste pollution of the
area which are destructive to environmental stability.

Late releases of project funds could hamper project operations. In cases like this, project
manpower complement could temporarily be reduced and most activities might be
suspended.

Chapter 4 - 13
VII. Budget Summary

Livelihood and Enterprise
Environment and Resource Management
Development
Land
TOTAL Community Seaweeds
Location Area Marine
Pop Mangrove CRM Organizing Production, Micro Other
(ha) Sanctuary IEC
Rehabilitation Plan Mariculture & Finance Livelihood
enhancement
Fishing
PANAON
De La Paz 260.1 491 x x x x x x x
Lutao 76.5 278 x x x x x x x
Punta 67.32 982 x x x x x x x
Sumasap 273.4 442 x x x x x x x
JIMENEZ
Butuay 320 1,751 x x x x x x x
Palilan 96 1,466 x x x x x x x
Taboo 120 2,723 x x x x x x x
SINACABAN
Cagay-anon 699.11 1,185 x x x x x x x
Sinonoc 239.94 2,432 x x x x x x x
Colupan 194.42 1,403 x
Bajo x x x x x x
Poblacion 240 2,179 x x x x x x x
Libertad Bajo 1,389 x x x x x x x
TUDELA
Tigdok 76.32 580 x x x x x x x
Basirang 232.71 949 x x x x x x x
Barra 31.63 1,112 x x x x x x x
Cabol- 43.8 1,382
anonan x x x x x x x
Budget 1,500,000 4,500,000 200,000 500,000 400,000 8,400,000 2,000,000 1,000,000

Chapter 4 - 14
Total budget for project components: P 18,500,000.00
Add: Budget for FOCAS Secretariat: P 3,000,000.00
----------------------
Grand Total P 21,500,000.00
=============

VIII. Management Plan

MAJOR Location Activities (How to)
PROJECT
COMPONENTS/
PROJECT
ACTIVITIES
Environment and Resource Management
Mangrove Panaon A total of 65 hectares of mangroves will be rehabilitated. This
Rehabilitation (Lutao, Punta, will be done through enactment of local ordinances. An
De la Paz) intensive information campaign shall also be conducted to be
Jimenez able to tap the coastal dwellers in the rehabilitation and in the
(Palilan, management and protection of the mangrove areas.
Butuay) However, the people’s involvement shall be planned wisely in
Sinacaban such a way that they are properly guided and benefited in the
(Poblacion, process.
Colupan,
Sinonoc,
Cagay-anon,
Libertad Bajo)
Tudela
(Cabol-
anonan,
Barra,
Basirang)
Marine Panaon The management of established marine sanctuaries in
Sanctuary (Lutao, Punta) Panaon, Sinacaban and Tudela shall be enhanced. A proper
enhancement Sinacaban management plan shall be crafted to make these sanctuaries
(Poblacion) functional. (eg. Appropriate management group responsible
Tudela for planning and policy directions will be organized)
(Cabol-
anonan)
CRM Plan Panaon, Convergence body must be created to conduct detailed
Jimenez, assessment and formulation of Coastal Resource
Sinacaban, Management Plan. The body will be composed of technical
Tudela personnel from the DENR, BFAR, NGO, MFARMC,
BFARMC, LGU Officials and Coastal Community
representative/s. The municipal mayor acts as the
coordinator and chairperson to all agencies involved.
Participating agencies must be tasked with individual
component of the plan to avoid duplication of the output.

Chapter 4 - 15
IEC All coastal - Various IEC materials will be developed to reach out to
barangays of more communities and other areas to include solid waste,
Panaon, etc.
Jimenez, - An educational programme shall be initiated to inform the
Sinacaban local people on the rationale of the Coastal Resource
and Tudela Management and Development project. The value of the role
of the people shall be emphasized.
Community Organizing
(Fisherfolks All coastal -Appropriate training and/or workshops will be provided to
strengthening, barangays of facilitate knowledge augmentation and skills development in
Bantay Dagat Panaon, the various areas of coastal management
strengthening, Jimenez, -A seminar on CRM and/or fisheries-related laws will be held.
Women Group Sinacaban -Training or re-training offish wardens will be facilitated.
formation) and Tudela -Where appropriate, a paralegal training will be conducted.
-Development of appropriate policies and ordinances will be
facilitated.
Livelihood and Enterprise Development
- Seaweeds Seaweeds Technical assistance will be provided to the development of
Production (Panaon, livelihood opportunities to ensure food security, improve
- Mariculture Tudela) income and more importantly, protect the environment.
& Fishing Mariculture
- Micro (Sinacaban)
Finance Micro Finance
Other livelihood and other
livelihood (all
barangays)

Chapter 4 - 16
Figure 1. Map showing the Focas of Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management and
Development Project (Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez and Panaon) inset map of Mindanao
Island showing the province of Misamis Occidental.

Chapter 4 - 17
CHAPTER 5
COCONUT INDUSTRY REHABILITATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
STRATEGIC PLAN

Glossary of Terms

PACAP- Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program
AusAID- Australian Agency for International Development
RAS- Responsive Assistance Scheme
FOCAS- Focus Community Assistance Scheme
SGF- Strategic Guidance Framework
CIRDP- Coconut Industry Rehabilitation & Development Project
CIIF- Coconut Industry Investment Fund
CTC- Cyclical Technology Corporation, Inc.
FMC- FOCAS Management Committee
CFAC- Coconut Farmers Agri-business Center (formerly NTC)
NTC- Niyog Tulungan Center
IAD- Integrated Area Development
CSO- Civil Society Organization
NGO- Non-government Organization
PO- People’s Organization
LGU- Local Government Units
NGA- National Government Agency
PCI- Philippine Coconut Authority
PES- Provincial Engagement Strategy
I. Background/Rationale

a. Description of the problem in the FOCAS area

Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project (CIRDP) is the only thematic,
agri-focused, among the four FOCAS Areas of the province.

Misamis Occidental is a predominantly agri-based economy with 118,933 hectares or
61.33% of its total land utilized as cropland. Food crops occupied an area equivalent to
13,861 hectares or 11.65% of its total cropland, while 105,072 hectares or 88.35% are
devoted to commercial crops.

Coconut shared the largest area of 101,784 hectares or 96.87% of commercial crops. It
is still the main cash crop of the province, even if some considered it a sunset industry.
Coconut is a major drag to agricultural growth. The low productivity and the inadequate
replanting are the principal issues facing the coconut industry. The main factors
responsible for low productivity are the use of planting materials of low genetic
potential and the virtual absence of fertilizer used on nutritionally deficient coconut
lands. Finally, improper harvesting, drying and storage practices are responsible for the
poor quality, which results in low oil extraction rate and higher refining cost.

There are a total of 58,685 coconut farmers in the province. It has 337.9 million nuts
production per year from 9.1 million coconut-bearing trees or barely 36 nuts per tree
per year which is very low production. 1

Compounding to the above-mentioned problems are the lack of crop diversification and
integration of coconut farms, lack of technology and ready market for non-oil coconut
products and seemingly few investors venturing into the processing and marketing of
these products. Given these conditions, it is believed that the poverty of the province is
directly related to the state of coconut industry.

The success of the Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project extends
its significance beyond the farms and rural communities. With very pronounced
poverty in rural communities, people, especially the young, seek relief from hard times
in urban areas. Less educated and armed only with false hope poor people migrate to
cities and mega-cities – many of them exploited and abused. Often they find it difficult
to move back to the rural areas when the harsh realities of urban poverty set in. The
success of any rural development initiative therefore greatly impacts on the population
pressure in urban areas.

When successful, the CIRDP will aid the local governments in developing a template
for agricultural community development, even if implemented only in four areas of
Misamis Occidental, namely Oroquieta City, Aloran, Lopez Jaena, and Plaridel.

2 Source: Provincial Socio-Economic Profile, 2002 - 2004
Figure 1. Location Map of CIRDP
CIRDP FOCAS Areas
b. Problem analysis/sector analysis and needs/concern

Inefficient and Over dependent Industry is of less
Underlying Causes ineffective policies on on copra alone as priority by National
coconut industry farm product Government & LGUs

Poor Tenant- Presence of Less marketing
Landowner relationship many support on marketing
intermediary infrastructure
traders
None competitiveness
of copra products

Lack of employment Farmers’ lack of Cutting due to
Secondary

opportunities capital and greater demand of
Primary &

Causes

knowledge in family coco trees
fund management

Senile coco trees and Price instability of
unfertilized trees Low quality of copra copra

Lack of marketing Lack of Alternative Livelihood
information
PROBLEMS
CORE

Lack of improved technology
Less opportunity to
increase income from
coconut and its by- Underutilization of coconut
products land resources

Threatened Coconut Poverty Lack of Funds for
Consequen-
Effects and

Industry industry
development
ces

Low income
Attitudinal problems
of coconut farmers

Figure 2. COCONUT INDUSTRY PROBLEM CAUSE-EFFECT RELATIONSHIP

In coconut areas and for families depending on the coconut industry, poverty is
often caused by low income and lack of employment opportunities. There also
exists the traditional attitude of mono-cropping and so much dependency on
copra as farm product.

Rural farmers find it difficult to venture into a more productive integrated farming
and coconut by-product processing because of the lack of technology and market
information. The fate of the coconut industry is even bogged down by inefficient
and ineffective national and local policies.

Chapter 5 - 4
b. Possible interventions of PACAP

PACAP’s fund facility of PhP21,500,000 pesos for the project can serve as a starter
fund to pump primed other stakeholders to pool their resources in whatever forms
(i.e. counterpart funds, physical properties, technical support, human resources
and others). PACAP’s learned lessons from earlier AFA areas and IAD approach
best practices can be of great help when replicated in the same or much improved
ways for the coconut industry of Misamis Occidental.

c. Interventions supporting PACAP’s Strategic Guidance Framework

The FOCAS Strategy is aligned with the first strategy in the PES which is
“augmenting traditional and/or providing alternative livelihood through agri-aqua
based food, raw materials, and industrial finished products”.

The FOCAS Strategy also is done via the IAD and supports the empowerment and
the protection of the vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of people.

d. Other programs and donor projects involved; timeframe; description of the
programs/ projects; & coverage/areas

Less intervention for the development of the Coconut Industry in the Province has
been introduced. The Philippine Coconut Authority centers its intervention on the
rehabilitation of senile coconuts through fertilization and replanting activities. Also,
efforts from small People’s Organization like cooperatives were of little contribution
to the industry. These efforts are in the form of organizing coconut farmers into
cooperatives engaged in establishment of cooperative copra trading and some
small non-copra product business venture like the coconut vinegar processing and
marketing.

II. The FOCAS Strategy and Logframe (Please see LogFrame below)
a. Goal
The general objective of Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project
(CIRDP) is to reduce poverty through income and employment generation from
coconut product and by-product utilization. The project will be implemented in
Aloran, Lopez Jaena, Plaridel and Oroquieta City.

b. Purpose

1. Develop and provide alternative while developing the traditional coconut-
centered livelihood of the farmers and farm hands;

2. Improve coconut production, utilization and processing of the province of
Misamis Occidental;

3. Address the socio-economic needs of coconut farmers and other individuals
and groups within the coconut industry, especially the women, children and
other marginalized and vulnerable sectors.

Chapter 5 - 5
4. Promote and advocate policies towards coconut industry rehabilitation,
institutionalization, development and sustainability.

c. Objectives

1. To consolidate resources of individual farmers, landowners, investors,
government agencies and coconut industry stakeholders.
2. To organize coconut farmer-beneficiaries into institutionalized organizations
3. To provide basic social services to the coconut farmers, farm hands and
neighboring residents of project sites.
4. To rehabilitate & regenerate at least 4,000 hectares of cocoland in the city
of Oroquieta and Municipality of Plaridel by establishing coconut processing
centers.
5. To reutilize waste materials from the coconut processing centers.
6. To provide additional income to farmers and farm hands through income
generating projects.

Chapter 5 - 6
CIRDP Date of this Logical Framework: July 15, 2005
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX

CIRDP VISION: “A highly productive coconut industry in Misamis Occidental having improved quality of life
through enterprising coconut farmers”

MISSION: “Committed to improve the quality of life of coconut farmers and stakeholders by rehabilitating coconut
farms and enhance entrepreneurial capabilities on integrated coco-based farming”

Goal 1: Address the socio-economic needs of coconut farmers and other individuals and groups within the coconut industry, especially
the women, children and other marginalized and vulnerable sectors;

Objective 1A: To consolidate resources of individual farmers, landowners, investors, government agencies and coconut industry stakeholders.
Key Result Areas Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Basic Assumptions & Risks
(KRAs) (OVI) (MoV) (BAR)
1. Formation of a ƒ Criteria for selection of eligible ƒ Presence of eligible members of ƒ The present government
Consortium of stakeholders for Consortium the consortium; does not drastically change
stakeholders of the membership; ƒ Written By-Laws, Articles of its form;
coconut industry ƒ By-Laws & Articles of Incorporation; Incorporation, Business Plan;
Economic Survey; Bonds & Surety Bonds receipts; sworn
Treasurer’s Affidavit (if cooperative) treasurer’s affidavit & bank
ƒ Articles of Incorporation; Levels of certificate;
organizational maturities; By-laws & ƒ Shares of Stocks certificates/O.R.;
Bank Statement (if Corporation); ƒ Signed Business Permits;
ƒ Shares of Stocks or Capital-Build-Up; ƒ Approved Accreditations;
ƒ Business Permits; ƒ Policies & Procedures Manual;
ƒ Provincial & Municipal Accreditations; ƒ Written Manual of Operation/IRR;
ƒ Consortium Policies & Procedures; ƒ Human Resource Dev’t. Manual;
ƒ Consortium Manual of ƒ 10 Year Sustainability Plan;
Operation/IRR; ƒ Project Implementation Plans;
ƒ Consortium Human Resource ƒ PO’s & NGO’s membership;
Program; ƒ Registered Consortium
ƒ Consortium Sustainability Plan; ƒ Two new sites for Processing
ƒ Project’s Operational Plans; Centers
ƒ Increased number of consortium
members;
Chapter 5 - 7
ƒ Replication of the Processing Center
to other areas
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ FOCAS Management
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart Committee’s deliberate and
ƒ Time sincere efforts to usher
forward the formation of the
consortium.
ƒ PACAP’s approval of the
CIRDP project.
2. Capability Building of ƒ Active consortium members; ƒ Active participation in meetings, ƒ Availability of resource
Consortium Member & ƒ High level of accountability and planning, assessments, persons having the right KSA
Partnership Building responsibility for all consortium evaluations and other consortium for the TNA’s consolidated
members; related activities of at least 10 from among the
ƒ Knowledge, skills, and attitude consortium members; representatives of the
acquired; ƒ Transparent system of recording & consortium and program
ƒ Practices of good KSA’s to project high level internal control; staff.
implementation ƒ Regular external audit findings &
ƒ Capable Consortium representatives; recommendations
ƒ Skilled & technically equip ƒ At least 6 trainings/year/consotium
management personnel; member conducted
ƒ Training Needs Assessment of at ƒ Consolidated Training Needs
least 10 consortium members. analysis
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ Various Training Manuals
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart related to the coconut
ƒ Time industry and organizational
development are available
Objective 1B: To organize coconut farmer-beneficiaries into institutionalized organizations
1. Community Organizing ƒ Presence of active key leaders in ƒ A duly registered cooperative with ƒ Adoption of Community
processes from pre-entry farmer cooperatives ; women different sub-committees on men; Organizing Standard in the
to handover or exit organization; children & youth women; children & youth; water & rural community
organization; water & sanitation sanitation; and health or;
organization; & barangay health ƒ Individually registered different
organization. farmers’ organizations.
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions

Chapter 5 - 8
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ LGU technical assistance
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart and other support available
ƒ Time to the community
Objective 1C: To provide basic social services to the coconut farmers, farm hands and neighboring residents of project sites.
1. Installation of Potable ƒ Hydrologic study; ƒ Level-II Water pipe system ƒ DOLE registration acquired
Water supply ƒ Water System Design & Installation; installed; as early as first year from
ƒ Community-managed Water & ƒ Registered Water & Sanitation project start-up;
Sanitation System System Association ƒ Social preparation done prior
to installation of equipments.
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
Goal 2: Improve coconut production, utilization, processing, and marketing of the coco-based products in the province of Misamis
Occidental;
Objective 2A: To rehabilitate & regenerate at least 4,000 hectares of cocoland
1. Installation of coconut ƒ At least 5 hectares of agricultural ƒ 5-hectare lot donated from LGU ƒ Executive officers of LGU’s
processing center land in the middle of coconut available for use by CIRDP; support to the project;
farmland available for use ƒ Physical make-up of the mini-coco ƒ Available farmers to supply
ƒ Equipments & facilities of coco center plant or center; 50,000 nuts per day to the
installed in 90 days period; ƒ Marketing contract; coco processing center;
ƒ Marketing agreement with potential ƒ Receipts of payments; ƒ Marketing contracts
buyer signed ƒ Farmers savings deposits
ƒ Daily volume input of 50,000 nuts or ƒ Farmers increases in capital
3,300 tons copra per year contribution
ƒ 2,000 farmer-households income ƒ Average PhP100,000 per year
increases at least 500% at the end of farmer-income;
first year of project operation & ƒ Php120 to 200 daily income of
1,000% at the end of three years employed farmer or additional
ƒ 1,500 farmers employed in the coco PhP62,400 per year.
center
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
2. Setting up of nursery for ƒ Available nursery site or provider of ƒ Land area for nursery site, or ƒ LGU to provide site for the

Chapter 5 - 9
replanting and fertilization seedlings; commercial seedling provider; proposed nursery;
program ƒ Available farmer-beneficiary; ƒ List of qualified farmer-beneficiary; ƒ Landowners provision of
ƒ Policies and schemes of Replanting ƒ Written policies & schemes; land.
& Fertilization Program; ƒ At least 800 hectares planted.
ƒ Number of hectarage planted
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
3. Set-up of marketing ƒ Available site for Bodega or existing ƒ Land area for building a bodega or ƒ LGU to provide site for the
logistics for product available stakeholder with marketing legal entity of available proposed bodega;
handling logistics; stakeholder;
ƒ Available direct marketing channels; ƒ Marketing contracts with
ƒ Available marketing infrastructure processors and millers;
and logistics; ƒ Human resources; physical
ƒ Regular supply of either copra or equipments & delivery vehicles;
aqueous coconuts for marketing ƒ 12 tons of copra or meat per day
from Processing Center
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
2. Installation of liquid waste ƒ Available site for mini-plant of organic ƒ Land area for building a mini-plant ƒ LGU to provide site for the
organic fertilizer fertilizer or available stakeholder of organic fertilizer or existing proposed organic fertilizer
production plant engaged in the production of organic stakeholder engaged in production; processing mini-plant;
fertilizer; ƒ Available coconut dust for fertilizer ƒ Local stakeholders engaged
ƒ Volume of coco dust available production in organic fertilizer production
to purchase waste material.
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
Goal 3: Provide appropriate technologies and enhance traditional coconut farming system of the coconut farmers and farm workers using
sustainable agricultural practices;
Objective 3A: To provide additional income to farmers and farm hands through income generating projects
1. Agri-Livelihood Projects ƒ Module for Bio-Intensive Gardening ƒ At least 2,000 number of farmers ƒ Technical assistance on the

Chapter 5 - 10
(BIG) or Food Always In The Home who are actual practitioners of the different farming systems are
(FAITH); different modules of sustainable available from institutions;
ƒ Module for Organic Livestock agriculture farming systems after ƒ Patent owners of these
Farming; three years of interventions; technologies openly shares
ƒ Module for Sloping Agricultural Land ƒ At least 4,000 Households’ income their technologies to the
Technology (SALT) system of increases by not less than 100%; coconut farmers.
farming; ƒ Food security in the home;
ƒ Multi-storey cropping or diversified & ƒ Presence of appliances in a
integrated farming system (DIFS) farmers house;
applied to not less than 4,000 ƒ Improved housing materials of
households at the end of three years; individual farmer-beneficiary;
ƒ Additional increases in coconut ƒ More cash circulation in the
farmers income & productivity community;
ƒ Providential loans.
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
2. Micro Finance Project to ƒ Installed credit facilitators in the coco ƒ Legal and credible financial ƒ Available credible financial
support capital processing center or utilized existing creditor with good tract record creditor willingness to extend
requirement on agri- creditors with expertise to facilitate services not less than 4,000 farmer its services to the coconut
livelihood projects and supervised credits to not less than households; farmers.
small cottage industries 4,000 farmers; ƒ Loan repayments receipts;
of coconut farmers ƒ Credit policies & procedure ƒ Written credit policies &
ƒ 100% repayments of loans; procedures;
ƒ Interest income ƒ Cash available;
ƒ Farmers’ savings in the bank
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
3. Small Cottage Industry ƒ Modules for various income ƒ Different cottage industry ƒ DTI and DOST’s sincere
generating small cottage industries; technologies adoption by farmers; effort in helping the coconut
ƒ At least 50% of total number of ƒ Increase income of not less than farmers in providing technical
beneficiaries has availed the support 2,000 farmers from their cottage assistance and marketing
for small cottage industry projects in industry projects; support.
the period of three years; ƒ All family members are sent to
Chapter 5 - 11
ƒ Increase household income school.
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
Goal 4: Advocate and implement policies and programs towards coconut industry rehabilitation, planting and replanting, institutionalization,
development and sustainability.
1. Monitoring & Evaluation ƒ Actual Accomplishments versus ƒ Monthly Accomplishment Reports ƒ All Monitoring tools and
targets; ƒ Hard Indicators Ratings Evaluation instruments are
ƒ Outcomes on indicative plans; ƒ Performance Review Ratings prepared by all stakeholders
ƒ Personnel Performance Reviews; ƒ Self-assessment Ratings and program staff and are
ƒ Self-assessments; ƒ Organizational Maturity Ratings therefore participatory and
ƒ Mid-term & year end evaluations; ƒ Financial statements & audit customized tools.
ƒ Financial Reports & Regular audits; findings;
ƒ Project reviews; ƒ Project appraisal reports;
ƒ Levels of organizational maturities; ƒ Ex-Post Project Benefits evaluation
ƒ Benefits Monitoring results;
ƒ External Impact evaluations; ƒ Ex-Post Project Impact Evaluation
ƒ Terminal Report consolidation findings & recommendations;
ƒ Written Terminal Reports
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
2. Advocacy ƒ Rate of cutting trees; ƒ PCA reports & primary data from ƒ Available prime time radio air
ƒ IEC materials produced & distributed; port authorities; time for possible contract
ƒ Lobbying in local LGU’s; ƒ Posters; billboards and other engagement;
ƒ Radio program on coconut issues & printing materials;
concerns; ƒ Ordinances and favorable laws
enacted by LGU’s;
ƒ Block Time radio program for
coconut issues & concerns
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP ƒ
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time

Chapter 5 - 12
3. Networking & Linkaging ƒ Alliances with CIIF, UCPB, CTC, ƒ MOA’s; marketing agreements & ƒ none
KAO etc.; contracts;
ƒ Networking with other Processing ƒ Communications;
Centers; ƒ Partnership engagements and
ƒ Networking with other IAD approach Joint ventures
implementers;
ƒ Networking with other Coco Farmer
Groups
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
4. Leveraging & Resource ƒ Project Development Team ƒ Available human resource for the ƒ Consortium has no track
Accessing organized from among the Project Project Development Team; record yet
Management Committee of the ƒ Approved counterpart fund from
Consortium other funding agencies;
ƒ Funding agency with the same ƒ At least 1.5 Million per year
thematic approach; (example: IAD) accessed from external funding
agencies.
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time
5. Sustainability Fund ƒ Sources of sustainability fund; ƒ Coconut Processing Center ƒ Price stability of copra
Management ƒ Sustainability scheme (reflows, levee, membership fees,
etc.)
ƒ CIRDP Sustainability Plan
Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions
ƒ Human ƒ PACAP
ƒ Material(s) ƒ Counterpart
ƒ Time

Chapter 5 - 13
III. Stakeholder Analysis Matrix
Key stakeholders How are they affected by What are they doing to
the problem solve the problem
Coconut farmers and the Coconut farmers and the Coconut farmers and the
coconut farm hands coconut farm hands are coconut farm hands are
directly affected by the organizing themselves into
supply and demand condition associations and
of the coconut product as cooperatives to consolidate
their main source of income resources
Coconut landowners Coconut landowners Coconut landowners are
although less affected than giving out their extra farm
farmers are also vulnerable lands to farmers through
to unfavorable price of copra Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program of the
government
Local Government Units Local Government Units enact laws that are favorable
(Provincial; City; Municipal & (Provincial; City; Municipal & to the coconut industry but
Barangays) particularly of Barangays) could generate needs willful implementation
Plaridel, Aloran, Lopez Jaena only less revenue from these
and Oroquieta City. coconut lands
Coconut Farmers Coconut Farmers consolidate resources to
Associations; Agrarian Associations; Agrarian gain favorable prices of their
Reform Communities & other Reform Communities & other products and access
People’s Organizations People’s Organizations are assistance from government
the product of unfair and line agencies
non-equitable economic
practices of the major players
in the coconut industry
Non-government Non-government identifying other means of
Organizations Organizations involved in income from the coconut
helping the Coconut Industry that can help increase
& coconut farmers are household income of the
concerned-based farmers. Also helps in
organizations envisioning a organizing these farmers
fair and just coconut industry into cooperatives and
associations
Other vulnerable groups Other vulnerable groups are These groups are largely
such as women and children indirectly affected through dependent on the decision of
the household income head of the family whom are
derived from copra and other believed to be the head of
coconut products the family
Coconut traders; Coconut traders;
concessionaires; & marketing concessionaires; & marketing
intermediaries intermediaries are the actual
beneficiaries of the proceeds
in the production process of
the coconut products
Philippine Coconut Authority Philippine Coconut Authority The Philippine Coconut
serves the interest of both Industry can only do within
the people in the government the auspices of their own
and the coconut farmers means that are limited and
restricted to its mandate
from the hierarchy

Chapter 5 - 14
List of CIRDP FMC Stakeholders

1. LGU of City of Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental
2. LGU of Municipality of Panaon, Misamis Occidental
3. LGU of Municipality of Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental
4. LGU of Municipality of Plaridel, Misamis Occidental
5. Misamis Occidental Maglulubi Multi-Purpose Cooperative of Oroquieta (MOMCO)
6. Paglaum Community Development Foundation Inc.
7. SIFAMCO of ARC Sibula, Lopez Jaena
8. Tri-People Partnership for Peace & Development (TRIPEACEDEV, Inc.)
9. Integrated Livelihood Cooperative (ILC)
10. Farmers Associations in the city of Oroquieta & the three municipalities
11. Philippine Coconut Authority
12. Paglaum Cooperative
13. Coconut Industry Investment Fund (CIIF)
14. Land Bank of the Philippines (ACCESS Program)
15. Individual Coconut Farmers & Landowners
16. Petals Foundation Inc.

IV. Organizational structure/Roles and functions

FOCAS Management
Committee

FOCAS Secretariat
(Paglaum CDFI)

CIIF/CTC CIRDP
Consortium

Project Management
Committee (PMC)

PIT 1 Project Implementing PIT 3
Team 2

Coconut Farmers

Figure 3. Proposed Organizational Structure of CIRDP

Chapter 5 - 15
ROLES OF PROPONENT (Individual POs/NGOs/LGUs/NGAs/others) & BENEFICIARY
(Consortium) ORGANIZATIONS:

Each CONSORTIUM shall have one (1) representative to act in behalf of her organizations’
interests. He/she shall have one seat in the CONSORTIUM. They shall chose among
themselves members of the PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (PMC) who is
responsible in the supervision of the entire management of the project. The PMC will act as
a policy and decision making body of the project for the highest and best interests of all
members of the consortium. They will set forth the implementing guidelines of the
purchasing, processing and marketing operations of all the projects. They can only
recommend employees to be hired by the individual consortium members and has no power
either to appoint or hire any members of the management staff. All consortium members
should maintain their autonomy and independent governance. The PMC may participate in
the preparation of the monitoring and evaluation tool. They may also conduct their own M &
E with the approval of all consortium members. They will be receiving also honoraria for
their efforts in the proper implementation of the project. A policy manual shall be formulated
for easy implementation of the project. The PMC may endorse qualified employees for the
management staff of individual projects. The PMC may enter into marketing agreements
and joint venture projects with other business entities like CIIF OR CTC that one way or
another has the same vision and thrusts.

A PROJECT IMPLEMENTING TEAM (PIT) will be organized and headed by the Program
Manager of all individual projects headed by Project Managers and shall act as facilitator or
mediator to all PIT meetings. All Project Managers from each identified projects must seat
as independent member in the project implementing team (PIT). A seat may be reserved for
the funding agency.

The PIT’s primary function is to act as a consultative organ of the project execution and
implementation. It shall formulate policies, guidelines and roles towards achieving successful
implementation of the project. It shall also design program that ascertains continuity and
sustainability of the project even beyond the donors funding.

The Management Staff for each individual Projects

(1) Project Manager - under policies set by the General Assembly of the Consortium,
Project manager shall have general charge of all the phases of the business operations of
the individual projects; he shall maintain the business records and accounts in such manner
that the true and correct condition is ascertained at any time, he/she shall render annual and
periodic statements and reports; preserve books, documents, correspondence and records
of whatever kind pertaining to the business. He shall maintain sanitation in the processing
center or plant vicinity. He shall make regular report to PACAP and to the Project
Management Committee.

(2) Cashier – must be responsible in the daily cash disbursements and collects from the
salesperson all sales. He must take care of the regular deposits of the consortium. He will
be responsible in all the properties within the perimeter of the processing center.

(3) Accountant/Bookkeeper - shall install adequate and effective accounting system; render
monthly reports, financial conditions and operations; coordinate with the manager, the
operations officer, the salesperson and the audit committee chairperson in the preparation of
annual budget; and should preserve book of accounts, documents, vouchers, contract and
records of whatever kind related to the business of the consortium.

(4) Plant Operations Officer - takes care of all the day-to-day operations of the coco-
processing; in charge of personnel management to all direct labor; coordinates with the

Chapter 5 - 16
salesperson; and is directly accountable to report weekly to the Project Manager regarding
operations in the processing center.

(5) Salesperson - is responsible in the distribution and marketing of finished products; daily
endorsed cash sales to the cashier; submits daily all documents to the bookkeeper; and is
obliged to report weekly to the Project Manager. (6) Contract Labor - directly takes care in
the processing of the dried copra. They are under the accountability of the Plant Operations
Officer.

V. Budget Summary
Major Budget Line Items Estimated Contribution Counterpart Request
Total Cost Of Other Contributions From
Donors PACAP
Proponent Beneficiaries
-1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6
A. Social Infra & Comm.
Org., admin, etc 2,200,000 325,000 325,000 1,500,000
B. Coco Processing
Center 7,000,000 1,000,000 6,000,000
- Whole nut separation
and coconut meat
processing unit.
- Husk decorticating unit
- Fiber bales production
unit
- Coconut peat based
feed and fertilizer
production unit
- Marketing, product
development and
management unit
C. Coco Farms
Rehabilitation 8,010,000 300,000 165,000 95,000 7,500,000
- Nursery, replanting &
fert’n
- Agri-Livelihood,
Microfinace & other
livelihood
D. Basic Social & Other
Services
- Water supply
840,000 250,000 50,000 40,000 3,500,000
E. FOCAS Secretariat
3,000,000 3,000,000
GRAND TOTAL 24,050,000 550,000 1,540,000 460,000 21,500,000

Chapter 5 - 17
Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project Budget Summary
Proposed Project Distribution Per Municipality

Major Budget Line Items Project Location (No. of Barangays) Request
From PACAP
Aloran Oroquieta Lopez Jaena Plaridel
A. Social Infra & Comm. Org., admin, etc x x x x 1,500,000
B. Coco Processing Center x (or) x 6,000,000
x (or) x
Whole nut separation and coconut meat processing unit.
Husk decorticating unit x (or) x
Fiber bales production unit x (or) x
x (or) x
Coconut peat based feed and fertilizer production unit

Marketing, product development and management unit x
C. Coco Farms Rehabilitation
7,500,000
Nursery x x x x
Replanting x x x x
Fertilization x x x x
Agri-Livelihood x x x x
Micro-finance x x x x
Other Livelihood x x x x
D. Basic Social Service - Water Supply x x x x
3,500,000
E. FOCAS Secretariat
3,000,000
Total 21,500,000

Chapter 5 - 18
Barangays Covered:

• Plaridel • Lopez Jaena (3,000 has)
• Quirino, 440 has • Sibugon
• Cebulin, 480 has • Sibula
• New Look, 22 has • Molatohan Bajo
• Unidos, 439 has • Mansabay Alto
• Mangidkid, 95 has • Katipa
• Tipolo, 190 has • Molatohan Alto
• Puntod, 20 has • Rizal
• Clarin, 44 has • Biasong
• Buena Voluntad, 150 has • Stante
• Mamanga Daku, 120 has • Mansabay Bajo

• Aloran • Oroquieta City
• Balintonga, 260 has • Apil, 251 has
• Culpan, 160 has • Bolibol, 253 has
• Maular, 452 has • Buenavista, 173 has
• Pelong, 467 has • Dolipos Alto, 401 has
• Sta. Ana, 400 has • Dolipos Bajo, 240 has
• Sinampongan, 130 has • Dullan Norte, 706 has
• Zamora, 427 has • Dullan Sur, 413 has
• Matipas, 370 has • Pines, 91 has
• Caputol, 568 has • Taboc Sur, 9 has
• Monterico, 494 has • Talairon, 73 has
• San Vicente Alto, 107 has
• San Vicente Bajo, 19 has

Chapter 5 - 19
Other considerations:

1. Risk Factors, its mitigating circumstance and pre-conditions:
MAJOR Risks Mitigating factors &
PROJECT COMPONENT pre-conditions
1. Social Infrastructure & ƒ Drastic changes in the form of government ƒ Strong leadership in the Philippine Government;
Community Organizing may shaken relationship between ƒ Immediate signing of contracts between Hassals &
governments of Australia and the Philippines; Associates with the Provincial LGU.
ƒ Expectations of community of PACAP’s fund ƒ Approval of PACAP for the CIRDP project;
facility; ƒ Adoption of CO standard by the implementing NGO
ƒ Capability of NGO/PO in community or PO;
organizing
2. Coconut Farms ƒ Community acceptance of the various ƒ A good social preparation before start-up of projects;
Rehabilitation projects; ƒ Viability and profitability of the project design and
ƒ Withdrawal of the investments of major feasibility;
contributors of the project; ƒ Government representation are assured;
ƒ Government officials unfavorable response to ƒ Favorable & stable price of raw materials;
the project; ƒ Marketing agreements signed;
ƒ Absence of continuous supply of raw ƒ PCA; CIIF & CTC to provide technical assistance;
materials; ƒ LGUs to provide fixed asset counterparts;
ƒ Instability of copra prices from processors;
3. Coconut Waste Product ƒ Absence or limited availability of technology ƒ Resource mapping and feasibility study preparations;
Utilization and technical people; ƒ Partnerships with National line agencies like DOST
4. Non-coco Product ƒ Availability of practical livelihood projects; ƒ Proper selection of capable POs to handle the
Integration project;
ƒ Technical Assistance on the different farming
systems are tap
5. Basic Social Services ƒ Limited funds availability to cope up with the ƒ LGUs provision of technical and physical
need of basic social services; infrastructure support;
TRAINING & CAPACITY ƒ Community’s acceptance to the project; ƒ Positive response and acceptability of the project by
BUILDING ƒ Time availability during calls for training; the coconut farmers and landowners through proper
ƒ Duration of training orientation and good feedback mechanisms;
ƒ Inavailability of resource persons having the ƒ Availability of training materials and manuals related
right KSA. to the coconut industry;
MANAGEMENT ƒ Insufficient funds to hire good managers; ƒ FOCAS MC’s sincere efforts to form a consortium;

Chapter 5 - 20
MAJOR Risks Mitigating factors &
PROJECT COMPONENT pre-conditions
ƒ Lesser accountability and responsibilities of ƒ Efficient fund management and control
project holders.
GOVERNANCE ƒ Ineffective governance ƒ Proper selection of representing delegates to the
consortium
OTHERS ƒ Lack of monitoring ƒ Participatory monitoring tools prepared by all
stakeholders

Chapter 5 - 21
2. Gender and Development - there are only perceive ways that the project will affect the
condition of women and men beneficiaries whether they are positive or negative such as:
¾ mutual economic benefit
¾ collective labor
¾ women’s empowerment through recognize additional earnings on her contribution
in group action (planning, decision making, governance and even managing)
CIRDP will encourage equal opportunity employment among men, women including
vulnerable groups. Further, the expertise of the Provincial Gender and Development Office
will constantly be requested to enlighten members and stakeholders on this issue.

3. Identified Effects of the Project on the Environment:

IDENTIFIED PROJECT MEASURES TO:
EFFECTS ON THE Enhance Positive Effects Minimize Negative
ENVIRONMENT Effects

POSITIVE
1. Health Utilization of bio-fuel in Maximized utilization of
drying copra hinders coconut waste through
emission of hazardous organic fertilizer production
fumes in the atmosphere of coco dust and vinegar
and in the environment. production of liquid waste-
water.
2. Atmosphere Non-chemical processes in Use of renewable
waste utilization of coconut resources like the coconut
water. shells in power
generation..

NEGATIVE
1. Human consumption Production of quality copra Quality consciousness
in the Coconut Processing from coconut collection,
Center transport, copra
processing and marketing

Some project components will demand construction. When this happens, the project will
seek first the approval of the Environment Management Board though an Environment
Impact Assessment and/or Environment Compliance Certificate.

VII. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework

PACAP M & E Systems and Tools may be adopted here but there must be a workshop to
formulate appropriate tools and instruments before project start-up.

Transparency of financial operations is essential for funding agency to regularly check,
monitor, and even proposes recommendations for the improvement of the project. Shared
monitoring tools and evaluation are highly appreciated.

Mid-year financial analysis and evaluation will be conducted. All the members of the project
implementing team will participate in the evaluation, and if possible one from the funding
agency.

Chapter 5 - 22
Financial Accountability of the Proponent

The PROJECT PROPONENT shall install appropriate system for project - fund management
and internal control in accordance with generally accepted standards of accounting and
PACAP’s Financial and Reporting System.

The project grant shall be deposited and maintained in a project bank account, preferably
current, under the name of the PROJECT PROPONENT with specific reference to PACAP
and/or the approved project’s name or title. Said account shall specifically indicate “Grant
Funds”.

Upon the opening of the said project bank account specifically for grant funds, the project
proponent shall execute a Special Bank Agreement (SBA) with the depository bank. The
original copy of the accomplished Special Bank Account shall be promptly submitted to
PACAP.

For projects with reflows or income, the PROJECT PROPONENT shall maintain a separate
bank account, either savings or current, again under the name of the PROJECT
PROPONENT and specific reference to PACAP and/or the approved projects’ name or title.
This second account shall specifically indicate “Project Reflows”. A separate SBA shall also
be accomplished for the purpose by the PROJECT PROPONENT.

The project grant shall be maintained and administered separately from other funds owned
and controlled by the PROJECT PROPONENT and should not be placed in time-deposit
accounts, money market deposit-substitutes, and/or other interest-bearing notes, certificates
or other such schemes.

The responsibility to withdraw from the project account shall be vested in at least two (2)
authorized individuals of the Project Proponent, one of which should come from the
Consortium.

The PROJECT PROPONENT shall maintain a separate bank account and financial records
for the project funds consisting of cash receipts book, cash disbursements book, general
journal book, general ledger and the applicable subsidiary ledgers.

For projects having sales and marketing component, the PROJECT PROPONENT shall also
maintain a sales journal and a purchase journal.

In cases where as part of the approved project, a contract for goods and services exceeding
25,000 in value is to be entered into the, PROJECT PROPONENT shall obtain a formal
written quotation from at least three independent suppliers. These suppliers must have
government permit to conduct business related to the transaction that is subject of the
quotation. Photocopies of the suppliers quotation should be forwarded to PACAP.

Where the amount involved is between P5,000 and P25,000, the Project Proponent should
conduct a canvass of cost from at least three independent suppliers which a summary of
canvass should be prepared by the PROJECT PROPONENT and on file with the project’s
financial records.

The PROJECT PROPONENT agrees to an external audit without prior notice to be
conducted by individuals nominated by PACAP at any time during the life of the project.

Audit rights are retained by the Funding Institution for up to two (2) years after the
completion of the project. The PROJECT PROPONENT, therefore, shall maintain and
preserve all financial records and pertinent documents of the project for the same period.

Chapter 5 - 23
In addition to the external audit, all financial records shall also be made available for
inspection by any individual(s) nominated by PACAP at any time during the life of the
project.

Reporting Requirements

1. The PROJECT PROPONENT is required to submit the following reports to the Funding
Institution.

a. Quarterly Reports

These reports shall include a discussion of objectives, the status of project implementation
and must fully describe the project activities by making a comparison between planned
activities and actual activities, the identification of the problems met and actions taken, the
gains and benefits derived from the project with reference to the baseline data, the workplan
for the succeeding quarter, and any proposed changes to the approved Project Proposal.

These reports shall also include a financial statement of project operations for the period
covered by the quarterly report.

The financial report shall contain such information as, but not limited to, actual expenditures
drawn from the grant and those drawn from counterpart funds. These should be supported
by schedules of expenditures. A statement of the income derived from the project and the
utilization thereof should also be included.

These reports should be received by PACAP within fifteen (15) days after the end of each
quarter.

b. Completion Report

These reports shall contain all the information regarding the implementation of the project.
The reports will also include the full acquittal of all the grant funds provided by the PACAP
and the total counterpart contribution of the PROJECT PROPONENT.

The reports shall also document the level of attainment of set project objectives and
assessment of the appropriateness of activities undertaken with reference to the baseline
data, impact of the project, its sustainability and the lessons learned in all project stages, i.e.
planning, design and implementation. Information on the specific activities that will be
continued and how the PROJECT PROPONENT and/or the beneficiaries will sustain these
must also be included.

These reports should be received by the PACAP not later than thirteen (13) calendar months
from the date of the signing of the Grant Agreement, together with the audited Financial
Statements.

2. If the PROJECT PROPONENT would like to seek subsequent funding assistance for
the approved project, the PROJECT PROPONENT should submit the Financial
Statements and the Completion Reports.

Monitoring and Evaluation

1. The PROJECT PROPONENT shall make available to PACAP the results of its regular
self-evaluation exercises. These will be incorporated in the required reports.

Chapter 5 - 24
2. PACAP reserves the right to conduct its own on-site review, evaluation and/or
operations audit during the life of the project.

VIII. Sustainability Plan

Sustainability Ensured through Self-reliant scheme

Sustainability of the project is largely influence by three factors: (1) steady supply of raw
material and production of quality copra; (2) good management and (3) good marketing
strategy. To become self-reliant, we must have the assurance that we have these factors at
hand. Thus, a support services scheme should be develop to secure our raw material
producers. This will be possible by providing Life Insurance and other benefits to the
coconut farmers; continuing education of sanitation and hygiene; technical assistance in
advancing appropriate techniques in coconut production and securing impact of the project
in their own lives. When supply of quality copra is insured, certainly there will be a
production of quality finished product providing we adopt good manufacturing practices and
develop hazard analysis critical control points in the plant.

Other facilitating factors that can help sustain the project are:
1. Consortium approach
2. Stakeholders’ ownership and participation
3. Installation of a good reflow scheme or sustainability fund
4. Continuous generation of local counterparts
5. External Resources accessing
6. Increase levels of accountability and responsibilities
7. Interdependence among stakeholders

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES BETWEEN CONSORTIUM AND STAND ALONE

CONSORTIUM STAND ALONE

Advantages Advantages

- efficient decision- making - empowerment and indigenization
- wider opportunity of greater - more employment generation
impact - penetrate direction
- cost effective- Economy of Scale - lesser impact/fragmented
- Sustainability Scheme
- Assure market volume
(greater command trading/pricing)
- have control and direction
- farmer has a sense of ownership
- Interdependence among CSOs

Disadvantages Disadvantages
- CIIF control pricing - higher expenses
- minimal chance to market
- higher competition

Phase-out Plan

Chapter 5 - 25
Exit plan starts immediately after the start of the project in the sense that the consortium of
all stakeholders assumes the over-all responsibility of every stand-alone project of the
CIRDP. Final handover of the whole program shall commence after PACAP withdraws from
its fund assistance or even before PACAP’s support commitment ends as long as the
Consortium can manage its own affairs.

IX. Attachments/Supporting Information (Left at the PACAP Provincial Office)

- Background History of the Coconut Industry in the Philippines
- List & resume’s of participants of FMC
- Statistical annexes
- Budget details
- Organizational profile of the NGOs involved in the FOCAS formulation
- Advantages and Disadvantages between Consortium and various Stand Alone
Organizations to manage CIRDP
- Participatory Assessment & Monitoring Tool
- Philippine Laws on Coconut Industry
- Special Orders

Chapter 5 - 26