This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Surian sa mga Pag-aaral Pangkaunlaran ng Pilipinas
Global Study on Child Poverty and Disparities: the Case of the Philippines
Philippine Institute for Development Studies DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES NO. 2009-27
The PIDS Discussion Paper Series constitutes studies that are preliminary and subject to further revisions. They are being circulated in a limited number of copies only for purposes of soliciting comments and suggestions for further refinements. The studies under the Series are unedited and unreviewed. The views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute. Not for quotation without permission from the author(s) and the Institute.
For comments, suggestions or further inquiries please contact:
The Research Information Staff, Philippine Institute for Development Studies 5th Floor, NEDA sa Makati Building, 106 Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village, Makati City, Philippines Tel Nos: (63-2) 8942584 and 8935705; Fax No: (63-2) 8939589; E-mail: email@example.com Or visit our website at http://www.pids.gov.ph
Global Study on Child Poverty and Disparities: The Case of the Philippines
Paper prepared for the United Nations Children’s Fund
PHILIPPINE INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Table of Contents
Acknowledgement Overview Chapter I Children and Development Introduction Children, Poverty, and Disparities Political, Economic, and Institutional Context of Poverty in the Philippines Macroeconomic Strategies and Resource Allocation Outcomes and Policy Recommendations Chapter II Poverty and Children Introduction Income Poverty and Deprivations Affecting Children Child Survival Summary and Policy Implications Chapter III The Pillars of Child Well-Being Introduction Nutrition Health Child Protection Education Social Protection Chapter Conclusion Chapter IV Addressing Child Poverty and Disparities: A Strategy for Results Introduction Framework for Defining Effective Strategies Strategies for Action Institutional Reforms Partnership Moving Forward Conclusions
1 1 1 7 11 20 24 24 24 52 53 99 99 99 109 136 169 199 211 224
224 224 226 230 231 232 234
List of Tables, Figures, and Boxes Chapter I Table I.1 Table I.2 Table I.3 Table I.4 Table I.5 Table I.6 Table I.7 Table I.8 Table I.9 Table I.10 Figure I.1 Figure I.2 Figure I.3 Figure I.4 Figure I.5 Box I.1 Appendix I Chapter II Table II.1 Table II.2 Table II.3 Table II.4 Table II.5 Table II.6 Table II.7 Table II.8 Table II.9 Table II.10
Poverty Incidence among Families, 2003 and 2006 Prevalence of Underweight Children 0–5 Years Old, 1989–2005 Poverty Incidence among the Population, 2003 and 2006 Poverty Measures by Sector of Employment of the Household Head, 2000 Poverty Incidence among Farming Households, 1985–2000 2008 Corruption Perception Index Annual Average Growth Rate of Real Per Capita GDP, 1950–2006 Per Capita in GDP (in 2000 US$) Poverty and Inequality in East Asia Indicative Areas for National Government Spending on Poverty Programs Child Poverty Approaches: Three Models Net Enrolment Rate, 2002–2008 Analytical Framework for Assessing the Microeconomic Impact of Macroeconomic Adjustment Policies (MIMAP) Government Expenditures by Type of Services (% of GDP), 1985–2007 National Government Deficits of the Philippines The MIMAP Program Progress in Achievement of MDGs in the Philippines
4 5 7 8 9 10 15 15 17 20 2 6 13 16 19 12 22
Trends in Income and/or Consumption Poverty, 1985–2006 Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Poverty Incidence among Children, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Poverty Headcount among Families with Children 0–14 Years Old, by Subgroup Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Subsistence Incidence among Children, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Prevalence of Underweight, Under Height, Thin, and Overweight Children 0–5 Years Old, Philippines, 1989–2005 Prevalence of Underweight Children 0–5 Years Old, by Region Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter, 2006 Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Shelter, by Region, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Shelter, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Sanitation Facilities, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Sanitation Facilities, 2006 (PIDS estimates)
28 30 31 33 34 34 36 37 37 39
Table II.13 Table II.14 Table II.15
Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Sanitation, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Water, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Water, by Region, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Provinces and Cities with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Water, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Provinces and Cities with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Information, By Region, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Provinces and Cities with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Information, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children 6–16 Years Old Who are Poor and Not Currently Attending School, 2002–2004 (PIDS estimates) Reasons for not Attending School, 2002 (PIDS estimates) Participation, Cohort Survival, Completion, and Dropout Rates in the Philippines, 2002–2007 Deprivation of Electricity and Secure Tenure, Incidence of Deprivations, 2003 and 2006 (PIDS estimates) Child Poverty as Multiple Deprivations, 2003 and 2006 (PIDS estimates) Trends in Childhood Mortality Rates, per 1000 live births, 1993-2008 Early Childhood Mortality Rates, per 1000 live births, by Region, 2003 Magnitude and Percentage of Poor Population and Children, Philippines, 1985–2006 Children (below 15 years old) in Poverty by Region, 2006 Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter, Philippines, 2000– 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter, by Region, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Sanitation Facilities, Philippines, 2000–2006 (PIDS estimates) Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Sanitation Facilities, by Region, 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Water, Philippines, 2000– 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation to Water, By Region, 2006 (PIDS Estimates) Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information, Philippines, 2000–2006 (PIDS estimates)
42 43 44
Table II.17 Table II.18
Table II.19 Table II.20 Table II.21 Table II.22 Table II.23 Table II.24 Table II.25 Table II.26 Figure II.1 Figure II.2 Figure II.3 Figure II.4 Figure II.5 Figure II.6 Figure II.7 Figure II.8 Figure II.9
48 48 49 50 51 51 53 53 26 27 35 35 38 39 41 42 44
2003 Children without Electricity and Security of Tenure. by Region. 2006 Children Experiencing Two Severe Deprivations.14 Table II. Cohort. by Region Trends in Subsistence Poor Percentage of Children 0-14 Years Old in Subsistence Poor Families. by Region Children in Deprivation. by Region Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Safe Water. 2003 (in %) Annual Per Capita Poverty Threshold: 2000. 2003.23 Table II.10 Appendix II Table II.7 Table II. by Region and by Province.16 Table II. Series of Years Number of Children 0–14 Years Old in Poor Families.5 Table II. 2006 Combined Child Poverty Incidence Correlation between Under-Five Mortality Rate and Income Poverty at Sub-National Level. 2003. 2006 Children Experiencing Only One Severe Deprivation. by Region.25 Table II. by Region.8 Table II. by Region.4 Table II.22 Table II.19 Table II. Philippines Percentage of Children 0–14 Years Old in Poor Families.13 Table II. by Region Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Toilet Facilities.24 Table II.20 Table II. by Region.28 Table II. and 2006 Annual Per Capita Food Threshold: 2000.Figure II.10 Table II. by Region Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Toilet Facilities.29 Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information.1 Table II. Series of Years Number of Poor Families with Children 0–14 Years Old.9 Table II.3 Table II.11 Table II.27 Table II. and Dropout Rates in the Philippines Percentage of Children without Vaccinations. Series of Years Children in Poverty.17 Tablle II. Series of Years Number of Subsistence Poor Families with Children 0–14 Years Old. by Region and by Province. by Region and by Province. and 2006 45 56 57 58 59 62 63 64 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 82 83 84 87 88 89 90 91 92 95 . by Region Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information. by Region. by Region Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Safe Water. Completion. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Poverty Tables Poverty Incidence. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Comparison of Families with Children and All Families in General.6 Table II. by Region.12 Table II. by Region Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Shelter.15 Table II. by Region Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter.26 Table II.2 Table II.18 Table II.21 Table II. Series of Years Number of Children 0-14 Years Old in Subsistence Poor Families. by Region Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Information. 2006 Participation. 2006 Children Experiencing Deprivations.
26 Table III.24 Table III. CY 2007 Number of Child Abuse Cases Served.17 Table III.7 Table III.10 Table III.19 Table III.20 Table III. 2003 Fully Immunized Children. 2003–2007 Children Immunization. by Region Breastfeeding Indicators Vitamin A Supplementation among Children 6–59 Months Old Micronutrient Supplementation.27 Table III. 2001–2006 Inventory of CICL. and Population Control (in 2000 Prices) Underweight Children. 2006 and 2007) Common Crimes Committed by CICL (Average for 2007) Number of BJMP and PNP Jails With and Without Separate Cells for Minors (as of May 2008) Number of Children in Conflict with the Law (CICL) Served by Program.5 Table III.Chapter III Table III.2 Table III. 2007 Beneficiaries of the Training on the Mobile/Out-of-Town Civil Registration Programs (as of May 2006) Birth Registration Program and Corresponding Number of Children Registered By Region. Service. by Type of Abuse.18 Table III. Nutrition. 1997–2009 Expenditure on Health.32 National Nutrition Council Expenditures. by Region (as per records of JJWC.21 Table III. 2003 Iron Supplements. Gender. SY 2005–2008 Early Childhood Education Indicators.22 Table III.23 Table III.28 Table III.6 Table III. 2001–2007 Summary of the Number of Juvenile Delinquents/CICL by Type of Cases. 1998–2006 Central Government Expenditure on Health Programs. 2003 Determinants of Child Immunization Status of Local Councils for the Protection of Children. by Socioeconomic Characteristics. SY 2005– 2006 Primary Net Enrolment Rates by Region.12 Table III.31 Table III. Agency Data. 2003 Number of Months Pregnant at the time of First Antenatal Visit. Gender and Urbanity. 2003 Number of Antenatal Visits. 2001–2007 Performance Indicators in Elementary and Secondary Levels. by Sex. SY 2005–2008 Secondary Net Enrolment Rates by Region.25 Table III.15 Table III. Project. by Region.4 Table III.16 Table III. 2005–2007 Child Mortality Rates. Birth Registration Project (as of May 2006) Children with Disabilities. 2004/2007 101 101 102 103 104 105 113 114 115 117 118 119 120 123 124 125 131 143 150 152 153 161 164 165 166 167 167 168 183 185 186 189 .14 Table III. by Age Group and Type of Disability (as of 2000 Census) Summary of the Number of Child Workers Rescued.30 Table III.29 Table III. 2003 Children Illnesses. and Urbanity.1 Table III.13 Table III. Philippines. 2003 Place of Delivery.3 Table III.8 Table III.11 Table III. 1993–2003 Early Childhood Mortality Rates.9 Table III.
DOH. Age Group. by Region and Gender Reasons for not Attending School. 2003 National Achievement Test-Mean Percentage Scores ALS Accreditation and Equivalency Test Registrants (Number) and Passing Rate. 1960–2003 DPT Immunization Rates in Selected Asian Countries.27 Figure III. by Age and by Location.20 Figure III.28 Figure III. 2006 School Attendance of Elementary and Secondary School-Age Children.1 Box III.12 Figure III.22 Figure III.11 Figure III. by Uses of Funds.24 Figure III. by Level.7 Figure III.4 Figure III. 1999–2008 Real MOOE Per Pupil/Student. 2003–2008 School Attendance. UNICEF Total Health Expenditure. by Income Decile.19 Figure III.34 Table III. 1992–2005 Trends in Children Under-Five Mortality Decline in Selected Asian Countries.16 Figure III.33 Table III.10 Figure III. 2006 School Attendance. 1983–2003 Measles Immunization Rates in Selected Asian Countries. by Sex. Neglect. 1999–2008 Distribution of Secondary MOOE. 2005 Composition of Total Health Expenditure. 1999– 2008 Per-Student Education Budget. 2002–2007 Secondary Participation. and Region. by Sex. 1999–2008 Department of Education Budget.15 Figure III.9 Figure III.2 Completion and Dropout Rates. 2004 Target Beneficiaries and Outreach of Food-for-School Program. by Language Basic Literacy Rate of Population 10–14 Years Old. by Source.5 Figure III. 1992–2005 Composition of Private Health Expenditure. LGU. by Source. SY 2005–2006 and SY 2006–2007 Perceived Gains from Food-for-School Program Conceptual Framework of Malnutrition. 1999–2008 Distribution of Preschool MOOE. Abuse. by Bottom and Top Quintile.26 Figure III.2 Figure III. 1999–2008 Determinants of Education Outcomes Reasons for not Attending School. 2000–2008 Distribution of the Department of Education Budget. 1983–2003 Basic Education Budget as Percentage of GDP.35 Table III. 2003 Functional Literacy Rate of Population 10–14 Years Old.29 Box III.Table III. National Government.21 Figure III.17 Figure III.13 Figure III. and Region. by Age and by Sex.25 Figure III. and Exploitation 190 197 203 205 106 111 113 114 115 122 122 172 174 174 175 176 177 178 178 181 181 182 183 184 184 187 188 192 192 193 194 194 196 138 140 . 2003–2007 Key Indicators in Early Childhood Education. by Ethnicity School Attendance. Completion Rates.6 Figure III. 2006 School Attendance. 2004 Child’s Rights Throughout the Life Cycle Enacted Laws to Protect Filipino Children Against Violence.8 Figure III.14 Figure III. 2000–2007 (in 2000 Prices) Performance on Millennium Development Goals Indicators.1 Figure III.36 Figure III. Cohort Survival.18 Figure III. 1999–2007 Distribution of Elementary MOOE.3 Figure III.23 Figure III. Age Group.
3 Box III. and Correlates for Diarrhea.3 Strategies Addressed to Key Players Taxonomy of Responses to Child Labor CRC Articles on Social Protection Young Children Health Outcomes.1 Table III.Box III.4 Box III. Related Care. 2005 Young Children Health Outcomes.5 Appendix III Table III.2 Table III. and Correlates for Acute Respiratory Infection. 2005 Determinants of Maternal Care Utilization 146 163 201 213 215 218 . Related Care.
Romblon. Rizal. Occidental Mindoro. Sultan Kudarat. and Quezon Cordillera Administrative Region Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Country Programme for Children Comprehensive Programme on Child Protection Convention on the Rights of the Child Council for the Welfare of Children Department of Budget and Management Department of Education Department of Health Department of Labor and Employment Department of Social Welfare and Development Early Childhood Education Expanded Program on Immunization Family Income and Expenditure Survey Food and Nutrition Research Institute Food-for-School Program General Appropriations Act Gross Domestic Product Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations Infant Mortality Rate Millennium Development Goals Micro Impacts of Macroeconomic and Adjustment Policies Oriental Mindoro. Laguna. and Palawan National Capital Region National Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons National Economic and Development Authority National Food Authority National Nutrition Council National Plan of Action for Children National Statistical Coordination Board National Statistics Office National Wages and Productivity Board Overseas Filipino Workers Philippine National Strategic Framework for Plan Development for Children Philippine Plan of Action for Nutrition South Cotabato. Marinduque.List of Acronyms ADB AHMP ALS APIS ARMM BESRA CALABARZON CAR CARP CPC CPCP CRC CWC DBM DepEd DOH DOLE DSWD ECE EPI FIES FNRI FSP GAA GDP GOCCs IMR MDGs MIMAP MIMAROPA NCR NCWDP NEDA NFA NNC NPAC NSCB NSO NWPB OFWs PNSFPDC PPAN SOCCSKSARGEN UCP UNGASS UNICEF WB WHSMP Asian Development Bank Accelerated Hunger Mitigation Plan Alternative Learning System Annual Poverty Indicators Survey Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda Cavite. Cotabato. and General Santos City Unregistered Children Project United Nations General Assembly Special Session United Nations Children’s Fund The World Bank Women’s Health and Safe Motherhood Project . Saranggani. Batangas.
open pit. Education: Severe deprivation of education refers to a condition where a child of school-age is not currently attending school . Less severe deprivation refers to the state where a household uses unimproved toilet facilities like closed pit. More specifically in this case. Severe deprivation in sanitation refers to the condition where a household does not have a toilet facility of any kind. Severe deprivation of water refers to a situation where a household obtains water from springs. including those mixed types but predominantly salvaged materials. Information: Severe deprivation of information refers to a case where a family does not have any of the following: radio. An informal settler refers to one who occupies a lot without the consent of the owner. and pail system. inadequate roofing/wall refers to one that is made of salvaged and/or makeshift materials or mixed but predominantly salvaged and/or makeshift materials. community water system. and peddlers. Less severe deprivation of water refers to a condition where the household obtains water from a dug well. A less severe deprivation of shelter refers to inadequate roofing or wall. Shelter and Security of Tenure: Makeshift housing refers to a dwelling unit where the material of either the roof or the wall is made of salvaged and/or makeshift materials. or computer. Severe deprivation refers to inadequate wall and roof. Inadequate means that the wall and roof are made of salvaged and/or makeshift materials. rain. the estimation captured only children 7–14 years old for this indicator.Definition of Terms Sanitation: Sanitary toilet facility (used in the Child Deprivation section) refers to water-sealed and closed-pit types of toilet facilities. A child whose weight is less than two standard deviations away from the average is considered underweight. Food: Less severe deprivation of food refers to a case where a child is underweight for his/her age using International Standards. Water: Safe water sources include faucet. only children 7–14 years old living in these households were estimated. and tubed or piped well either owned by the household or shared with others. telephone. As in severe deprivation. In the report. Less severe deprivation refers to the state where a household has any of the following: radio or television. rivers and streams. television.
Yap for Chapter 1. Pantig. PIDS also acknowledges the kind assistance provided by the Council for the Welfare of Children and the CWC-Subaybay Bata Monitoring System. Reyes and Aubrey D. Asis. The usual disclaimer applies.Acknowledgement This report was prepared by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS). Tabuga for Chapter 2. Dr. Michael R. Yasay for the Policy Template. Cuenca for Chapter 3. . Blessila G. Ida Marie T. Celia M. Dr. and Kathrina G. The authors would like to acknowledge the excellent research assistance provided by Fatima Lourdes E. Dr. Ronina D. Rouselle F. Datu. Ma. Aniceto O. Ms. Del Prado. This report benefited from comments provided by the UNICEF Philippine Country Office. The lead authors are: Jenny D. and Donald B. Josef T. Lavado. Macasaquit was responsible for consolidating the report. Gonzales. Cabalfin. Mina. Christian D. Balboa and Dr. Mari-len R. Orbeta. and Janet S. Macasaquit for Chapter 4.
Moreover looking at the regional patterns. 7 of 10 poor children are from the rural areas. This report shows that poverty incidence among children living in rural areas is more than twice that of children living in the urban areas. In 2006. high infant mortality rate is found prevalent among infants born to mothers with no education. The Philippines is no different. All these suggest wide disparities in poverty incidence across regions and between urban and rural areas Chapter 2 of the report describes the many facets of deprivation that could either be severe or less severe. Disparities in education outcomes were also observed in different socioeconomic dimensions. income and geographic location. are mostly from the Visayas region. social protection. The section widely covers issues on child protection and the challenges confronting the Filipino children such as child labor.000. . no antenatal and delivery care. In fact. sanitation and water. The section on child protection cites the Philippine government’s efforts to protect the rights of families and children which begun as early as 1935. children under-five who are most likely to suffer acute respiratory infection belong to households in the lowest quintile. Compared to its close neighbors in Asia. a significant number of children are likely to be illiterate. Using known indicators on education. The section on child health meanwhile analyzes trends and issues on infant mortality and child immunization.Global Study on Child Poverty and Disparities: The Case of the Philippines Executive Summary In a country where poverty is prevalent. Results of regression analysis used to identify the determinants of maternal care utilization and child immunization were also discussed at length. thus. It also shows disparities in malnutrition incidence among regions. and those who are either too young or too old for pregnancy. and prone to abuse and physical violence. Children who experienced two of the severe deprivations estimated to be around 840. Specifically. malnourished. shelter. Also in 2006.4 million children were deprived of at least one of the three dimensions of well-being covered by the study. this report summarizes the Filipino children's welfare and living conditions taking account the disparities in gender. a little over half a percentage of all children suffered all three deprivations. whose household heads have lower level of education. The report finds some remarkable improvements in the plight of the children based on recent data and indicator estimates. 18. physical and sexual abuse. namely. the Philippines posted a drastic decline in immunization rates in 2003. The five pillars of child well-being are examined more closely in Chapter 3 of this report. The first section deals with child nutrition and highlights the fact that malnutrition is one of the underlying causes of child mortality. children in conflict with the law. some regions are consistently ranked as being 'worse off' compared to other regions. commercial sexual exploitation. Meanwhile.6% of children or 5. Another section is devoted to education and highlights various basic education indicators and trends. requiring that the 25-year millennium development target be achieved in eight years. and children affected by armed conflict and displacement. It narrates how the 2007 level of elementary participation rate became at par with 1990 level. poverty and health.
increasing participation in early childhood education which should be a main priority in basic education programs will require more government resources to ensure wider coverage and better quality of teaching. In conclusion. and also to beef up investments in health logistics.In the section for social protection. stabilizing macroeconomic fundamentals. and. These data and information should be made available to all. As regards other government programs. and policy and program formulation. the report finds that it is not sufficient that budget is allocated adequately. there is an urgent need to reach those mothers and children that reside in remote rural areas. and overcome the risks that confront the poor and vulnerable people were presented. . and child protection. In particular. the report pointed out the need for a policy that would require building up of database or repository of information on child well-being indicators. to analyze the correlation between interventions and outcomes. The report ends with a view on how the role and active participation of public institutions. communities. building up data and giving due consideration to regional disparities in aid of planning. this section suggests critical areas that should be considered in assessing social safety net programs. Also given the urban bias of most health services. Similarly. research works should continue to look for reasons why gaps persists. Some specific recommendations include pursuing an effective population management program. and to examine the interrelated forces and relationship that would strengthen the pillars of child well-being. and facility and management capacity of health workers. especially to policy-makers. private organizations. More importantly. infrastructure. allocating more financial and rational manpower resources for health. manage. will be a helpful tool for duty-bearers in determining where and what interventions are necessary. Geographical Information System based mapping of child well-being indicators for example. and individuals must be upheld and coordinated to promote the welfare of the Filipino children. policies and programs that aim to prevent. What is crucial is proper targeting and making sure that resources are given to that segment of population where interventions are needed the most. education. Moreover. the report proposes different strategies for action using the rights-based approach.
hence. There is no duty more important than ensuring that their rights are respected. The link between high population growth and poverty incidence has been established by empirical studies showing that the larger the family. She and her siblings are prone to diarrhea. She is not sure if she could continue to attend the nearby public school or if she will simply find a job to help her parents provide for the family.Overview “There is no trust more sacred than the one the world holds with children. children can be adversely affected by poverty in many ways. that child poverty is distinct from the nature of poverty experienced by adults. education. gender parity. that their lives are free from fear and want. violence and abuse. The present crisis that is crippling economies the world over has not spared the Philippines. unlike some of her younger siblings. Under a host of environmental issues bigger than they are. as surely there are others. that their welfare is protected. high levels of corruption reduce economic growth. for developing skills. the more likely it is to be poor. it is universally accepted that childhood should be a time for growth and development. Meanwhile. though they finally have sanitary toilet facilities recently installed. and are less developed physically. and for forming aspirations. particularly the boys. Though the direct impact can be considered minimal. and affect the performance of government in many aspects. This brief account summarizes the profile of the poor Filipino child. were described looking at income differentials. However. Poverty-related issues In a country where poverty is prevalent. By being born poor. she was able to get immunization from the health center. all the younger ones were able to get Vitamin A supplementation. This report shows it is necessary to take into account the various indicators to fully capture the general living conditions of Filipino children. and that they can grow up in peace. distort the allocation of resources. have poorer health. Filipino children are vulnerable to issues such as mortality. There is also evidence that economic benefits were not equitably shared and recent studies have argued that an inequitable distribution of wealth is a constraint to economic growth and development. and forced labor. and reduces the state’s capacity to provide social safety nets. including and beyond income. health. described and established in this report based on data from surveys and estimates. While the definition of childhood in various cultures and societies differ. As the firstborn of a large family. given the nominal . Disparities in terms of multiple indicators of child poverty. a child is robbed of these opportunities and freedom. It is for this reason. and geographic differences. children in large families do not usually perform well in school. Corruption has a pervasive and troubling impact on the poor since it distorts public choices in favor of the wealthy and powerful. High fertility is associated with decreasing investments in human capital.” – Kofi Annan Introduction A typical poor Filipino girl child is one who lives in a rural area with her parents and siblings—not all of whom are able to attend or to complete school.
livelihood and employment. poverty rates are higher in the Visayas and Mindanao regions. poor investment climate. corruption. and could worsen their children’s vulnerability. and each one could either be severe or less severe. In 2006. namely. This proportion is slightly lower than the 19.000. Rizal. 7 of 10 poor children are from the rural areas. across a range of domains. The bulk of this number come from the Visayas region. a little over half of all children suffered all three deprivations. which creates fiscal deficit and heavy public sector debt. which has weakened economic performance and aggravated poverty incidence. sanitation. Other regions experiencing relatively low poverty rates are those situated around NCR in the island of Luzon. Laguna. and the current global financial crisis.6% of children (5. These. Low productivity and low income limit a family’s capacity to provide for the needs of its children. Children who . which results in low foreign direct investment due to macroeconomic stability. shows that the same regions are consistently ranked as being worse off. the indirect effects are being proven to be substantial due to dwindling export earnings and retrenchments in the manufacturing sector. Poverty incidence across regions The wide disparities across and within regions must also be considered. A closer look at the regional pattern of child poverty indicators.participation of the Philippine economy in global financial dynamics. Foremost of these are declining revenue collection. remittances of overseas Filipino workers are expected to decline as they themselves try to cope with possible loss of working hours and worse. Figures in Chapter 2 show that while poverty incidence is only 16% in the National Capital Region (NCR). compared to the other regions. as well as in terms of urban and rural settings. the equivalent at the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) is 69%. 4 of 10 children face at least one severe deprivation. Families dependent on these migrant workers are bracing for the shock this situation would bring.4 million) were deprived of at least one of the three dimensions of well-being covered by the study. In fact. shelter. The largest number. differences in poverty rates were also observed. high crime rate. In 2006. however. it is must also examine and address the chronic macroeconomic problems that plague the country. Batangas. uncertainty in some economic policies. 18. In ARMM. and water. is in Cavite. Types of deprivations among children This report presents more than one type of deprivation being experienced by children. Poverty incidence among children living in rural areas is more than twice that of children living in urban areas. Meanwhile. and the gradual loss of international competitiveness due to poor performance of the export industry. affecting the children’s general well-being. Chapter 2 shows that there are multiple deprivations. While the government is instituting coping mechanisms to deal with the crisis. Among the provinces within regions. Figures for multiple deprivations (two or three types) have not declined significantly. The worst case is when a child faces all three types of deprivation. On top of this. thus.7% estimate in 2003. call on the government to establish social protection measures in the midst of meager resources. and Quezon (CALABARZON) region where more than half a million children suffer from one type of severe deprivation. Children who face two (at most) of the severe deprivations are estimated to be around 840.
maternal care. and General Santos City (SOCCSKSARGEN) and Central Luzon. However. Though most households may be nonincome poor due to greater opportunities for employment or are engaged in small enterprises.suffered all three types of deprivation. Even local government units (LGUs). Saranggani. immunization. One of the important findings from the analysis of child poverty is that. and . Highlights of findings include the fact that malnutrition is considered to be one of the underlying causes of child mortality. Specifically. The proportion of children without access to electricity went down. Many of them are from NCR. Sultan Kudarat. It is highly probable that due to such low expenditures. there were recent legislations aimed at protecting children from falling into (or for rescuing them from) various forms of exploitative conditions. from infant feeding. which were charged to implement public health programs at their level due to decentralization in government. Cotabato. This is a positive and significant occurrence as the incidence of material (income) poverty has reversed recently its downward trend or simply put. The government is primarily responsible for funding health education. have increased between 2003 and 2006. These are the Anti-Child Labor Law (Republic Act 9231) enacted on December 19. needs closer examination. as well as figures for access to sanitary toilet facilities and safe water. interventions are still seen to be necessary to reduce the number of children that suffer from multiple deprivations. 2003. are not encouraging. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child serves as the beacon and guiding framework for the various dimensions of human rights accorded to children. In the Philippines. the region with the lowest income poverty rate. It is quite possible that these positive outcomes came about due to the international and national efforts to improve the plight of children. NCR. high infant mortality rate is prevalent among infants born to mothers with no education. favorable general trends were noted. micronutrient supplementation. indicators of child health as found in this report.000 children are facing all three kinds of deprivations. Favorable trends In general. various policies were put in place. aside from the government’s framework for action and plans. those born below two years interval. though very small in percentage. poverty incidence has started to rise again. many of the deprivation indicators showed improvements. These legal. particularly improvements in infant mortality and under-five mortality rates. South Cotabato. the general government budget indicates that only 39% was used for public health in 2005. The first section deals with child nutrition. About 17. and eradication of communicable diseases. and planning frameworks are also translated into programs and projects that cater to the particular needs of children and these are presented in this report under the five pillars of child well-being. Death rate is also higher among very small infants. to weight and height monitoring. The section on child health states that the government declares public health programs and primary health care services as one of its main priorities. and those who are either too young or too old for pregnancy. conceptual. spent only 45% of their budgets for health services. To address malnutrition among children. The five pillars of child well-being are examined more closely in Chapter 3. no antenatal and delivery care. 2003 and Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003 (Republic Act 9208) enacted on May 26.
and participation of children. The section on education notes that in 2002. These factors are: number of children she already has. however. child protection issues include those relating to child labor. This section of the paper also discusses child protection issues and the types of challenges confronting the Filipino children. children of minorities and indigenous peoples.” PD 603 codifies laws on the rights of children and the corresponding sanctions in case these rights are violated. and whose household heads have lower levels of education.2%. Of these two child characteristics. at a rate of 13. a mother’s working status. and desire for or “wantedness” of a child. children in conflict with the law. and perceived difficulty due to distance lowers the probability of seeking immunization services. findings showed that: • • • • • the higher the level of education a mother has. Results show that a woman’s characteristics and circumstances may influence her decision to use maternal care.those born at birth parity of seven and above. Children underfive who are most likely to suffer acute respiratory infection are those from households that belong to the poorest wealth index quintile. chances are higher that she will take her child for immunization. and projects for the survival. or “The Child and Youth Welfare Code. development. the Philippines had a medium probability of meeting the millennium development target in elementary participation. and her decisionmaking power have no effect on utilization. her decisionmaking power. Firstborn babies. In Philippine context. However. household wealth has no impact on increasing complete immunization uptake. children with disabilities. her desire for a child. and enforcement of all policies. the section on health features regressions of variables to identify the determinants of maternal care utilization and child immunization. programs. Child protection issues The section on child protection cites the Philippine government’s conscious efforts to protect the rights of families and children as early as 1935 as reflected by the Constitution at that time. Children belonging to households in the poorest quintile are also more likely to suffer diarrhea. This suggests that both boy and girl child have equal access to child care in the Philippines. For determinants of child immunization. physical and sexual abuse. and other children in need of special protection. the more likely her children will be fully immunized. have higher probabilities of having complete immunization than those born later in the birth order. elementary participation rate decreased. commercial sexual exploitation of children. To establish causality. Among its close neighbors in Asia. birth parity matters more than gender in the decision to immunize a child. between 2002 and 2006. protection. resulting in a low . street children. as a mother gets older. former President Ferdinand E. PD 603 (Article 205) or the Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC) was created to act as the lead agency to coordinate the formulation. children affected by armed conflict and displacement. Marcos signed Presidential Decree (PD) 603. In 1974. children and drugs. implementation. the Philippines posted a drastic decline in immunization rates in 2003.
net enrolment should increase by an average of 1. these should increase by at least 1% annually until 2015. and overcome the risks that confront poor and vulnerable people. 62% said their number of school days missed declined while 44% of the children weighed gained weight. and policy and program formulation. disability. Strategy for action The final chapter outlines the proposed strategy for action. 20. and community factors. it becomes easier to understand and address the problems. political instability. In 2006 and 2007. These risks may take various forms such as economic recession. and location for community factors. the section on social protection explains the policies and programs that aim to prevent.likelihood of meeting the millennium development target. These are the Food-for-School Program (FSP) and the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program or the 4Ps. private organizations. performance in these indicators improved. In addition. old age. the Philippines had a low probability of meeting its targets on elementary cohort survival rate and completion rates. and the community should have clearly defined roles in the child development process and be able to work in synergy . household. it has been emphasized in this paper that. there are two major social protection programs in the Philippines. thus. Finally. manage. unemployment. age and sex for individual factors. namely. Disparities in education outcomes were also observed in different socioeconomic dimensions and can emanate from individual. Of the total respondents. among others. Results show that this program had positive impact on both school attendance and nutrition status of the pupils who benefited from the FSP. Household factors can be a confluence of individual factors while community factors may be the result of a confluence of household factors. however.1% reported an enhanced knowledge on basic nutrition because of the program. sickness. “duty-bearers” comprising public institutions. More important. the 2007 level is the same as the 1990 level. among others. Some specific recommendations for policies and programs include pursuing an effective population management program to stop the vicious cycle of poverty and underdevelopment. To achieve a net enrolment of 100% by 2015. Data shows an increase in elementary participation rate.9% annually. However. sudden death of a breadwinner. requiring that the 25-year target be achieved in eight years. individuals. education and child protection. An initial monitoring done by the Department of Education in 2006 of the FSP validated the experience in other countries that social transfers can act as effective incentives to increase the poor’s demand for services and improve their education outcomes. income for household factors. allocating more financial and rational manpower resources for health. building up data and giving due consideration to regional disparities in aid of planning. Its performance worsened even more in the following years. By getting to the root causes of the factors that lead to child poverty and deprivation. In 2002. stabilizing macroeconomic fundamentals to strengthen the country’s economic performance in order to reduce the incidence of poverty. and. and drought. Discussed in this section are the three common indicators for these three factors. using the rights-based approach to guide those responsible for ensuring that the human rights of children are preserved and enjoyed. Currently. To achieve targets in cohort survival and completion rates.
This.with all stakeholders to narrow the disparities among children and continuously promote their well-being. . after all. is the right of every Filipino child.
while an estimated 10 million children die each year. for developing skills. This cycle will continue as long as there are poor families that could not break the chain and do not benefit from poverty reduction strategies (Minujin et al. which is carried out in 40 countries and seven regions. Davidzuk. 1. 2006. thorough conceptualization and empirical studies are needed to capture the nuances of child poverty and their implications for policymaking in order to address them. age. Education and health are important to break the intergenerational transfer of poverty. poor children are most likely to grow into poor adults. Children. While the definition of childhood in various cultures and societies differ. It has different causes and has different effects and impact on children. thereby depriving them the opportunity to live healthy and fulfilling lives.Gonzalez.Chapter I: Children and Development Introduction Recognition of child poverty as a distinct issue in the study of poverty is a new development and only achieved universal recognition recently. it is universally accepted that childhood should be a time for growth and development. lack of 1 Minujin. A. E. 1 . and E. The traditional. gender. Based on UNICEF’s definition.” Environment and Urbanization 18 (2). By being born poor. and for forming aspirations. and for improving child survival to meet the target of halving absolute poverty by 2015. a child is defined as a human being below the age of 18. To understand the dynamics and follow the achievement of countries in meeting this goal. Recognizing this. creating a comprehensive definition that includes household structure. UNICEF) has distinguished child poverty from poverty in general. and to tackle issues on gender equality and child poverty. the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) launched the Global Study on Child Poverty and Disparities. children are robbed of these opportunities and freedoms. “The Definition of Child Poverty: A Discussion of Concepts and Measurements. and Disparities Conceptual Framework In international law. studies show that malnourished children are likely to become vulnerable as adults and may have reduced chances to secure sustainable livelihood in the future. widely accepted monetary approach in identifying and measuring poverty is found to be inadequate to define the forms of deprivation experienced by children suffering from poverty. Consequently.. A. Poverty. and other factors. Universal access to education is important to enhance skills and increase employment opportunities. Poverty breeds poverty and creates a cycle that is passed from generation to generation. The United Nations estimates that half of the 1. the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) include in its targets the need for universal access for primary education.2 billion people in developing countries living in poverty are children. This Global Study aims to address issues that hamper the progress of meeting the MDGs. Poor children are robbed of their childhood and are denied a chance to achieve their potentials.1 Child poverty is different from adult poverty. 2006). Likewise. Delomonica. Hence.
2007-2008. Guided by global. 2 2 . taking note of the strengths and weaknesses of various concepts in given contexts. It should also bring in the unique way that children experience poverty. voicelessness seeks solutions to address the main or core causes of poverty in the country child-specific concerns and/or urge for immediate relief ignored per capita GDP people living on less than US$1 a day (at PPP) or in different wealth/asset quintiles households under national food poverty line. national. and country level efforts to define and measure the various dimensions of child poverty. community.1. A comprehensive child poverty concept should build on existing definitions and measures of poverty. the UNICEF’s Guide to the Global Study on Child Poverty and Disparities takes a three-part approach to child poverty. people excluded from political participation Model ‘B’: child poverty = poverty of households (families) raising children Implications Advantage focus on material poverty seeks solutions to address the main. or core causes of poverty in the country and the inadequate support and services to families raising children Based on the UNICEF Guide to the Global Study on Child Poverty and Disparities. systemic policy concerns at family. are included. as shown in Figure I. while maintaining linkages to broader. regional.2 This concept considers how child poverty fits in as a vital part of the general discussion on poverty. and even international level. September 2007. Figure I. Other aspects of material deprivation like access to basic services and issues related to discrimination and exclusion that affect a child’s self-esteem and psychological development.1: Child Poverty Approaches: Three Models “A” “C” “B Model ‘A’: child poverty = overall poverty Implications Advantage Disadvantage Examples focus on material poverty and the correlates of poverty such as powerlessness. underlying.economic security is only one component of child poverty.
and could mask child disparities that exist within the household. or State of the World’s Children (SOWC) 2004. 6) children with two or more severe deprivations (shelter. Holland. New York. including gender inequalities.. Model “B” equates child poverty with the poverty of families raising children. This model can capture the income and labor disadvantage that families (especially women) raising children may face as they seek a balance between work and family responsibilities. Model “A” is a strategic situation for advocates of child rights. since children are already included (although in an implicit or invisible manner) in this broad concept of poverty. 3 4 ‘Bristol Concept’ in Townsend et al. brings in the concerns for child protection Disadvantage methodological difficulty to produce standard poverty measures (headcount.” UNICEF Division of Policy and Planning Working Paper. food. and health service)3 Model ‘C’: child poverty = the flipside of child well-being Implications Advantage strongest focus on child outcomes besides material poverty. which is much closer to the level at which children come into focus. concepts at this level are prone to ignore non-material aspects of child deprivations.1. 2006. 7.g. or via social services delivered to them by their household/community environment. education. The advantage of this model is that it takes the household-level perspective. UNICEF IRC Report Card No. “Poverty and Children: A Perspective. poverty gap) and/or lack of indicators/statistical data especially in developing countries composite indices on child well-being in rich countries4 complex child poverty measures in some Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries (e. However.2003. G. It must be remembered here that disadvantaged children could benefit from economic growth through two key channels: through employment opportunities delivered to their care providers/parents. addresses also the emotional and spiritual aspects of the child deprivation. the United Kingdom) Source: Fajth. 3 . therefore. This approach starts with a macro view of poverty that must be made more specific (or disaggregated) to reveal poverty at the community or household level. and K. information. sanitation..Disadvantage Examples non-material aspects of child deprivations ignored number of children living in households less than 50% of the median income or under national poverty threshold (UNICEF IRC Report Card No. water. Model “A” presents the simplistic way in which the world generally sees child poverty—as indistinguishable from overall poverty. Bradshaw et al. Examples In Figure I. 2007.
Model “C” is the best fit.8 45.1 30.1 28. showed more families becoming worse off in the past three years (Table I. and labor to name a few.6% of the population) 0–5 years old are underweight. In 2006.3 24. Data showed that six regions had an increase in the number of underweight children from 2003 to 2006 (Table I.4 23.4 19.8 31.5 16. Four regions.1 45.2).” Children. Child poverty is an outcome of deprivation in the family.6 33. ARMM.Northern Mindanao Region XI – Davao Region XII . X and Caraga. Filipino children have become vulnerable to a host of issues such as mortality. namely Regions VI.7 43.Western Visayas Region VII . experienced the steepest rise in poverty incidence among families in three years.3 44.1 47. 5 Data based on DevPulse of the National Economic and Development Authority. Table I.1 30. health.9 7. The country’s poorest region. becoming exposed to exploitation and abuse.4 A survey conducted in 2005 revealed that almost a quarter of Filipino children (24.7 40.Central Luzon Region IVA – CALABARZON Region IVB – MIMAROPA Region V – Bicol Region VI .5% nationwide.6 35.8 16.3 13.2 20. showed slight decline in poverty incidence among families. 4 . the rest of the country. education. as poverty incidence in families rise.9 40. However.2 36.Eastern Visayas Region IX . 2003 and 2006 (in %) 2003 Philippines NCR CAR Region I – Ilocos Region II .4 14.6 31.3 40.4 4. Poverty Incidence among Families.5 55.7 28. poverty incidence among families increased by 2.1. at almost 10%.8 25. more and more children are deprived of their basic needs and are pushed to join the labor force at an early age.0 37.5 39. NCR included.8 26.8 24.Cagayan Valley Region III .Central Visayas Region VIII .SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga ARMM Source: National Statistical Coordination Board 2006 26.For a model that captures individual child outcomes and also brings in non-material aspects of poverty.Zamboanga Peninsula Region X . IX.7 41.1). Poverty and Disparity: The Case of the Filipino Children5 In a country where poverty is prevalent. It considers child well-being and child deprivation to be “different sides of the same coin. thus. violence and abuse.5 32.
Davao XII. health.5 34. net enrolment rate declined for elementary school children (Figure I.2.3 33.2 32. SOCCKSARGEN Caraga ARMM 1989/1990 34.8 17.5 28.8 37.6 41.8 36.6 16.7 2001 30. Southern Tagalog IV-A CALABARZON IV-B MIMAROPA V.1 27.5 35. As a result of the continued armed conflict and security problems in Central and Western Mindanao and ARMM.2 17. Central Visayas VIII.8 31.5 17.7 32.4 25.1 34. Zamboanga Peninsula X.3 27 32.5 26.3 30.5 31.3 32 31.4 34. with figures showing that 4 million of the 25 million children between ages 5–17 are engaged in child labor.3 30.7 31.2).84% in SY 2007–2008. Cagayan Valley III.7 22.5 23. Central Luzon IV. Records show that there are 44.2 34 2005 24.5 19.6 29. Secondary school participation was also noticeably low and fluctuated between 59% and 62% from 2002 to 2008.5 24.6 20.4 29.5 32. 766 HIV seropositive children and youth were accounted for in the human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) registry. 5 .6 32. Western Visayas VII.7 38.5 28.3 32.1 33. Eastern Visayas Western Mindanao IX.4 31.2 1998 32 26. To date.2 30.2 37.9 29.29% in school year (SY) 2002–2003 to 84.1 28 34.5 25.5 27.8 35.5 1996 30.1 33.8 34.8 24.8 35. According to the 2003 Situation Analysis of Children and Women in the Philippines.2 1992 34 27.1 34.2 44.3 38 Source: National Nutrition Survey.4 29.6 32. Northern Mindanao Southern Mindanao Central Mindanao XI. malnutrition among infants and young children was found to be associated with the mothers’ level of education.6 33. Ilocos II.9 26 34.9 2003 26.9 32.3 46 40.1 33.3 26. and nutrition status. Prevalence of Underweight Children 0-5-Years Old.1 21.8 23 27.8 33.3 31 37.1 23.4 34.9 25.9 19. and 33 of 100 among the age group 11–19 are underweight.9 17.3 1993 29..8 32.6 30.9 42.8 16.1 35.6 36.4 36.045 abused children had been under the care of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) as of 2002.8 34.4 39. and the psychological trauma of being displaced. Child labor incidence is also staggering.2 25. Bicol VI. Since 2002. Many Filipino teenagers admitted to having engaged in commercial sex.1 36.3 30. their exposure to the elements due to meager facilities in evacuation centers.2 28.Table I.435 street children nationwide.5 34.3 26.8 17.1 35.8 26.4 33. Older children and adolescents are not spared from malnutrition as reports showed that 3 of 10 children have stunted growth due to malnutrition.3 28.4 28.9 34.9 27.4 29. A recorded 21% paid for sexual favors while 13% were paid for these.9 31. Participation rate declined from 90.8 31 37.2 35 37. as cited in DevPulse.5 39.3 30.1 32.3 22.2 40.1 29.8 23. National Economic and Development Authority.2 32.6 24.7 36. half a million families were displaced and had tremendous impact on children with their education disrupted.3 23.7 20.2 28 30. 1989-2005 Region tab NCR CAR I. A total of 10. Conflict and insurgency problems also exposed some Filipino children to grave threats and danger.8 37. Sexual and physical abuse and exploitation are also rising.8 37.2 33.
It also authorized the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) to shut down business establishments found to have violated this law. medical or psychological services. The new law increased the penalties for violators up to a maximum of P5 million and up to 20 years imprisonment. Improve maternal health – Reduce maternal mortality by three-quarters by 2015 and increase access to reproductive health services to 60% by 2010 and 80% by 2015. 2003. The government’s commitment to achieve its MDG targets by 2015 helped in setting the right targets to address issues affecting the Filipino children. Thus far. particularly women and children. this law aims to eliminate the worst forms of child labor such as slavery. b. Reduce child mortality – Reduce children under-five mortality rate by twothirds by 2015. and educational assistance to the victim. With little success achieved in eradicating child poverty in the past decades. counseling. The Act also provides for mandatory shelter or housing. These targets are: a. livelihood and skills training. c. preferably by 2005. policy gaps and disparities must be expediently addressed to improve the condition and to give the protection and support that Filipino children deserve. the law institutes policies to eliminate trafficking of persons. 2003. child prostitution.2. free legal services. Ensure environmental sustainability – Implement national strategies for sustainable development by 2005 to reverse loss of environmental resources 6 . Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003 (Republic Act 9208)—Enacted on May 26.Figure I. Net Enrolment Rate Source: Department of Education. two important laws were passed to protect the children: Anti-Child Labor Law (Republic Act 9231)—Enacted on December 19. d. Philippines. and the use of children for illegal and hazardous activities. and in all levels of education no later than 2015. Promote gender equality – Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education.
9% of the population is poor.2 44. and provide access to affordable essential drugs in cooperation with pharmaceutical companies. and poverty reduction – both nationally and internationally.6 2006 32.3 43. and Institutional Context of Poverty in the Philippines Poverty and inequality has become a feature of the Philippine economy.9 10.0 6. Include a commitment to good governance. The poorest region.7 38. has 61.1 48. and forestry sectors. e.7 51.5 18.by 2015.1 36. predictable. The highest concentration of the poor is in the rural areas.5 45.8% of its population suffering from poverty (Table I.9 52.6 35.5 39.9 32. with large variations in poverty incidence across regions.5 32. Other sectors with recorded high incidence of poverty are construction.5 17.3 46. These sectors contribute 61.0 52. 2.6 61.Central Visayas Region VIII . and transport. (Table I.1 38. mining.8 Philippines NCR CAR Region I – Ilocos Region II .4 34.Eastern Visayas Region IX . deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries through national and international measures in order to make debt sustainable in the long term.4 48.Western Visayas Region VII .4) 7 . Table I. halve the proportion of people with no access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation facilities or those who cannot afford it by 2015.Northern Mindanao Region XI – Davao Region XII – SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga ARMM Source: National Statistical Coordination Board Poverty incidence is highest among families whose household heads are employed in agriculture. Latest figures show that 32.7 25.Zamboanga Peninsula Region X .2 28.3). non-discriminatory trading and financial system.0 34. and achieve a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020. Political. Progress in achieving these targets is shown in Appendix 1.Poverty Incidence among the Population. Develop global partnership for development – Develop further an open.6 40. fishing. ARMM.4 48. Economic.7 20.2 24.0 49.2 30.Cagayan Valley Region III .6% of poverty incidence in the country.5 20. 2003 and 2006 (in %) 2003 30.3.4 54.8 52. rulebased.Central Luzon Region IVA – CALABARZON Region IVB – MIMAROPA Region V – Bicol Region VI . development.
9 0. 85-107. pp.Table I. The ballooning population is creating a strain on the country’s limited resources. Low Income and Underemployment As of 2008. The link between high population growth and poverty incidence has been established. 6 8 . children in large families usually do not perform well in school.8 8.5 6.1 11.” January.0 7. What this relatively low figure implies is that the problem is not unemployment per se. Poverty Measures by Sector of Employment of the Household Head. “Poverty in the Philippines: Assets. 2000.2 100. be an integral component of the government’s poverty reduction strategy.5 14.2 2. 2005.6 11. therefore. Major causes of poverty and underdevelopment could be traced to the following:6 High Population Growth Rate Philippine population has been growing at a rate of 2.7 Contribution to Poverty Incidence (%) 61.04% (as of 2000–2007) and is projected to reach 103 million by 2015.7 6. have poorer health. but belong to jobs that do not provide sufficiently for the basic needs of the family. Several factors could explain the high level of poverty incidence in the country. also has the highest population growth rate at 5.4%. and Forestry Mining Manufacturing Utilities Construction Trade Transport Finance Services Unemployed Total Source: National Statistical Office Family Income and Expenditure Survey. High fertility is associated with decreasing investments in human capital (health and education).1 0.3 5.4 100.7 28. higher unwanted fertility.8 17.6 1.8 16. and are less developed physically.0 Sector Agriculture. An effective population management program should. Empirical studies show that the larger the family. In Asian Development Bank.7 4. ARMM. 2000 Share of Household Heads (%) 35. Fishing.4 - 4.5 1. and higher unmet needs for family planning (Orbeta 2002).6 16.5 44.4 15. the more likely it is to be poor. Income.1 6.6 11.2 0.6 7.4. Data show that most of the poor are employed. Moreover. and Access. There are studies showing that the country’s high population growth is the result of the poor’s limited access to family planning services.0 Poverty Incidence (%) 48.46%.7 9. the poorest region. the unemployment rate was 7. but low incomes derived from employment and underemployment.
An effective land reform program.5). are therefore critical. 7 9 . 1985–2000 Year Poverty Incidence (%) 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 56. the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) is still yet to deliver its basic promise of land for the landless. as estimated by the National Wages and Productivity Board (NWPB). It can distort the allocation of resources and the performance of government in many aspects. After more than two decades. Domestic issues remain the same for a long period. Agriculture provides 25% of employment in the Philippines.7 55.5 57. It exacerbates poverty. Agriculture: Low Productivity and Land Reform Issues The Philippine agriculture sector has been mired by low productivity and structural problems. it was shown that minimum wage levels are only about 40% of the family living wage7. It is not surprising that more than half of farming households are suffering from poverty. Improving the performance of this sector will be a huge triumph in poverty reduction efforts. Underemployment is pervasive as there are a sizeable number of workers who want to work longer hours to augment their income but do not have the opportunity or access to work. (ii) nonfood expenditures derived using the food expenditure ratios of families with 6 members that is solely dependent on wages and salary. Corruption and Good Governance High levels of corruption reduce economic growth.8 Sources: Reyes (2002a). and (iii) an additional 10% to allow for savings and investment. particularly lack of support to farmers. (M92).3 55. It has a pervasive and troubling impact on the poor since it distorts public choices in favor of the wealthy and powerful. and Family Income and Expenditure Survey data. This suggests that poverty is increasingly concentrated in the agriculture sector (Table I.5. inadequate infrastructure. Among the identified effects of a corrupt regime are (UNDP 2000): The family living wage is comprised of (i) food expenditures based on the menus set by the NSCB. despite a fall in poverty incidence nationally. most especially in developing and transitional economies. and access to land.3 55.a study conducted by Asian Development Bank (ADB). Table I.4 52. coupled with investments in productivity enhancement strategy and infrastructure. and reduces the state’s capacity to provide social safety nets. The deadline for CARP’s completion has been postponed while cases of wealthy landlords that continue to circumvent the CARP law persist. Poverty Incidence among Farming Households. This proportion remained almost unchanged since 1985. (ADB 2005).
displacement.• • • • Lower level of social services. While good government is bound by rules aimed to create a transparent and accountable government. corruption has a far-reaching effect on the national psyche. falling below Vietnam and Indonesia.2 5. natural capital.6 2.1 3. and sometimes discreetly. which eventually goes back to undermine the whole system of good governance (Balboa and Medalla 2005). Based on Goodhand’s analysis. conflict and poverty has a bi-directional causal relationship. Higher tax burdens yet fewer services. On the one hand.3 Source: Transparency International. and produces a generation that knows nothing but violence. corruption serves the narrow interest of a few families and their allies. on these rules to make decisions that benefit only those who have access to power and the highest bidder.6.6). The country landed at the 141st spot in the 2008 Corruption Perception Index of Transparency International. and Lower opportunities for farmers to sell their produce and for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to flourish as their ability to escape poverty through their livelihood is severely restricted by corruption of the state’s regulatory apparatus. death. Conflict writes off any gains achieved in development.5 2. Infrastructure projects biased against the poor since public officials will design public projects with maximum bribery receipts and with minimum chance of detection. Corruption is the anti-thesis of good governance. and physical capital. disability. social capital. While the latter aims to serve public interest. Table I. disrupts flow of services needed by the people from their government. Corruption has been identified as a major reason for the underdevelopment of the Philippines. financial capital. making it one of the most complex and difficult issues to address in human development. and breaking down of rules 10 . corruption plays directly. Goodhand (2001) summed up the negative effects of conflict into five dimensions: human capital. Conflict Conflict has a wide-ranging impact on development.7 2. conflict breeds poverty as a result of damages to physical infrastructure. Rank 4 47 80 121 126 141 2008 Corruption Perception Index Country Singapore Malaysia Thailand Viet Nam Indonesia Philippines Score 9. more insidiously. and listed as the worst performer in middle-income Southeast Asia in corruption perception rating (Table I. Thus. mental and social damages. creates physical.
The stipulated ownership and access to the various productive factors then determines the size distribution of income. The interface between the macroeconomy and household outcomes is where output. MIMAP-type models evaluate the impact of macroeconomic adjustment policies on poverty incidence. poverty. Such a framework is described in the next section.3 while Box I. The latter are translated to outcomes that determine the level of human development. It will be useful to link macroeconomic policies with decisions at the household level.1 describes this program at length. This will help trace the impact of macroeconomic policy—in particular. especially if the condition remains unaddressed for a long period. particularly ARMM and the insurgency areas in Eastern Visayas and Caraga are the poorest. MIMAP Framework A useful framework to adopt is that of microeconomic impact of macroeconomic adjustment policies or MIMAP. factor quantities employed. Macroeconomic Strategies and Resource Allocation The situation and outcomes described earlier are related to the general macroeconomic environment.and order. and the aggregate balance of trade in goods and services and international financial flows with the rest of the world. the overall price and employment levels. primarily because the armed conflict made it more difficult for basic services to be delivered and necessary infrastructure for development to be built. and the size and distribution of income influence household choices. education. the macroeconomy determines the aggregate supply and demand of goods and services. The more recent quantitative tools with similar objectives were reviewed in a World Bank study (Bourguignon and Pereira da Silva 2003). Relative prices. Unfortunately. income distribution. employment. yet most deprived of basic services. factor returns. It should be noted that the MIMAP approach is not unique in relating macroeconomic policies with microeconomic outcomes. and the environment. On the other hand. decisions on resource allocation—on child poverty. There were also cases of detainment of Muslim women and children because of their suspected relationship with terrorists. and grievances could ultimately breed conflict. inequality. relative and general price levels affect sectoral factor demand and supply. gender bias. An alarming result is the involvement of children in armed conflict. health outcomes. the level and distribution of public goods and services. Measures that are initiated at the aggregate level are considered as ‘macroeconomic adjustment policies. including being among the combatants. there is a dearth of studies that deal solely on the impact on child poverty.’ The general MIMAP framework is illustrated in Figure I. and the functional distribution of income. 11 . Child soldiers are being recruited and trained for guerrilla warfare. 3. The conflict-ridden areas of the country. In this framework.
many developing countries introduced measures to meet structural adjustment targets and to promote sustained economic growth. Country Projects Africa: Benin. Pakistan. and liberalizing the trade and financial sectors. Although tools for measuring poverty at the household and community levels and for modeling national economies were developed to address these concerns. These macroeconomic changes had drastic and unintended effects on the poor and vulnerable.idrc. and international levels. The network includes more than 40 research teams from Asia. and international experts. their use suffered from the limited involvement of developing-country researchers and policymakers. and Canada. Nepal.Box 1. nongovernment organizations (NGOs). Africa. India. Viet Nam *From MIMAP website: http://network.ca/ev. The Program The MIMAP program helps developing countries design policies and programs that meet economic stabilization and structural adjustment targets while alleviating poverty and reducing vulnerability. policy officials.1 The MIMAP Program* The Context In the 1980s.php?ID=6672_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC 12 . Ghana Asia: Bangladesh. devaluing local currencies. Philippines. and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. the network works to increase knowledge of the human costs of macroeconomic policies and shocks. the World Bank. national. It became clear that local capability and knowledge base were essential to sustain efforts to measure poverty and analyze the impacts of macroeconomic policies and shocks. Sri Lanka. the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) launched the Micro Impacts of Macroeconomic and Adjustment Policies (MIMAP) program in 1990. Morocco. Concern about these effects was reinforced by the publication of important studies by the United Nations Children’s Fund. training. Through research. These included reducing public spending. Lao PDR. improve policies and programs to alleviate poverty and increase equity. and press for their consideration and implementation at the subnational. Burkina Faso. Senegal. The program established the MIMAP Network that connects developing-country researchers. and dialogue. To that end.
And Education.” Workshop paper (July). 13 .3 Analytical Framework for Assessing the Microeconomic Impact of Macroeconomic Adjustment Policies Macroeconomic Adjustment Policies Macro Processes Economic Outcomes Facing Households Human Development Household Choices • • Health Public Provision of Goods And Services • • • Labor/Factor Markets Goods/Services Markets • • Incomes Prices • Human Development Production Inputs • • Mortality Morbidity Nutrition Policy Instruments Macro Outcomes • • • • • • Health Services Utilization Sanitation Dietary/Nutrient Intake School Participation Others • Growth Failure •Micronutrient Deficiency • Education Government Revenues and Expenditures • • • • • Interest Rate Exchange Rate Wages. Literacy Schooling Attainment School Achievement * Modified diagram version of Table 1 of Herrin. Prices Tariffs Level and Distribution of Public Goods/Services • • • • Employment Output Prices • • • • • Literacy/Functional. (1992): “Micro Impacts Of Macroeconomic Adjustment Policies On Health. A.Figure I. N. Nutrition.
At 0. the national government paid $74.44. which appropriates debt service automatically into the national budget. while the consolidated public sector debt accounted for more than 130% of GDP. which mandated the government to honor all Philippine debts and. Meanwhile. While the region’s middle. leading to a large external debt overhang. higher than Indonesia (7. This is evidence that economic benefits have not been equitably shared and recent studies argued that an inequitable distribution of wealth is a constraint to economic growth and development.9). This policy dovetails with Presidential Decree 1177.7). In 2005. the Philippines’ economic growth record has been disappointing. As a result. thus.40%). In 2006. The gap narrowed through time and by 1984.and high-income economies experienced at least 2% average growth of real per capita gross domestic product (GDP) during the past 50 years. on average. the Philippines is also a laggard in East Asia in terms of poverty alleviation.Macroeconomic Trends in the Philippines Poverty and Growth Sustainable economic development continues to be elusive for the Philippines. and Indonesia were included in this select group.7%) and Viet Nam (8. Figure I. including private loans. the Philippines recorded only a 1. Compared with other economies in East Asia. 14 . the Philippines was not even described as a “high-performing economy” by the World Bank in its 1993 study of the East Asian Miracle while Thailand. legitimized the assumption of debts by the national government. Between 1986 and 2002. debt service dominated government expenditures except for the period 1995–2000. This was facilitated by President Corazon Aquino’s Proclamation 50.2% in the Philippines.4 shows that since 1985. the national government’s debt was equivalent to 79. Thailand’s per capita GDP was higher than that of the Philippines. The Philippines’ per capita GDP was almost twice as large as that of Thailand and thrice that of Indonesia in 1960 (Table I. it assumed responsibility over many debts extended to the private sector. In stark contrast. Thailand’s per capita GDP was more than double that of the Philippines while Indonesia—which has a population more than twice as large—has nearly caught up. This was largely a result of the international debt crisis that erupted in 1982. Malaysia and Thailand have virtually eliminated absolute poverty (Table I. Resource Allocation A major reason for the disappointing record of the Philippines in terms of economic growth and poverty reduction is the allocation of fiscal resources. The Philippines had a fragile fiscal position since 1980. Malaysia. This is. the Philippines’ Gini coefficient per capita income is highest among all middle-income countries in Southeast Asia (Table I. Absolute poverty incidence—based on the one-dollar-a-day threshold applied to recent data—is 13. 7% of GDP and does not even include the operations of government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs).7 billion for servicing its outstanding debt.9).9% average (Table I. Not only did the Philippine government borrow heavily between 1976 and 1980.8).3% of GDP.
3 6.1 5 4.685 15.8 4.8 3. Republic of Malaysia Philippines Singapore Taipei.2 2.163 467 4.6 2001–2006 4. Indonesia Korea Malaysia China 1951–1960 9.0 2.6 3.1 -0.779 983 13.865 4.0 4. 1950–2006 (in %) Period Hong Kong.9 Singapore 5.4 7.4 1971–1980 6.110 784 612 2.2 4.960 196 1.China Thailand Source: Asian Development Bank.4 7.028 444 3.3 5. Annual Average Growth Rate of Real Per Capita GDP.6 Table I.6 1961–1970 7.175 27. 2007.7 1.059 1.4 4.3 Thailand 5.0 3.9 3.169 933 2006 31.0 5.5 3.4 5.161 908 11.0 5.468 329 13.9 2.004 10. 2007.1 3.3 4.623 1.8: Per Capita in GDP (in 2000 US$) 1960 Hong Kong. China 7.5 Taipei. 1983 1.846 897 1984 14. Philippines 3. China Indonesia Korea.7.3 1981–1990 5.8 5.Table I.386 2.7 Average growth rate for 56 years 5.2 5.8 Source: Asian Development Bank.7 3.884 2.2 5.3 7.3 2.6 0.1 2.4 4.482 2.9 5.3 8.6 9.7 3.8 3.2 1991–2000 3.549 15 .147 2.4 7.251 1.6 9.042 3.6 5.2 4.3 1.7 4.
Figure I.4 Government Expenditures by Type of Services (% GDP): 1985-2007 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Economic Services Social Services National Defense Public Services Debt Service (Interests) 16 .
poor revenue generation performance.47 0. The most notable in terms of contribution to the deficit are the: National Power Corporation (NPC).37 Source: Asian Development Bank Key Indicators.9.9% of GDP in 1998 to 4. political interference in tariff setting.1% in 2000. This took a heavy toll on public services as government agencies had to work with budgets so much smaller than what is needed to effectively deliver social services and the much-needed physical infrastructure. from 1. Despite these problems. Infrastructure expenditure in 17 .40 0.80 19.34 0.80 16. GOCCs exacerbated the country’s fiscal position as many of these suffer from poor cost recovery due to inadequate tariff adjustments. Manasan’s study (2004) showed that 14 GOCCs of the country are responsible for the huge deficit of the non-financial public sector. and reached a peak of 5.00 8. Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS). the Philippines was able to consolidate its fiscal balance in early 1990s.44 0.4% in 2002. partly because of proceeds from the privatization of government assets. Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA). For example.00 13. National Food Authority (NFA). The result was surpluses of less than 1% of GDP in 1994 to 1997. National Irrigation Administration (NIA). government intervention in pricing policy. the World Bank estimates that a middle-income country in East Asia will need to spend at least 5% of GDP annually on infrastructure to meet its needs in the next 10 years. Meanwhile. the government relied on expenditure cuts to maintain fiscal stability. 2007. In general. largely as a result of reforms aimed at increasing revenues.70 0.10 30.50 7.00 9.70 5.Table I. Poverty and Inequality in East Asia Population in Proportion Poverty of Population (in %) Below $1 (PPP) a Day (%) 2. While the Philippines did not suffer as much as the other East Asian countries. and Home Guaranty Corporation (HGC).42 0. a stark contrast from years of fiscal deficit in the 1980s up to the early 1990s (Figure I. and overstaffed structures with grossly overpaid staff. Deficits persistently grew. one visible mark left by the financial crisis in 1997 is that it squandered fiscal gains achieved in the 1990s. The level subsequently fell from 2003 to 2007.50 10.20 0.40 Gini Coefficient Country People’s Republic of China Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Thailand Viet Nam 0.5). liabilities that they had contracted through the years.
6%. in contrast to the combined debt service and defense budgets which account for 40. However. on average.the Philippines is way below this benchmark as it only accounts for 2%–3% of GDP. 20% of budgetary expenditure in developing countries and 20% of aid flows should. the 20/20 Initiative was crafted. In addition. resources allotted for infrastructure development are spent inefficiently.6% of the Philippine national budget. be allocated to social services. 18 . on average. At the World Summit for Social Development held in Copenhagen in 1995. This initiative proposed that to achieve universal coverage of basic social services. basic social services account for only 8.
Philippines (% of GDP) 19 .5: National Government Deficit. ‐6 0 1 2 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ‐5 ‐4 ‐3 ‐2 ‐1 Figure I.
and land distribution.4. malaria and other diseases. improving maternal health. Utmost care should be exercised in allocating the scarce resources given the fiscal bind faced by the government. and increasing access to reproductive health services project low probability of being met. Targeted supplemented feeding programs and food stamps 5. education. Unless an effective population management program is implemented. especially teaching materials.10 Indicative Areas for National Government Spending on Poverty Program Areas to Spend More 1. reducing child mortality and the incidence of HIV and AIDS. Basic health and family planning services 3. which are important strategies in attaining the MDGs.10). 2004–2010. infrastructure. the Philippines showed a strong record on its goal of eradicating extreme poverty and hunger in 2015. housing. Table I.6–Php389 billion (or 1.1%–1. particularly in the Philippines. water and sanitation. especially transport and power 4. it is unlikely that the Philippines will achieve all its targets unless it prudently channels scarce resources or will tap other sectors to help. decentralized development. These seven areas had proven to be effective in directly benefiting the poor (Table I. and skills development especially in rural areas. Balisacan (2007) drew a menu of government spending that would yield high returns to the poor with the least leakage of benefits to unintended non-poor groups. Given this huge resource gap. and national harmony. The MTPDP is guided by the 10-point agenda in the areas of livelihood.2% of the GDP). Impact monitoring & evaluation Source: Balisacan. fiscal strength. as critical goals such as achieving universal primary education. Expenditures on basic social services and MDG targets have declined since 1996. Nonetheless. The cumulative resource gap of all MDGs from 2007 to 2010 is estimated to be Php350. R&D and small irrigation systems 6. 2. Outcomes and Policy Recommendations The country’s poverty reduction strategy is embodied in the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP). An assessment on the performance of the Philippines in attaining its MDG targets showed a patchy record. Capacity building for LGUs and microfinance providers 7. particularly national government expenditures on basic health/nutrition. based on the low-cost assumption made by Manasan (2007). Areas to Spend Less Tertiary education: cost recovery (but with scholarship) Tertiary health care: Impost costrecovery Public works equipment program (except for short-term disaster relief) General food price subsidies Post-harvest facilities (private goods) Livelihood programs (except for short term disaster relief) Serious attention should be given to control rapid population growth. and ensuring environmental sustainability (Manasan 2007). Rural infrastructure. Basic education. 2007. technical education. 20 .
The government should address these challenges and focus on measures to meet the financial requirements of MDGs. poor investment climate. Foremost of these are declining revenue collection. 21 . Policies that support these goals should be implemented and sustained to reduce poverty and subsequently combat child poverty in the country. which results in low foreign direct investment as a result of macroeconomic instability. high crime rate. which not only weaken economic performance but also aggravate poverty incidence. corruption. and the gradual loss of international competitiveness due to poor performance of the export industry. uncertainty in economic policy.the country would remain captive in the grinding cycle of poverty and underdevelopment. which creates fiscal deficit and heavy public sector debt. It is also important that the government examines and addresses the chronic macroeconomic problems that plague the country.
2007-06.15 22.60 (2006) 80.01 Low 80.00 -2.80 83.11 -0.06 -0.27 4.33 0.29 High High 24.00 <1%(2005) 59.62 -12.27 High High <1% 123.20 24.00 -5.22 1.82 3.13 0.85 1.95 -0.20 3.00 (2004) <1% 24.50 67.57 0.70 67.65 -0.09 0.30 45. Malaria and other Diseases HIV prevalence Malaria morbidity rate (per 10.000 live births) Combat HIV and AIDS.56 0. Financing the Millenium Development Goals: The Philippines.20 0.48 1.00 -0.00 162.40 (2003) (2003) 10. Makati: PIDS.00 (2006) 52.37 0.48 High 85.98 16. Proportion of population below Subsistence threshold Poverty threshhold Prevalence of malnutrition among 0-5 year-old children (%underweight)Based on international reference standards Proportion of households with per capita intake below 100 percent dietary energy requirement Achieve universal primary education Elementary participation rate Philippines8 Elementary cohort survival rate Elementary completion rate Improved maternal health Maternal mortality ratio Increase access to reproductive health services Prevalence rate of men and women/couples practicing responsible parenthood Reduce child mortality Under 5-mortality rate (per 1.000 population) Appendix 1.29 0. Philippines MDG Rate of Progress at the National Level Target by 2015 Baseline (1990 or year closest to 1990 (b) (l=b/a) current level (2005/2006 or year closest to 2005/2006) Average Rate of Progress (1990-2005/2006 or year closest to 2005/2006 (a) Required Rate of Progress (2005/20062015) Ratio of Required Rate to Average Rate to Probability of Attaining the Targets 20.59 -0.11 High High High 69.50 1.00 (2006) (2006) 26.65 66.40 56.50 30.20 0.00 -3.37 Low 40.00 0.00 50.00 32.60 -0.40 39.70 -1.90 -1.60 80.30 34.20 19.10 68. G. R. Manasan.00 (2003) (2003) 12.2007.90 10.74 0.66 13.11 1.25 -1.000 live births) Infant mortality rate (per 1.28 -0.60 (2005) 17.17 High High 8 MDG Goals and Targets Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger A.25 -0. Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) Discussion Paper Series No.83 1. Progress in the Achievement of Millennium Development Goals in the Ensure environmental sustainability 22 Proportion of households with access to safe drinking water Proportion of households with sanitary toilet facility .05 0.61 -0.20 -3.67 81.90 (2005-06) 84.20 86.26 Low Low Low 209.48 1.70 19.30 28.00 -4.00 -0.50 24.37 1.80 0.85 -1.90 (2003) 34.00 0.28 High High 73.04 84. Proportion of families below Subsistence threshold Poverty threshhold B.99 (2005-06) 69.00 0.00 24.54 12.00 57.44 (2005-06) 100.20 (2004) (2004) 86.
Pasig City: NEDA. challenges remain. Gonzalez. Goodhand. “Anti-corruption and governance: the Philippine experience. 23 . fancies. Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan. Quezon City. Pernia. Bourguignon. 2002.: The World Bank. Manila: Asian Development Bank. SEARCA Agriculture and Development Discussion Paper Series No. nutrition. Midterm progress report on the MDG's progress and challenges. Vietnam for the APEC Study Center Consortium Conference 2005. G. 2005. 2004. Pasig City: NEDA. J. Minujin. Why does poverty persist in the Philippines? Facts. Washington D. National Economic Development Authority (NEDA). income. 2007-06. Pasig City: NEDA. 2006. “Gains achieved.” DevPulse XII (XIV). _______. 2007-1. Pereira da Silva.References Asian Development Bank (ADB). _______. "The definition of child poverty: a discussion of concepts and measurements. _______ and E. “Micro impacts of macroeconomic adjustment policies on health. Medalla. F. Makati: PIDS. A. A. and policies. and implications for the Philippines. and E. poverty and chronic Poverty. July. 2007. and access. poverty?” DevPulse 10 (58). What else beside growth matters to poverty reduction in the Philippines? ERD Policy Brief Series Number 5. Economics and Research Department. Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) Discussion Paper Series No. 2004. Pasig City: NEDA. A. E. Pasig City: NEDA. 2005. and education. June 30. 2004–2010. _______. 2006. March. _______. 2002." Environment and Urbanization 18(2). Financing the Millennium Development Goals: the Philippines. G. evidence. Manchester: University of Manchester. Diliman. “Overcoming the food crisis.A.” Chronic Poverty Research Centre Working Paper 6. Makati: PIDS. October. 92-18.2007. INNOTECH Building. 1992. Orbeta. Reyes. Pasig City: NEDA. _______ . Manasan.” Paper presented in Ho Chi Minh City. Fajth.” 2nd Progress Report on the MDGs. DevPulse X (29). “Poverty and children: a perspective. Balboa. 2008.” UNICEF Division of Policy and Planning Working Paper. M. Pasig City: NEDA. Poverty in the Philippines: assets. and K.” Working Paper Series No. A. 2001. Delamonica. 2007. “Violent conflict. Makati: PIDS.. “The Philippine economy: prospects for 2008. Balisacan. 200407. 2007. “Can we win the war vs. N. R. _______. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies. and E. Holland.” Paper prepared for the 2002 Population National Congress. The Philippines’ fiscal position: looking at the complete picture. 2003. Davidzuk. Manila: ADB. and L. Herrin. J. 2002-20. The impact of economic policies on poverty and income distribution: evaluation techniques and tools. 2005. December. New York. 2002.C. “Population and poverty: a review of links.” DevPulse XI (20) Special Issue. C. 2007. The poverty fight: have we made an impact? Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) Discussion Paper Series No. Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) Policy Notes No. A.
Poverty incidence among households with children is higher at 33. In 2006. 7 to less than 15. the NSO weights were used as the NSCB weights for poverty estimation were not yet obtained. It does not provide information on the number of members aged below 18 in the family. Except for 2006. In this report. The poverty thresholds are provided in the appendices. children are defined as those aged below 15. the FIES has to be merged with the Labor Force Survey (LFS). causal analysis called for has not been done. the weights used in the estimations are those provided by the NSCB. The second part briefly discusses the notion and characteristics of child survival. It also shows the severity of the deprivations the children experience and how many are experiencing multiple deprivations.1 Sources of basic data are the different rounds of the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) of the National Statistics Office (NSO) and poverty thresholds used are those officially released by the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB).8% than the overall poverty incidence of Filipino households at 26.Chapter II: Poverty and Children Introduction This chapter focuses on poverty and the Filipino children.9%. 1 to less than 7. Estimates in this paper are calculated at the standpoint of the Filipino family simply because the survey used is the FIES. 15 to less than 25. Thus. the number of members in households considered poor or Due to data limitations. The first section discusses the poverty profile of Filipino children and the types and severity of deprivations they experience. and 25 years and over. In 2006. with focus on the general trends in poverty rates and sub-national disparities. approximately 29 million Filipino children are in age range 0–14.and province-specific poverty thresholds.5 members) with children of this age range is bigger than the average Filipino family (4.2 These are region. which is the usual definition of children. 2 1 24 . 3 The age categories of family members in the ordinary Public-Use Files (PUF) of the FIES allows only this kind of tabulation. 4 Refers to estimates from the FIES. Income Poverty and Deprivations Affecting Children Income/Consumption Approach This section discusses the general poverty and deprivation situation of the country and how these are correlated with the situation of the child. the discussions in this report concern mainly those children below 15 years old. It provides estimates on the number of poor children in the country and how these poor children are distributed across subgroups and regions in the country. Since no dataset with the income levels of individuals is available. A typical family (5. not official population projection. To obtain an age range of 0–17.8 members). 1.4 Seven of 10 families in the country have children belonging to this age cohort.3 The FIES dataset—the official source of income and expenditure data—contains information on the number of members who are less than 1 year old. This chapter is divided into two main parts.
4 million.9% of the population from 30% in 2003 and in 2000. the figures indicate that the country has not yet won the fight against poverty. These basic food and non-food requirements are determined by the NSCB. 25 . There are several possible explanations for this trend. The data from 1985 to 1994 are not consistent with 1997 data. The definition of poor is someone who does not have sufficient income to meet the basic food and non-food requirements. The series 2000 to 2006 use a different methodology from the previous series. the number did not actually decline but rather went up.6 million.3 million. This is a reversal (if one looks at the trend. The WB’s PovcalNet estimates. It may be that poverty reduction efforts did not pay off and/or that population growth has offset all the supposed effects of programs. Figure II.1 in the Appendices). which are based on consumption poverty lines.deprived of basic needs provided this study with rough but convenient measures. High fertility rates were found as one of the reasons why the fight against poverty has been tough (Orbeta 2003). While the series is not exactly comparable across time. this figure grew to 27. what may be of greater interest are the changes in the magnitude of income-poor. all the members are considered poor. show that those in poverty slightly increased in 2006 compared to 2003 figures (see Table II. Official estimates of income-based poverty measure show that poverty incidence increased in 2006 to 32. Thus. when a family is poor. showing an increase of 1. In 2006. Analyzing the poverty situation of the Filipino child is anchored on examining the poverty profile of Filipinos in general. In 1985. although there have been changes in the methodology over time)5 from 1985 to 2000. This upward movement of the poverty rate was also captured in the data by the World Bank (WB). The assumption was that income and opportunities inside the family is equally distributed among its members. the official estimate of the income-poor population is 26. Though the rates show relatively minimal movements. 5 Please take note of the break in the series. which also sets the poverty threshold. Larger families were known to experience higher poverty rates.1 shows that although the percentage of poor households has gone down since 1985.
7–14 years old) comprise the majority. in fact. the trends of child poverty rate and magnitude were drawn against the overall poverty measure of the general population. and poverty thresholds developed by the NSCB. Note that child poverty rates move alongside the trend of the poverty incidence of the population.8 million. In fact. 1985–2006 Sources: FIES. In 2006. Magnitude and Percentage of Poor Population and Children. 6 Poverty estimates on basic sectors released by the NSCB.1). 26 . The above figure made use of Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) estimates based on available Public-Use Files (PUF) of the FIES conducted by the NSO.e..5% (more than 14 million) in 2000. living in families that did not meet the basic food and non-food requirements based on their income.000 during the past two decades. there were 12. To start with. and is almost the same as the rate more than two decades ago.1. the absolute number has not been reduced but. were only for two survey years.5 million children) from 42. Among the children suffering from income poverty.5%). poverty incidence among children living in rural areas (31.1.6 Apart from the alarming trend in poverty magnitudes. and National Statistical Coordination Board. Philippines. the trend is consistent with the PIDS estimates. National Statistics Office. In Figure II. 2000 and 2003. This estimate is higher by around 1 million from the 2003 figure of 11. school-goers (i. It was also noted that though the rates have declined since 1985.4%) is more than twice that of those living in urban areas (12. grew by around 70. Looking at the official estimates on poverty rates among children aged below 18 released by the NSCB. This represented 44% of all children of that same age range. The estimates produced.8 million children. however. 7 of 10 poor children are from the rural areas (Table II. aged below 15.Figure II. These show that estimates of children in poverty went down to 38.8% in 2003 (about 13. there are wide disparities among geographic locations in the country that are too glaring to ignore.
326.257 963.3 Sources: 2006 Family Income and Expenditure Survey. National Statistical Coordination Board.2 51.340 819. Cordillera Autonomous Region (CAR) has the lowest count of poor children at 0. Poverty rates are higher in regions in the Visayas and Mindanao islands.3 69.3 46.425 516.8 48.042 681.2.6 44.5 51. 27 .188 664.2 million.179 667.760 225. by Region. and CALABARZON regions.The distribution of children in poverty across geographic units is shown in Figure II.489 552.2.190 739. However.537 43.8 million income poor children.910 1.0 62. even if poverty incidence is highest in ARMM. National Statistics Office (NSO).1 million) and Mindanao (4.1 million).5 34. Although the higher rates of poverty are in the Visayas and Mindanao. Of the 12.3 15.529 1. in the ARMM it is 69%.631 650.9 43. Other regions experiencing relatively low rates of poverty are those situated around the capital (NCR) in the island of Luzon. It shows that while poverty incidence is only around 16% in NCR/Metro Manila.140.9 63.653 870. Western Visayas. the number of poor is still higher in Luzon (5.8 53.5 28.7 million) as compared to Visayas (3.886.083.722 1.8 30. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Philippines I CA R II III NCR IVA IVB V VIII VI VII CA RAGA X IX XI XII ARMM 12.761 986.5 million come from these three regions with each region having more than a million poor children. Children Below 15 Years Old in Poverty. the magnitude of poor children is highest in the Bicol.9 63.4 56.0 67. 3. Figure II. and based on NSO weights.613 325.037 673.
695 23.000 87.34 41.170 27.653 89.201 89.677.5 28.305 4.Table II.583 40. by national poverty line.782 4.836.8 13.55 33.631 42.305 27.2 40.18 28 .888 44. 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 50.19 33.816.1.412 43.933.090 55.261.552.87 12.by national poverty line .93 12.849 4.228.by international poverty line Magnitude of poor -families -population Number of children (below 18 years) in poverty (NSCB) .835 43.472.602.1 13.952.17 4.22 11.385 88.653.052 26.by national poverty line Magnitude of poor families with children 0–14 years old Families with children 0–14 years old as percentage of poor families Poverty incidence among all families .616.by national poverty line (%) -number .868 28.41 13.102 38.780.205 3.803.927 126.96.36.1994.663 25.092 88.886.81 3.093.46 3.53 12.104 4.784.5 13.469.33 3.46 46.484 25.2 39.9 20.766 23.19 35.790 43.28 3.by international poverty line Number of children (below 15 years) (PIDS estimates) .124.79 12.861 55.477 89.500.79 33. Trends in Income/Consumption Poverty.11 30.61 27.348 88.355.758 4.in poor families.331.53 11.80 46.9 n.49 26.982.867.531. by national poverty line 58.110 88.7 3.92 3.317.a.5 14.022.77 4.005.978.345 4.25 13.230. 1985-2006 Philippines Poverty incidence among families with children 0–14 years old .663 51.4 13.54 24.996. (%) .in poor families.
036 8.777 8.293.101.asp NSCB.754. 1991 data is not comparable with the rest of the estimates herein shown. 1991 data is not comparable with the rest of the estimates shown here.704 40.355 9.542 5.602 4.jsp?WDI_Year=2007 Retrieved July 15.194 15.307 5.141 9.asp.118 4.801.538. 2000 to 2006 data are comparable.851 21. 29 .843 10.157 4.482 29. 2008.373 5. in Philippine pesos.683.934 5.623.329. 1991 figure not comparable with 1997 onwards.19 5.84 3.4.503. (%) .133. 1997 figure is not comparable with 2000 onwards.857 34.92 8.195 11.309 11.214.074 32. NSO.234 4. World Bank’s PovcalNet data.480. For Notes.804.941 28.479 5.742 11.532 10.473.927 22.in poor families in urban area.649 32.82 5.in poor families in rural area National poverty line (Philippine peso) Number of families with children Total number of families Total number of children (0–14 years old) Average household size Average household size among families with children  16.841 17.510.509 11.074 15.549 Sources of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES).559.33 4.36 9.474 12. but using the same method the rate for 2000.20 9.847.73 3. Data are available at http://www.ph/pressreleases/2007/Sept21_PR-200709-SS1-04_Poor.458 10.475 5.27 5.758 14.302 9.071. Source: National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB).in poor families in rural area.gov.944 25.ph/technotes/poverty_tech.744 7.     NSCB. National Statistics Office (NSO). Poverty headcount among population.399.349.375.057 12.211. (%) .org/PovcalNet/jsp/CChoiceControl.nscb.441 25.038.987.287 5.898.437 31.10 3.38 8.4.gov.180.worldbank. Data refer to poverty rates of sample households based on FIES.807 7. 1993 PPP prices at http://iresearch.675. was 28.145. please refer to http://www.21 8.603.048 16. 1997 figure is not comparable with 2000 onwards but using the same method.071.344 5.43 9.16 8.nscb.906 11. the rate for 2000 was 28.814.in poor families in urban area .51 3.506 6.281 29.403.975.463 27.799 33.393 29. 2000 to 2006 data are comparable. Annual Per Capita Poverty Thresholds.192.533.36 9235626 3.130 12. 1997 figure not comparable with those of 2000 onwards..718 17.863.816 5.148.116 5.339 21.962 10.42 3580464 42.853 15.885 9.37 3.635 12.157.
half of families with children are considered poor. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Incidence (%) Province (Highest) Province (Lowest) Incidence (%) Tawi-Tawi Maguindanao Zamboanga del Norte Apayao Northern Samar Abra Aklan Masbate Surigao del Norte Lanao del Sur 79. While the number of poor families with children was around 3. bigger than the average Filipino family (5. as expected.6 14.2 17.1 million. while the majority of children in Quezon are considered income poor. In 1985. Pangasinan. Although Tawi-Tawi has 8 of 10 children considered poor. the situation has worsened. but Benguet has only 16%.2 shows provinces with the highest and lowest poverty rates among children.5 members as compared to 4. Table II.4 73. Note the staggering gaps in the estimates. the former has higher income poverty incidence as compared to all families in general.5 68. Although provinces in Ilocos Region do not have wide disparities in poverty rates. As mentioned earlier. Apayao province has a very high income poverty rate at 73%.9 million in 1985. and tends to be lower when the education of the family head is higher. In CAR. it only has over a quarter of what Negros Occidental has.2.3 15. Tawi-Tawi has the highest income poverty rate with 8 in 10 children not being able to meet the basic food and non-food needs. Poverty incidence among households with children tends to increase as the size of family increases. absolute numbers do still matter. A typical family with children of this age cohort is. however. In terms of magnitude. In 2006.There are also differences among the provinces within regions. Table II. more than half (68%) of the income poor children are located in only one province. Across all provinces. Poverty headcount rate is higher among male-headed families 30 . in terms of absolute magnitude. Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Poverty Incidence among Children. However.7 69. Tawi-Tawi’s rate is more than five times than that of NCR-4th District. In CALABARZON region.2 67.0 72.7 15. with almost half a million poor children.1 15.3.7 16.6 18. In contrast. the poverty incidence among these families is down to about 34%.4 71.4 18.8).2 18. only few children are income poor in Rizal (15%).4 75.8 Comparing families with children to an average Filipino family reveal interesting insights. The proportion has been declining ever since.7 NCR-4th District Rizal NCR-2nd District Pampanga NCR-1st District (Manila) Benguet Bataan Cavite NCR-3rd District Laguna 14.3 73. the estimate in 2006 was 4.6 77. the 4th district in Metro Manila/NCR only has 1 in 10 children. Income poverty among families with children is illustrated by family characteristics and geographic dimensions in Table II.
46 54.54 52.Western Visayas 7 .32 28.44 49.37 43.12 50.71 20.66 Poverty headcount rate (in %).21 31.88 40. 2003 FIES 30.Cordillera Administrative Region 15 .50 42.80 37.63 34.59 6.77 12.73 25.91 21. It is important to note.37 49.National Capital Region 14 .46 37.26 35.27 31 All families with children (0–14 years old) Family size Less than 3 3–4 members 5–6 members 7+ Education of the head of the family None Elementary graduate At least secondary undergraduate Gender of the head of the family Male Female Geographic dimension 1 . by Subgroups Country Poverty headcount rate (in %).92 9. Poverty Headcount Rate among Families with Children 0–14 Years Old.29 47. Table II.26 48.76 50.83 21.69 16.86 46.Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao 16 .62 47.17 20.89 47.compared to female-headed families.16 43.CALABARZON 4B .48 19.3.95 36.SOCCSKSARGEN 13 .61 51.48 18.Caraga Residence Urban Rural .Northern Mindanao 11 . however.Davao 12 . 2006 FIES 33.60 62.MIMAROPA 5 .11 31.Bicol 6 .19 39.Eastern Visayas 9 .Central Luzon 4A .04 36 50.Ilocos Region 2 .29 71.06 18.90 17.51 68.53 32.Central Visayas 8 .28 10.67 39.79 43.58 22.63 31.24 17.76 18. that headship in the Philippines does not always correspond to who is actually providing economic support to the family.50 36.01 52.45 24.Zamboanga Peninsula 10 .39 41.Cagayan Valley 3 .81 33.
there are only around 64.32 or US$0. Most of these children come from the Bicol and Western Visayas regions. Compared with poverty incidence gaps among provinces. In contrast. With this measure.43 per day. is sure to take the beating. In 2006.Poverty incidence among families with children in urban centers (NCR and CALABARZON) is lower. In 2003. Camarines Sur. There are instances when the poverty thresholds differ for the provinces.6% of the total subsistent poor children. Among the provinces in the country.9 for the trend in subsistence incidence). The contrast is so big if one looks at Pampanga. The combined poor families from these regions make up around 20% of the total poor families that have children in the country. one can also use the subsistence incidence. Zamboanga del Norte also has the 2nd highest. To sum up. the child. This means that 1 in every 5 children may not be meeting basic food requirements. please refer to the Appendices on poverty thresholds. being a vulnerable member of the society. Other provinces with over 200. In this situation. This is roughly equivalent to only P22. about 6. 8 of 10 subsistent poor children live in the rural areas. the income poverty estimates show an alarming trend and very wide disparities across geographical units of the country. For a list of the poverty thresholds used in this report. Both regions comprise 20.149 per person per year. Aside from the usual poverty measure of poverty incidence based on poverty thresholds.7 and Table II. with majority of its children population living in subsistence.29%. The poverty threshold however differs for each region in the country.000 children in subsistence are Leyte. It is noted that Zamboanga del Norte’s 62% subsistence incidence is 48 times higher than that of Pampanga’s 1. Zamboanga del Norte has the worst subsistence rate. The rate in rural areas (16. In fact. The highest rates of income poor families with children are in Caraga and ARMM. Notwithstanding the differences in the methodologies employed to produce these income-based measures are negligible. 7 32 . Although the rate of poor families with children in these areas is the highest among the regions. next to Negros Occidental. the disparity among children in urban and rural areas becomes wider. the highest numbers come from Bicol and Western Visayas regions.95%) is four times that of the urban areas (4. and Cebu.3%). This measure provides estimates of children whose families could not meet the basic food requirements based on their per capita income. with only 1. number of poor children at around 224. which the Filipino children and the country as a whole has to face. the national food poverty line set by the NSCB was P8.2 million children were living with less than the subsistence threshold. the gaps are much wider for subsistence incidence. This figure is slightly lower than the 2000 estimate but higher than that in 2003 (see Appendices Table II. this is an appalling situation.3% of its children considered subsistent poor.000 of them in Metro Manila.7 These are the subsistent poor.000.
8 Food deprivation is measured by malnutrition data. according to the 2005 estimates of the Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI).60 Pampanga NCR-2nd District NCR-1st District (Manila) NCR-3rd District NCR-4th District Cavite Rizal Bataan Bulacan Benguet 1. The dimensions tackled in this paper are deprivations of food. water. Although Zamboanga Peninsula and Eastern Visayas showed very slight increases. the estimate is recently showing a consistent upward trend (Table II.70 44. Deprivation indicators produced are based on information/details that are in the FIES dataset.90 3. education. It is again noted that the disparity is wide when NCR (17.20 43. shelter. It is helpful that other measures be examined. electricity. More than a quarter of all children are considered under height and although the percentage of overweight is at a very low level.30 1. it may not capture other dimensions of poverty that are equally important. The proportion of underweight children by region is likewise shown in Table II. For example. though very modestly. considered suffering from less severe deprivation of food.60 2.20 2.30 1. 8 33 . The prevalence of malnutrition among Filipino children aged 0–5 has been continuously declining.40 46.70 2.30 42.00 53. since 1998.50 Deprivation Approach While the income-based measure is a popular way of measuring poverty.Table II. these two regions also have relatively high income poverty rates. still a quarter of all children in this age cohort are considered underweight for their age. ARMM’s rate has been continuously increasing at quite a significant rate. thus.70 50.00 3. These may not be exactly the same as the proposed definitions mentioned in the Global Study guide.20 49.00 47. However.6.20 41.50 2.5).30 2.8%) is compared with ARMM (38%). information. Though the national average has been declining. The following section discusses the overall trend and patterns of various dimensions of child deprivation in the country. Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Subsistence Incidence among Children.4. sanitation facilities. and health. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Province (Highest) Incidence (%) Province (Lowest) Incidence (%) Zamboanga del Norte Northern Samar Tawi-Tawi Kalinga Masbate Apayao Surigao del Norte Surigao del Sur Antique Agusan del Sur 62. one should pay attention to regions that are exhibiting upward trend recently.
4 0.6 29.9 17.8 37.8 16.3 4.1 32.1 21.8 32.9 25.3 38.3 5.2 32.5 0.6 6.5 27.2 28.3 27.000) of all children suffered from severe deprivation of shelter.7 0.3 34.0 6.7 20. 9 34 .0 31. Department of Science and Technology.Table II.4 28.9 19.7 22. Prevalence of Underweight Children 0–5 Years Old.5 35.0 Source: Food and Nutrition Research Institute.5. Thin.8 26.07%).3 22.8 35.9 The estimate is almost the same as that in 2003 (1. Philippines.2 6.9 36. and Overweight Children 0–5 Years Old. There is.0 24.2 34. Prevalence of Underweight.0 32.0 1.1 33.4 1.1 27.9 26.9 34.9 26.3 23. 2001.6 30.4 2.2 17.05% (307. roof and wall data were used instead.0 30. a growing concern on this aspect of The FIES do not have information on flooring of the dwelling units.8 34.8 0.6 16.7 5.6 20. Severe deprivation of shelter refers to inadequate roof and wall.2 25. 1.3 30. by Region Region 2001 2003 2005 Philippines NCR CAR Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga ARMM 30.5 24.5 28.9 27.6. however.5 17.2 33.8 27. Table II. Regional Updating of Nutritional Status.5 34.3 32.0 31. Under Height.3 5.4 31.3 30.4 23. 1989–2005 (in %) Year Underweight Under Height Thinness Overweight-forAge 1989–1990 1992 1993 1996 1998 2001 2003 2005 34.4 34.5 34.4 29.8 24.8 34.9 24.8 32. Thus.9 31. In 2006.0 6.0 29. Philippines.6 39.5 31.6 0.9 30.6 26.0 Source: Facts & Figures 2005.04%) but is slightly lower than in 2000 (1.4 29.3 28. Food and Nutrition Research Institute. Another dimension of poverty is deprivation of shelter.
2006 (PIDS estimates) The province and/or city with the highest percentage of children in severely deprived shelters is Cotabato City while the lowest. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter. for those with above zero percentages. The magnitude of those suffering from severe deprivation of shelter has been continuously growing as shown in Figure II. Figure II. Figure II. Philippines. is Leyte. Athough 35 . Metro Manila has the largest number and percentage of those in severe deprivation of shelter.3. a less densely populated region.4.poverty.3. by Region. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter. while CAR. has the smallest number and percentage. 2000–2006 (PIDS estimates) Among the regions.
24 0. There are 17 provinces with zero percentage of this type of deprivation (Appendix Tables II. Cotabato City is a city that is taken separately from the province of Cotabato in the FIES.67 2.2%) come from the 3rd District of NCR. Iloilo.2 1.67 2. Compostela Valley.69 4. it contributes only 2. Misamis Occidental.5% to the total.34 0. Table II.82 Leyte Cotabato Pangasinan Davao del Sur Benguet Batangas Sultan Kudarat Negros Occidental Masbate Abra 0.7. Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter. has the highest magnitude of these children among all the regions. In 2006.82 2.28 0.000) are living in shelters that have inadequate roofing or wall. They may be income poor but shelter does not appear to be much of a problem for them.9 shows the best and worst performing provinces in terms of less severe deprivation of shelter.17 0. and Agusan del Sur.38 0. is the best (only among provinces that have percentages above zero).Cotabato City has the highest.19). Siquijor. again. NCR/Metro Manila. Antique.06 3. These are Camarines Norte. among many others.29 0.87 4. or where dwelling is made of mixed but predominantly salvaged and/or makeshift materials. Those located in the rural areas are less likely to experience deprivation of shelter.92% in 2003. As in severe deprivation. Cotabato City is the worst-performing city while its province. 2. 2006 Province (Highest) % Province (Lowest) % Cotabato City Maguindanao NCR-3rd District Zamboanga Sibugay Occidental Mindoro Nueva Ecija Camarines Sur NCR-4th District Davao Oriental Quezon 11. Cotabato.31 0. It may be noted that there are provinces that do not have this type of deprivation. 36 . Many of these provinces have very high rates of income poverty.1% of all children below 15 years old (about 380. Table II.49 2.28% but is slightly higher than the 1. The bulk (10. This is lower than the 2000 estimate of 2.98 1.47 0.31 0. Sorsogon.47 A less severe deprivation of shelter is defined as living in dwelling units where the roof or wall is made of salvaged and/or makeshift materials.
Table II.8. Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Shelter by Region, 2006 1/ (PIDS estimates)
Region Number % to Total Children Share
Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total
12,651 8,932 69,106 66,237 25,890 67,350 25,241 49,298 12,742 23,715 43,433 18,239 19,548 109,461 5,000 29,983 26,398 327,294 285,930 613,224
0.85 0.95 2.25 1.89 2.45 3.2 1.14 2.3 0.82 2.03 3.14 1.3 1.5 3.13 0.99 2.54 3.16 2.44 1.79 2.09
2.06 1.46 11.27 10.80 4.22 10.98 4.12 8.04 2.08 3.87 7.08 2.97 3.19 17.85 0.82 4.89 4.30 53.37 46.63 100.00
1/ If roof or wall of a house is made of salvaged and/or makeshift materials; also when it is made of mixed but predominantly salvaged and/or makeshift materials.
Table II.9. Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Shelter, 2006
Province (Highest) % Province (Lowest) %
Cotabato City Maguindanao Misamis Oriental NCR-3rd District Agusan del Sur Quezon Camarines Sur Oriental Mindoro Guimaras Albay
11.87 7.60 6.29 5.63 5.57 5.49 5.04 4.67 4.61 4.54
Cotabato Iloilo Sarangani Samar (Western) Abra Ifugao Rizal Pangasinan Sultan Kudarat Leyte
0.24 0.33 0.44 0.46 0.47 0.58 0.58 0.66 0.68 0.69
In terms of sanitation, around 10 million children are experiencing severe and less severe deprivation of sanitation facilities. In particular, 11.8% or 3.4 million children below 15 years old do not have access to a toilet facility of any kind in 2006, hence, suffering from severe deprivation. Meanwhile around one-fifth of all children are using unimproved facilities like closed pit, open pit, and pail system. This is categorized as less severe deprivation of sanitation facilities. The rate of children who suffer from severe deprivation has gone down from 12.6% in 2003. However, the absolute numbers are still higher than the 2000 estimate.
Figure II.5. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Sanitation Facilities, Philippines, 2000–2006 (PIDS estimates)
Figure II.6 shows the number of children with no toilet facility by region. It shows that although the national average is 11.8%, the percentages of those suffering from severe deprivation in some regions, like Eastern Visayas and Bicol, are much higher at 30.6% and 23.4%, respectively, than those of NCR which only has below 2%. The proportion is higher for children in rural than in urban areas. There are also glaring disparities across provinces within regions. In CALABARZON area, the number of children in this dire state in Quezon province is 14 times larger than those in Rizal. While Negros Occidental has 34% of its children being severely deprived, Capiz only has 5%. Table II.10 shows the best and worst-performing provinces in terms of this indicator. Masbate has the highest deprivation rate while Apayao, Batanes, Quirino, Aurora, Benguet, and Siquijor have zero rates. Masbate and Northern Samar are provinces with the highest income poverty rates.
Figure II.6. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Sanitation Facilities, by Region, 2006 (PIDS estimates)
Table II.10. Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Sanitation Facilities, 2006 (PIDS estimates)
Province (Highest) % Province (Lowest) %
Masbate Isabela City Northern Samar Eastern Samar Samar (Western) Romblon Catanduanes Negros Occidental Kalinga Negros Oriental
64.13 51.12 38.65 37.96 37.92 36.94 36.15 34.20 32.87 29.38
Apayao Batanes Quirino Aurora Benguet Siquijor Nueva Vizcaya NCR-2nd Dist. NCR-4th Dist. Ilocos Norte
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.42 0.74 0.82
The proportion of children experiencing less severe deprivation of sanitation facilities in the country has declined quite substantially from 23.1% in 2000 to 17.9% in 2006. This is equivalent to a 1.2 million reduction in the number of deprived children. Table II.11 shows the geographical distribution of those suffering less severe deprivation in sanitation. Almost 8 of 10 children in ARMM are using unimproved toilet facilities. At the
same time, ARMM also has the largest magnitude of children experiencing less severe deprivation of sanitary facilities.
Table II.11. Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Sanitary Facilities by Region, 2006 1/ (PIDS estimates)
% to total children
Share to total
Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total
126,346 190,862 249,928 413,306 229,493 320,212 534,037 348,278 167,854 340,536 308,796 293,013 368,325 230,572 112,709 906,788 105,789 1,251,163 3,995,682 5,246,845
8.47 20.24 8.12 11.8 21.76 15.21 24.02 16.22 10.83 29.11 22.32 20.85 28.33 6.59 22.25 76.72 12.66 9.31 25.07 17.86
2.4 3.6 4.8 7.9 4.4 6.1 10.2 6.6 3.2 6.5 5.9 5.6 7.0 4.4 2.1 17.3 2.0 23.8 76.2 100.0
1/ Less severe deprivation of sanitation facilities refers to the use of closed pit,
open pit, and other toilet facilities such as pail system.
As expected, provinces in the ARMM have the highest rates of less severe deprivation in sanitation. In fact, 88 of 100 children in ARMM are suffering from deprivation of sanitation in varying degrees. Poor sanitation has a direct implication on the health of children. This suggests the urgency of addressing the sanitation problem in this region. One dimension where improvements have taken place is on deprivation of water. In 2006, 11.6% of all children in the age group obtained water from springs, rivers, streams, rain, and peddlers, which is categorized as severe deprivation. This rate has been continuously declining. In fact, children suffering from this type of deprivation have declined in number by around 300,000 since 2000.
Table II.12. Provinces with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Sanitation Facilities, 2006 (PIDS estimates)
Province (Highest) % Province (Lowest) %
Tawi-Tawi Sulu Lanao del Sur Maguindanao Basilan Ifugao Capiz Palawan Quirino Davao Oriental
82.57 80.93 78.69 75.78 56.03 53.31 47.66 43.25 36.99 35.58
Batanes Marinduque Ilocos Sur La Union Rizal Eastern Samar Bataan NCR-2nd District Laguna Bulacan
0.00 0.34 0.93 1.31 1.62 2.02 2.48 2.65 3.21 3.38
Figure II.7. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Water, Philippines, 2000–2006 (PIDS estimates)
NCR, the urban capital, has the largest number of children suffering from water deprivation. In fact, 400,000 children are deprived severely of water. Aside from NCR, CALABARZON and ARMM regions have large numbers of children experiencing severe water deprivation. In relation to the reference population, ARMM has the highest percentage among those without safe water source at around 35%.
Lanao del Sur.38 24.04 28. Provinces and Cities with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Water.69 32.00 0.7 25.00 0. It also has the highest percentage of this type of deprivation among all provinces.00 0.Figure II.18 39. there were no significant changes in the national level data. the rate of children suffering from this kind of deprivation slightly 42 .6 25. in ARMM.13.26 34. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Among the provinces and cities. the 4th District of NCR has the largest number of such children at 237. Table II. has the 2nd highest magnitude of children severely deprived of water.00 0.8% in 2000. From 10.23 0.76 Tarlac Ilocos Sur Batanes Aklan Biliran Isabela City Camiguin Isabela Pampanga Cagayan 0.42 35. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Province/City (Highest) Province/City (Lowest) % % Lanao del Sur Tawi-tawi Benguet Cotabato City Misamis Occidental Davao Oriental NCR-4th District Basilan Sultan Kudarat Bukidnon 60.23 For less severe deprivation of water.00 0.000.8 25.00 0. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Water. by Region.14 0.00 0.8.
054.472.359 1. Camarines Sur. the highest percentage comes from ARMM and the largest numbers are from Western Visayas and Bicol regions.131 23.372 1.53 6.939.40 15.361 188.296 1. Maguindanao.385 23.105.550. and Cagayan.569 47.283 3.57 14.501.657 3.06 12.850 3.29 4. Quezon.492. Sulu.778 2.151 212.613 86. Among provinces within these regions.749 2. by Region.497.602 1/ Those that obtained water from dug well.409 3.146.968 835.011 134.83 3. the most number of children experiencing severe deprivation are found in Negros Occidental.300. 43 . Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Water.907 2.72 21.383.declined to 10. Tawi-Tawi.907 1.188 48. and Camarines Norte.585 185. Again.310 15.51 10.428 13.052 942.514 1.077. 20061/ (PIDS estimates) Region Number % Total Number of Children Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 91.653 590.685 506. The total number of Filipino children suffering from severe and less severe deprivations is estimated to be around 6.5 million.375.405.457 116.36 1.16 15.51 6. Guimaras has the worst problem in this area.96 9.13 8. Sulu.191 114.436.67 4.975 377. Cebu.700 2.553 1.565 310.73 31.063. Table II. These refer to children in households who obtain water from dug well.74 25. followed by Masbate.1 million) in 2006.181. It may be noted that these regions have the highest income poverty rates as well.563 6.43 1.14.757 77.293 29.78 0. Iloilo.4 % (around 3.216 457.13 12.757 568.46 12.169.223. Palawan. Masbate.700 1.
Philippines.7 37. it is possible to generate data on information deprivation from the FIES.2 36. one cannot say whether or not they truly have no access to such media facilities as lack of ownership may not always mean that children or their households do not have access to these media. and computer as reported in the FIES.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 30.0 0. Of the 16. Severe deprivation of information was examined by counting the number of children in households which do not have radio.9 Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information.9 36.0 0.0 0.Table II. television. 2000–2006 (PIDS estimates) 44 .2 49. about three million children. This rate is better than both 2000 and 2003 estimates.15. However. Provinces and Cities with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Water. are reported to be experiencing severe deprivation of information.0 0.5 54. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Province/City (Highest) Province/City (Lowest) % % Guimaras Masbate Tawi-tawi Sulu Camarines Norte Capiz Zamboanga Sibugay Maguindanao Cagayan Palawan 61.0 0.9 30. Greater access (or lower deprivation) to information denotes greater opportunity for learning.2 33. Figure II. telephone. Nevertheless.8 million children 7–14 years old. or 17%.1 Batanes Catanduanes Biliran Camiguin Abra Mountain Province Nueva Vizcaya Bataan Laguna NCR-2nd District 0.3 52.0 0.0 It is likewise interesting to see how Filipino children have been doing in terms of access to information.
10.86 38. Provinces and Cities with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information. have very low deprivation of information with Central Luzon and CALABARZON estimated at only 6% and 8%. Leyte. Cebu. Areas around NCR.56 2.55 43.42 43. Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information.47 37.00 1. likewise. ARMM.16.15 3. Relative to the population of children in this age cohort.52 4. 36% of children do not have access to information. Apayao Bulacan Aklan 0.49 3. provinces in Samar. by Region.69 37.04 3.08 4.20 42.00 49. Table II. respectively. The NCR estimate is only 3%. 2006 (PIDS estimates) The provinces with the largest number of children severely deprived of information are Zamboanga del Norte and Sur.28 1. and Negros Occidental.24 Batanes NCR-2nd District Manila Benguet Pampanga Bataan NCR-4th Dist.01 45. Figure II.02 4.In Zamboanga Peninsula. and Zamboanga Peninsula have the highest rates of information deprivation. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Province/City (Highest) Province/City (Lowest) % % Northern Samar Tawi-Tawi Eastern Samar Sulu Zamboanga del Norte Isabela City Zamboanga Sibugay Kalinga Antique Camiguin 53.97 37.14 45 .
42 34.794 2. and Negros Occidental.71 21.3 6. The highest deprivation rates are recorded in Samar provinces.072 3.980 271.3 29.2 million children.86 21.98 27.17.Children experiencing less severe deprivation were estimated to be 19% or 3.9 5.18. The bulk of these children live in rural areas. among others.3 8.850 218. 46 .105 76. 2006 1/ (PIDS estimates) Region Number % to total children Share to total Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 98.3 7.8 13.714 65.4 19. 4 of 10 children (38%) aged 7–14 live in households that do not have either TV or radio.213 679.8 4.335 355.9 4.0 1/ Those children that do not have any of the following: radio or television. vary widely across regions.94 28.4 5.61 38. Leyte.169 289.9 2. Cebu.4 4.9 100.866 11. The best and worst performers in terms of proportions are shown in Table II.89 31.411 213.0 9. The equivalent rate for NCR is only 3%.237 189.795 141.765 154. Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Information by Region.221.896 42.884 330. NCR districts have very low incidence of information deprivation.678 189.0 2.91 36.13 3. These are reported to have no radio and television. Tawi-Tawi. Table II. The bulk of these numbers is from Zamboanga del Norte and Sur.542.0 8. In Zamboanga. Sulu.22 3.4 10.3 21.44 14.89 9.457 139.01 25.1 78. again.6 11.67 7.74 20.9 6.913 254.462 189.0 1. The disparities.53 23. and Zamboanga provinces.8 5.
8%.83 49. Table II. cohort survival rates.Table II. These are school participation rates. Elementary school participation rate declined from 90% in SY 2002–2003 to 83% in SY 2006–2007 but rose to almost 85% in SY 2007-2008.3 million children) are income poor. This is another serious issue that needs to be addressed. The main reasons for children not attending school are lack of personal interest and high cost of education. Of the 1.64 4.01 47.92 43.14 4.5% between SY 2003-2004 and SY 2005-2006 but rose to almost 62% in SY 2007-2008. completion.15 3.62 44. In 2004. Participation rate is the ratio of enrolment of children in the school-age cohort to the total population of that age range.20 shows other reasons for not attending school. 47 . Still. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Province/City (Highest) % Province/City (Lowest) % Northern Samar Eastern Samar Tawi-Tawi Zamboanga del Norte Isabela City Sulu Kalinga Palawan Zamboanga Sibugay Antique 54.45 40. However.61 46. Based on the administrative data of the Department of Education (DepEd).42 Another dimension of poverty with serious implications to the long-term welfare of the child is education.8 million children not currently attending school. the percentage of children not attending school has gone up to 9. This represents 9% of the total number of children in this age group.18.90 38. it is likewise important to look at basic education indicators. school participation rates for both elementary and secondary levels have been declining since School Year (SY) 2002–2003 until recently. Moreover. Provinces and Cities with the Highest and Lowest Percentage of Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Information. Children aged 6–16 not currently attending school in 2002 were estimated to be 1.09 3.12 5. Secondary school participation rate also declined slightly from 60% to 58.78 51.45 39.57 Batanes Manila NCR-2nd District Bataan Benguet Aklan NCR-4th District Nueva Vizcaya Pampanga NCR-3rd District 0. The number of children experiencing deprivation in this aspect was estimated using the Annual Poverty Indicators Survey (APIS). 13% of all poor children and 14% of those in bottom 30% did not attend school.00 1. 69% (or 1.94 2.41 4.8 million. and dropout rates. the country has a low probability of hitting the MDG goal of universal basic education by 2015.71 5. these and other indicators namely cohort survival and completion rates have been showing improvements in recent years. Aside from data showing non-attendance in schools.
358 13.9 – – 9.538 1. Nevertheless.826.Table II.20.937 20.397 46.0 14.6 100.835 10.19.796 110.454 4.384. National Statistics Office.710.8 Source of basic data: Annual Poverty Indicators Survey (APIS) 2002.372 435.1 33.1 6.297 5.262. National Statistics Office. Cohort survival rates for both elementary and secondary levels exhibited slight improvements over the same period.255 6.0 2.998 126. 48 . Only 72 of 100 students who enter Grade 1 will finish elementary and only 72 of 100 students who enter high school will finish high school.5 9.9 0.9 6.203.592. Table II.307 604.419 229.0 Source of basic data: Annual Poverty Indicators Survey (APIS) 2002. They also suggest that only 77 of 100 children who enter first year high school will reach fourth year high school after four years.6 23. 2002 (PIDS estimates) Reason Frequency % Schools are far/No school within the barangay No regular transportation High cost of education Illness/Disability Housekeeping Employment/Looking for work Lack of personal interest Cannot cope with school work Finished schooling Others Total 92.076 856.640 1. the data suggest that only 73 of 100 children who enter Grade 1 will reach Grade 6 after 6 years.297 – – 2.091.1 0. Children 6–16 Years Old Who are Poor and Not Currently Attending School (PIDS estimates) Children Not Attending School Total Percentage to Total 2002 Poor children Children in bottom 30% All 2004 Poor children Children in bottom 30% All 1.826.266 – – 22.1 8.793 9.079 165. Completion rates are not also showing improvements. Reasons for not Attending School.2 12.
09 70. The bulk of these numbers are reported in the Bicol region.89 8.55 Source: Fact Sheet: Basic Education Statistics. Disparities are wide if one looks at NCR.11 59.37 8. The percentage of those not immunized increases as the birth order becomes higher. issues like lack of access to electricity and living in informal settlements’ areas are also important concerns in the Philippines and have direct or indirect impact on the well-being of children. An informal settler refers to one who occupies a lot without 49 .) In addition to these dimensions. while ARMM has five. Completion. In 2006.45 6. 7.72 72.43 77.54 83.02 67.11 61. respectively. Caraga and Zamboanga Peninsula have the highest incidence of deprivation with at least over one-fifth of these children not being immunized. Department of Education.44 58. 2002–2007 SY 2002– 2003 SY 2003– 2004 SY 2004– 2005 SY 2005– 2006 SY 2006– 2007 Indicator Participation Rate Elementary Secondary Cohort Survival Rate Elementary Secondary Completion Rate Elementary Secondary Dropout Rate Elementary Secondary 90. From only 445.00 88.32 73. and Dropout Rates in the Philippines.74 60.21.16 6. Commision on Higher Education (CHED) and Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA)-supervised schools are included. and ARMM. In 1985. This estimate is 24.51 6.69 8.99 71.Table II.84 77. Note: Data of the laboratory schools of state universities and colleges (SUCs).5% lower than the figure in 2003.2 million or more than 4% of all the children in the country. This deprivation is slightly higher in rural than in urban areas. Among the regions. (Please refer to Appendix Table II. this number went down to 6. there were about 10 million children (over 45% of all children) who were living in households that do not have access to electricity.97 84. The official school-age population for elementary and secondary are 6–12 and 12–15.71 71.4 million. the magnitude and percentage of those in informal settlements have doubled through the years. which only has 3 of 10 children not being able to have access to electricity.55 74.98 7.66 71. On health deprivation. The number of children in households with no access to electricity has generally been declining over the survey years.44 76.000 in 1985.38 68.33 12.3% of children 12–23 months old in the country did not receive vaccinations in 2003.99 7. This was obtained from the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS) conducted by the NSO. Meanwhile. which was lifted from NSO’s website on the 2003 NDHS.32 78. Participation.14 6.15 87. there are now 1.81 70.22 58.21. The percentage is lower for more educated mothers and for richer families. Cohort Survival. Western Visayas.59 72.67 69.06 72.29 59.33 71.24 71.
50 . 18.37 1. way above the estimates in other aspects. sanitation.64 25. 1988. is in CALABARZON region where more than half a million children suffer from a severe deprivation.91 21.004 3.034 27. Policies that aim to fast track interventions or programs for the urban poor have to take this in mind.051 44. However. Also. 1of 10 children in NCR live in an informal settlement. The aspects taken into account here are shelter. In 2006.the consent of the owner.454 21.65 .97 1.801 10. namely shelter. a huge number of children are still experiencing deprivation in this area. Table II. 1994. This is because information has a different reference population while deprivation data on food and education were obtained from different datasets.69 28. there is also another element called multiple deprivations.988 9.092 46. though the rates of deprivation among children have been somewhat declining.7%. and water.148 10.16 25.29 . NCR has the largest number of children considered informal settlers at 382. 1985–2006 (in millions) (PIDS estimates) Indicator 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 Children in households with no electricity (in %) In informal settlements (in %) Total number of children 10.4 million) were deprived of at most one of the three dimensions of well-being covered here.510. Special attention should be focused on education because of increasing deprivation in this area. the incidence of multiple deprivations can only be based on these three areas mentioned. 1985.091 38.035 3.589 34.97 29. Among the regions.98 22. To sum up. deprivation in sanitation facilities is another dimension that has to be addressed in the immediate future. and water only. which not only exhibited very high income poverty rate but also high deprivation rates and magnitudes in sanitation and water. the changes are very slight to make significant improvements.03 .376 Sources of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey.633 2. In 2006.17 1. The above discussion shows the incidence of deprivation among Filipino children in various aspects of human needs. Deprivation of Electricity and Secure Tenure. This estimate is 170. 1991.822 43. This proportion is slightly lower than the estimate in 2003 of 19.664 2. and 2003.22. however.79 1. Thus. with all of them coming from the same dataset with the same reference population. sanitation.559 8. 1997. Interventions employed in the past may be put to waste if population grows at a rate faster than the ability of governments and stakeholders to tackle these problems.349 6.16 29.189 29. 4 of 10 children face at most one severe deprivation.percentage point increase.820 3.166 3.222 4. The largest absolute number. Greater efforts must be done to outpace the rate at which population grows. Although the rate and magnitude have gone down quite a lot.64 27. Also a growing concern in this country that is due to high urbanization rate is the increasing number of children in informal settlements and those that live in inadequate shelters. 2000.83 . This is shown in Table II.072 8.510 10.000 higher than the 2003 estimate showing a 6.6% of children (5. In ARMM.23. Special attention must be given to ARMM.445 1.
362 3.349 29. Water (0–14) 4.8262/ 1.8 (2004) 2/ – 3. Shelter (0–14) 2.06 51 . Sanitation (0–14) 3. 2006 and APIS 2002.87 0.24. 2003 and 2006 (PIDS estimates unless otherwise specified) Number of children in relevant age cohort (‘000) Of which experiencing ‘severe’ deprivation Of which experiencing ‘less severe’ deprivation % Magnitude (‘000) % Magnitude (‘000) 2003 1. Information (7–14) 5.Table II.420 2.063 3.78 2.64 17.349 29.93 0.04 18.71 12.86 10.874 2. weight-for-age.314 3.09 17. Source of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey 2003.81 2. FNRI estimate. Food 6.348 (samples) 29.246 3.68 11. 3/ 2005.003 1.045 – 1.13 24.5922/ 1. 2/ Based on the Annual Poverty Indicators Survey (APIS).43 19. Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI).32 9.6 3/ – 5.684 3.99 18.376 19.29 18.23.86 0. Table II. Health 2006 1.5 8.456 3. Food 6. 2003 and 2006 (PIDS estimates) Country Of which experiencing ‘severe’ deprivation 4/.349 29. Shelter (0–14) 2.27 0.23 2.9 1/ – 6.14 0. Sanitation (0–14) 3. Health 29.203 2.349 16.846 – – 1. National Statistical Coordination Board thresholds.04 12.57 11.519 3.3 3.87 (2002) 2/ 7.221 – 1/ <-2SD from the average.376 16.76 11.91 26.12 0. National Statistics Office weights for 2006.55 11. Information (7–14) 5.376 29.06 – 9.05 11. Incidence of Deprivations.65 – 8. Education (6–16) 7. Education 7.92 21. Child Poverty as Multiple Deprivations.376 29.26 2. percentage of children 6–16 years old not currently attending school. water and information 29. Water (0–14) 4.54 0.53 0.102 – 20. (% to total) 2003 2006 Number of children in relevant age cohort (‘000) Only 1 deprivation Any of the 3 Sanitation only 1/ Water only 2/ Shelter only 3/ 2 of any deprivations: Any 2 Shelter and sanitation but not water Water and sanitation but not shelter Water and shelter but not sanitation 3 deprivations: Sanitation.
Those that face two at the most of the severe deprivations are estimated to be around 840. The regions located in Visayas and Mindanao have higher rates than those in Luzon. These cover approximately five years prior to the survey year.6 million) of them. The under-five mortality rate refers to the number of children who died before they can even reach their fifth birthday as a proportion of every 1. almost three times that of the CAR. In 2006. has not been declining significantly.000 children born alive. From 34 per 1.1/ Severely deprived in sanitation but not in water and shelter. If one looks only at those deprived of shelter (or water) only. being the region with lowest income poverty rate. Around 3. Though most people may be non-income poor due to greater opportunities in the capital for employment and being engaged in small enterprises. Combinations of the abovementioned deprivations were also tabulated.000 children facing all three kinds of deprivations. The worst case is when a child faces all three types of deprivation. and Central Luzon (see Table II. These estimates are from various rounds of the National Demographic and Health Survey conducted by the NSO. the under-five mortality rate declined from 54 to 34 (see Table II. there is still the problem of wide disparities across regions.25). 3/ Severely deprived in shelter but not in water and sanitation. have increased between 2003 and 2006. It may be useful to look into specific types of deprivations. NCR. The bulk of these come from the Visayas regions.3 million children in the country experience severe deprivation in terms of sanitation only (which means they do not experience water and shelter deprivations).000 live births in 1993.000 (2. 2/ Severely deprived in water but not in sanitation and shelter. the infant and under-five mortality indicators were examined. Though the country estimates declined over the years. and CALABARZON. interventions are still necessary to help children who suffer from multiple deprivations. NCR. 4/ Please refer to previous section for definitions of severe deprivation in sanitation. the number of infants dying before they reach the age of 1 has declined to 25 in 2008. though in very small percentage. This is also true for under-five mortality rate. 52 .22 in Appendices). Regions with high numbers of children experiencing two deprivations are Central Visayas. 2. MIMAROPA had the highest rate at 44 per 1000 live births. there are over 230. Many of them are from NCR. A severe case is when a child faces two or more deprivation. 7 regions have infant mortality rates higher than the national average. Child Survival To assess the situation of Filipino children in terms of survival. a little over half a percentage of all children suffered all three deprivations. The number of those suffering from multiple deprivations. needs closer examination. SOCCKSARGEN. NCR also has the most number of children suffering all three kinds of ``deprivations (see Appendix Tables II. either two or three in this case. water.000. In 2003.25). There are about 17. and shelter. From 1993–2008. Infant mortality rate in the Philippines has declined through the years. Those that suffer all three.23 to II. The under-five mortality rate has gone down as well.
and Bicol region. National Demographic and Health Survey. children’s living conditions have been getting worse. to name a few.2 48. National Statistics Office.000 Live Births Survey Year 1993 1998 2003 2008 Approximate Calendar Period 1988-1992 1993-1997 1998-2002 2003-2007 Infant Mortality Rate 33. 2003. 2003 and 2008.7 24. notwithstanding the limitations of the data used. Table II. MIMAROPA. NCR.000 Live Births. Early Childhood Mortality Rates. per 1.9 Under-Five Mortality Rate 54.9 33. per 1. During the period 2003–2006. Conversely. A look at income-based poverty incidence alone leads one to conclude that. poverty incidence went up by four percentage points and the number of poor children increased by about one 53 . 1998.4 39.25. Trends in Childhood Mortality Rates. 3. 2003 Region Infant Mortality Under-Five Mortality Philippines NCR CAR Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga ARMM 29 24 14 29 28 25 25 44 28 39 28 36 27 38 38 27 35 41 40 31 34 39 35 31 31 68 43 50 39 57 43 49 47 37 49 72 Source: National Demographic and Health Survey.6 35. which has lower poverty incidence. It is to be noted that regions with relatively high mortality rates are the same regions with high income poverty incidence rates.Table II. These are ARMM. has also lower infant and under-five mortality rates.1 28.5 Sources: 1993 National Demographic Survey. Data points to an upward trend in the most recent survey. Summary and Policy Implications Children’s living conditions have not really improved over time. by Region.26. indeed.
The proportions of underweight and under height children have been cut down by 7. Elementary school participation rate. In 2006. 2005 estimates show that 24. The most common reasons for non-attendance are lack of personal interest and high cost of schooling. However. sanitation. Cohort survival rates at the elementary and secondary levels have increased slightly at 73% and 77%. One dimension of well-being that has shown significant improvement is water. In addition. other areas that were examined were nutrition.6%. An important conclusion that can be drawn from this is that reducing poverty in general will most likely reduce child poverty.8 million in 2006.07% in 2000 to 1. The number of children in households that do not have incomes adequate to meet basic food and non-food needs numbered 12. Both administrative data and survey data show this trend. It is necessary to take into account the various non-income indicators to really capture the general living conditions of the Filipino children. which now stands at 83%. A vital dimension is access to education. 3. shelter. Child poverty rates moved alongside the trend of poverty incidence of the general population. Severe deprivation means not having any toilet facility at all. the bulk of which live in Metro Manila. The magnitude as well has been cut down by around 300. the deprivation rate in water went down from 13.3% are under height. a 7 percentage-point decline from the 2000 figure.4% and 7. One issue that has to be dealt with utmost urgency is the growing number of children not attending school. from 1998 to 2005. Sanitation is another area that needs immediate action. respectively.e.05% in 2006. 54 .7%. more children are now experiencing severe deprivation (i.2% to 11. has been declining in recent years.6% of these children are underweight for their age. Income poverty alone is not adequate to monitor the multiple dimensions of poverty. The estimated number of poor children is.4 million children did not have any kind of toilet facility.000. those with no adequate roof and wall).. In addition to education. The current global financial and economic crises are expected to further lead to a worsening of the poverty situation. The prevalence of malnutrition among children 0–5 years old have been declining since 1998. From 2000 to 2006. likely leading to a further increase in the number of poor children. 22% was without access to electricity. and electricity. and this could have serious implications on the children’s future productive capacity. This is a controversial finding amidst the continuous growth that the country experienced prior to this time. respectively. the number of children suffering from severe deprivation in sanitation has increased quite significantly. Children with no access to electricity or those living in households without access to electricity have been continuously declining. 26. more children are now living in informal settlements than before. and 2% are overweight. slightly higher in 2006 than in 1985. In 2006. Compared to estimates for 2000. there are 307. both in percentage and in number. Although the percentage has slightly declined from 1. the magnitude has grown continuously. in fact.000 children who do not have adequate shelter. On shelter. Secondary school participation rate remains relatively low at 59%. around half a million higher than the estimate in 2000. water.million. The magnitude and proportion of children without safe water sources have been consistently declining. In 2006.
Note.000 livebirths in 2003. Moreover. absolute numbers still matter. ARMM is both worst performer in terms of percentage and magnitude in sanitation and water. Many times. and Western Visayas.000 livebirths in 1986 to 30 per 1. Caraga. some of these regions are constants in income poverty and deprivation figures. For instance. ARMM.On child survival. the larger number of poor children is located in more densely populated areas like Bicol. 55 . While poverty rates are highest in ARMM. The above statements summarize in a nutshell the poverty profile of children below 15 years old in the country. however. and Visayas regions experienced the worst cases in most of the dimensions of poverty.6 deaths per 1.000 children in 1990 to just 40 in 2003. more attention should be devoted in scrutinizing and addressing the gaps. Infant mortality rate was reduced by half. Although general trends of the national level data are helpful in analyzing the performance of the country. from 63 per 1. This fact is crucial in developing effective targeting schemes to improve the welfare of children. especially in regions with high rates and magnitudes of poor people. Data after 2003 are being awaited to verify whether or not the positive trends will hold up amidst the series of shocks that have buffeted the country. which are too glaring to ignore. available data show some improvements. The underfive mortality rate also declined from 79. that developments in these indicators at sub-national levels have to be taken seriously because of the large disparities among regions and provinces. CALABARZON.
68 28.99 22. 1997 estimates are not comparable with the rest of the estimates shown here.org/PovcalNet/povcalSvy.9 30.1 27. so are 2000 to 2006 data.11 21. 1/ Family Income and Expenditure Survey. International Poverty Line 2/ 34. and World Bank’s PovcalNet.worldbank. 2008] http://iresearch.48 30. Please take note of breaks in the series.9 % of Population 49.1.2 39.5 45.gov.9 Percentage of Population. National Statistics Office.html 56 .ph/technotes/poverty_tech.62 Year Sources: National Statistical Coordination Board. Philippines National Poverty Line 1/ % of Families 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 44.4 26.3 49.asp 2/ Percentage of population living in households with consumption per person below the World Bank poverty line of $1.Appendix Tables Appendix Table II. For Notes. [Retrieved October 31.2 40.9 35.25 per day or $38 per month based on 2005 PPP rates. 1985 to 1994 are comparable with each other. Poverty Incidence.6 33 33 30 32.3 40.nscb. please refer to http://www. National Statistics Office.45 21.61 22.5 28.5 24.
5 28.1 45.8 64.8 43.8 53.6 59.3 64.5 69.5 2000 46.5 43.7 25.6 47.4 54.3 60.7 54.5 52.6 44.4 1994 64.3 38.2 1997 49.9 66.1 70.9 62.2 58.3 15.8 55. by Region.1 65.2 33.3 61.6 44.2 11.5 1991 64 61 44.2 64.3 66.5 62.6 67.1 61.7 26.7 61 51.7 69.2 47.1 57.7 56.9 63.2 68.4 53.2 64.5 30.7 56.9 29.8 62.3 58. Percentage of Children 0–14 Years Old in Poor Families.3 43.9 63 51.5 64.3 38.2 56.7 28. 57 .7 55.5 57.6 40. Appendix Table II.1 24.8 54.8 44.6 34.4 55.7 51.2.4 48.6 57.6 48.4 13 46.8 70.1 41.9 Source of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey.3 61.6 10.1 54.5 68 24.4 47.4 64.6 74.1 61. Series of Years Region Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Total 1985 54.8 73.2 61.1 55.5 56 46.5 56.8 1988 63.9 42 51.3 64.4 59.7 62.3 47.3 58.5 57.7 64 58.9 54.5 51.9 2003 41.4 59.3 30. National Statistics Office.5 78.8 38.4 72.3 57.4 77.9 33.2 63.2 49.2 56.8 46.9 55.2 2006 43.5 55.7 56.2 51.3 46 62.8 43.1 61.5 68 69.2 71.2 34.3 55.2 60.2 68.7 41.1 59 16.2 53.2 39.8 58 36.2 55.
532 1.508 957.473 937.672 624.187 884.828 1.601 12.631 Basic source of data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey.287 596.852 518. 58 .090 1988 832.748 521.586 917.995 1.320.646 870.722 664.868 728.369 755.643 369.316 609.999 217.328 537.069 600.323 819.790 2000 651.140.861 1991 883.044 13.125 689.014 614.190 12.383.005 504.589 415.422 1.340 552.631 1.910 1.754 1.043 526.317 647.569 719.830 556.652 1.160 11.820 12.189 855.635 1.308 1.964 660.440.500.729 773.204 1.125.016.867 1.614 1.313.895 599.627 309.058 807.452.091 495.816.452 1.237.489 1.529 225.538 339.906 733.933.760 325.092 461.748 568.166 613.537 516.084 466.032 645.046 742.326.592 266.167 586.425 963.886.273 584.026.029 782.536.771 1.439.613 819.663 1994 875.149 872.595 506.036 533.359 910.3 Number of Children 0–14 Years Old in Poor Families.310.478 532.788 1.515 1.002 918.673 1.722 856.270.042 739.799 793.824 205.619 456.733 326.995 652.078.377 590.556 644.587 916.257 1.412 2006 650.841 452.489.283 874.930 13. National Statistics Office.037 673.923 1.736 280.996.857 667.992 799.801 255.188 681. by Region. Appendix Table II.792 448.331.583 2003 614.455 887.179 667.761 986.281 1.033.842 1.386 801.989 791.409 934.2188.8.131.521 864.317.791 666.644 434.083.530 350.296 645.003.333 398.196 529.524.864 540.459 11.305 564.618 561.117 12.512 562.896 348.672 594.778 563.835 1997 722. Series of Years Region Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Total 1985 703.305 709.243 528.865 799.518 467.023 810.746 754.406 1.803.034 834.653 870.
036 16.367 31.524 440.492.084 38.398 325.041 91.731 225.973 183.097 26.052 167.939 187.009 257.146 942.634 125.655 170.618 17.474 313.348 126.877 15.886.226 70.574 12.591 934.566 30.409 186.890 576.783 371.Appendix Table II.517 21.869 59 .850 11.077 3.076 21.318 28.441 16.4.337 34.077.585 1.602 3.740 8.834 34.763 16.578 18.693 506.125 65.899 57.586 870.553 76.477 5.489 32.026 886.096 142.567 1.453 6.497.613 55. Children in Poverty.481 54.963 33.665 88.339 32.776 46.878 35.199 287.015 264.221 28. 90.738 187.251 218.173 72.631 552. by Region and by Province. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Number of Children Number of Children 0–14 Years Old in Poor Families Number of Children 0–14 Years Old in Subsistence Poor Families 6.582 81.356 921.242.896 721.025 122.920 102.375.120 138.283 32.069 775.153 434.235.331 201.977 9.685 558.681 30.403 27.529 87.949 70.501 9.313 650.653 .062 Region/Province Philippines NCR Manila NCR-2nd District NCR-3rd District NCR-4th District CAR Abra Benguet Ifugao Kalinga Mountain Province Apayao Ilocos Region Ilocos Norte Ilocos Sur La Union Pangasinan Cagayan Valley Batanes Cagayan Isabela Nueva Vizcaya Quirino Central Luzon Bataan Bulacan Nueva Ecija Pampanga Tarlac Zambales Aurora 29.565 209.348 21.928 64.763 134.064 172.408 110.432 9.760 49.690 3.
036 10.557 117.257 268.907 1.220 418.302.888 276.283 205.551 135.105.756 371.910 55.791 400.961 248.504 121.930 131.938 2.505 32.297 1.545 192.083.635 214.990 5.518 912.378 2.152 92.246 562.514 115.828 673.610 986.360 26.766 44.493 255.414 120.718 166.409 1.328 106.445 176.288 133.035 666.543 558.996 288.991 123.668 94.686 163.914 50.086 148.743 190.161 130.866 814.528 271.722 114.326.693 169.836 549.411 693.608 258.102 727.067 351.713 185.713 211.655 664.270 404.037 288.169.819 52.501.874 13.042 349.CALABARZON Batangas Cavite Laguna Quezon Rizal MIMAROPA Marinduque Occidental Mindo Oriental Mindoro Palawan Romblon Bicol Region Albay Camarines Norte Camarines Sur Catanduanes Masbate Sorsogon Western Visayas Aklan Antique Capiz Iloilo Negros Occidental Guimaras Central Visayas Bohol Cebu Negros Oriental Siquijor Eastern Visayas Eastern Samar Leyte Northern Samar Samar (Western) Southern Leyte Biliran Zamboanga Peninsula 3.290 1.514 1.695 472.223.414 217.624 119.289 305.903 253.089 121.456 69.897 213.701 495.294 421.324 213.997 61.550.994 24.055 2.173 248.730 23.778 88.887 647.978 645.217 1.403 20.399 63.425 253.668 181.409 64.700 416.054.700 156.551 35.598 31.837 963.748 103.815 75.022 180.570 674.308 2.749 464.431 1.140.678 16.246 28.116 60 .359 699.406 71.522 78.761 112.101 21.771 369.881 75.296 174.492 109.656 668.146.536 450.472 100.
001 835.079 65.415 127.546 261.494 154.537 55.799 11.307 230.642 94.941 111.968 108. 61 .293 81.486 465.575 131.865 234.372 448.590 431.514 279.991 224.302 200.558 1.546 270.751 138.206 681.227 163.424 739.248 213.055 337.965 191.663 10.663 129.511 35.229 70.743 1.587 232.300.104 69.238 1.945 Source of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey.943 227.093 28.896 147.857 43.386 272.639 136.663 30.007 566.726 388.739 224.008 185. National Statistics Office.863 321.234 124.888 305.846 698.473 60.838 1.026 204.321 81.292 129.142 202.600 186.646 82.292 14.363 667.202 8.190 108.512 17.181.308 267.074 345.560 112.423 211.468 126.774 70.952 119.828 819.405.604 172.806 101.040 67.367 87.340 168.454 84.381 56.319 375.730 18.179 161.383.462 76.428 218.967 146.757 516.979 425.283 367.542 340.318 129.019 122.Zamboanga del Norte Zamboanga del Sur Zamboanga Sibuga Isabela City Northern Mindanao Bukidnon Camiguin Lanao del Norte Misamis Occidental Misamis Oriental Davao Region Davao Davao del Sur Davao Oriental Compostela Valley SOCCKSARGEN Cotabato South Cotabato Sultan Kudarat Sarangani Cotabato City Caraga Agusan del Norte Agusan del Sur Surigao del Norte Surigao del Sur ARMM Basilan Lanao del Sur Maguindanao Sulu Tawi-Tawi 362.328 115.188 223.927 133.
816 4.2 39.5 44.82/ 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 5.116 5.5.9 Average Family Size 50.27 5.7 33.074 5. and National Statistical Coordination Board thresholds.287 5.5 24.549 1/ PIDS estimates.9 35.1 27.307 5.841 5.3 33.82 6.474 5.851 5.906 5.742 4.3 46.506 5.532 5. Series of Years Income Poverty Rate (in %) Year All Families Families with Children1/ 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 44.2 41.5 28.2 40.9 33.8 30.4 26.Appendix Table II. 2/Based on National Statistics Office weights. 62 . Comparison of Families with Children and All Families in General.118 4.
118 229.478 232.092 1988 253.818 121.787 155.947 368.640 145.514 61.393 89.568 98.898 174.949 257.588 192.226 135.034 171.659 138.018 4.915 312.653.784.978.267 173.381 186.475 205.345 147.346 178.999 206.439 104.786 237.570 252.793 257.602.145 278.477 Source of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey.114 444. by Region Region Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Total 1985 201.587 123.653 1991 276.086 3.965 172.325 206.686 243.216 224.577 345.060 192.283 143.699 230.116 130.738 362.578 70.199 367.281 186.888 179.228.000 1997 217.327 367.454 284.755 272.348 158.898 145.957 153.150 258.031 104.988 146.053 241.745 282.566 237.765 201.110 1994 281.376 181.419 404.498 174.119 388.013 3.902 183.704 245.834 149.472 354. National Statistics Office.813 199. Appendix Table II.995 253.201 2000 202.6.788 166.511 323.972 286.242 470.619 3.775 163. 63 . Number of Poor Families with Children 0–14 Years Old.238 87.197 185.731 62.916 80.164 3.695 157.289 232.335 248.647 94.584 163.927 200.923 435.174 184.867.586 140.360 313.177 172.348 2003 195.255 306.178 3.550 260.350 412.023 79.301 188.015 161.694 247.934 135.196 357.841 189.400 286.330 345.015 206.779 402.552.464 267.314 291.367 248.659 417.644 288.449 229.763 213.125 241.997 210.593 3.578 125.527 205.022 420.
by national poverty line .21 32.14 1.291 25.7.065 15. Trends in Subsistence Poor Philippines Subsistence incidence among families with children (0-14 years old) .26 8.60 5.51 2.195 15.257.649.96 6.234 28.873 6.6 36.713 16.695.8 1.295 24.235.742.08 32.by international poverty line Magnitude of subsistence poor -families -population -population in % Number of children in subsistence poor .69 2.229 4.62 12.in poor families.5 1.5 2.112.179 10.260.984.088 10. by national poverty line.72 6.59 1.4 24.036.092 91.by international poverty line Number of children 0–14 years old (PIDS estimate) .27 23.8 1.534.6 15.761 28.849.379.041 15.45 11.984 8.35 29.1 16.08 2.601.23 6.445.780 91.675.105.4 22.02 7.32 10.069 92.542 24. (%)  1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 28.751.13 13.139.3 13.556 92.67 7.739.Appendix Table II.994.in poor families in urban area .322.07 21.751.965 21.041 92.876 12.82 1.683 19.106.930.339.403.0 2.in poor families.914 12.16 22.in poor families in urban area.90 2.303.45 20.913.80 24.540 92. (%) .779.2 14.3 2.77 20.69 1.42 1.400. (%) .303 13.38 1.874 4.872.99 1.245 8.80 1.902 18.78 7.in poor families in rural area.3 2.36 1.by national poverty line Magnitude of poor families with children 0–14 years old Households with children 0–14 years old as percentage of poor families Subsistence incidence among all families .41 18.by national poverty line (%) -number .928 4.227.761.208.785 14.28 1.71 2.551 25.317 91.95 64 .589 16.206.883 13.229.065 93.8 1.354 3.393 21.212.563. by national poverty line .200.53 1.372 21.34 19.620.312 14.668 1.3 24.
718 17.962 10.927 22.754.707 10.  Basic source of data: FIES.674.506 6.asp  Data refer to poverty rates of sample households based on the FIES. For Notes.801.in poor families in rural area National poverty line (food threshold) (Philippine peso) Number of families with children Total number of families  6.898.484 2.4. World Bank’s PovcalNet data.816 5.82 5.533.549 Total number of children (0-14) Average family size Average family size among families with children  Source of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES).gov. For Notes.527.327 7.978.339 21.nscb.473.338 10. 1997 figure is not comparable with 2000 onwards but using the same method the rate for 2000 was 28.gov.714.nscb.742 5.463 27. National Statistics Office (NSO).118 4.148.602 4. 1993 PPP Prices at http://iresearch.944 25.635 12.758 14. 1991 data is not comparable with the rest of the estimates shown here.344 5. 2008]   NSCB.683.149. and 2000 to 2006 data are comparable.841 5.287 5.906 5. NSO.279.  65 .157.195 11.375. Annual Per Capita Poverty Thresholds.847.27 5. Source: National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB).322 3.341.145. 1991 figure not comparable with 1997 onwards.441 25.asp NSCB..479 5.393 29.071.org/PovcalNet/jsp/CChoiceControl.510.asp.gov.369. Poverty headcount among population. please refer to http://www.071.jsp?WDI_Year=2007 [Retrieved July 15. 1997 figure not comparable with those of 2000 onwards.121.022 9.538.074 5.149 11.641 8.591 6. 1991 data is not comparable with the rest of the estimates shown here.871 4. Data are available at http://www.532 4.worldbank.853 15.192.475 5.ph/technotes/poverty_tech.928 9.188 8.542 5.941 28.480. PIDS Staff STATA runs.ph/pressreleases/2007/Sept21_PR-200709-SS1-04_Poor.4.116 5.ph/technotes/poverty_tech.025 12.716 4. 1997 figure is not comparable with 2000 onwards but using the same method the rate for 2000 was 28.609 7. refer to households with children 0–14 years old.934 5.804. please refer to http://www.214.440 16.975.475 4.851 5. in Philippine pesos.801 10.987.191 6. 2000 to 2006 data are comparable.559. NSO.373 5.403.482 29.355 9.nscb.307 5.
0 35.6 20.3 33.4 39.7 38.9 28.9 1.3 44.1 8.6 2006 17.7 21.4 36.8 41.7 26.5 1.5 47.9 1.Appendix Table II.3 11.9 45.7 37.7 46.3 32.6 18.4 9.3 36.3 28.5 46.4 35.9 32.3 36.4 38.4 36.8 39.3 38.6 43.0 38.0 34.9 32.8 25.0 16.4 53.2 32.8 38.6 44.8 1997 33.4 34.7 33.4 34.0 37.2 18. National Statistics Office.2 32.7 52.2 29.7 29.8 27.0 43.3 58.6 47.7 37.7 31.6 4.2 12.9 30.6 52.6 32.4 31.6 36.6 2000 23.3 33.2 20.4 25.2 24.4 40.0 51.3 50.7 34.3 7.6 16.6 8.2 Basic source of data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey.1 25.5 33.4 6.2 36.7 25.2 40.8 54.5 43.8 24.6 22.1 41.8 10.6 10.5 38.7 2003 17.8 18.2 41.6 45.4 36.8 25.2 42.3 39. 66 .6 28.6 47.0 25.2 24.4 32.7 36.2 56.9 34.6 41.2 28.8.5 42.4 32.7 36.5 19.5 33.7 32.4 25.5 21.8 32.8 2.4 37.2 28.9 33. Percentage of Children 0–14 Years Old in Subsistence Poor Families. by Region.6 10. Series of Years Region/Year 1985 1988 1991 1994 Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Total 26.0 32.0 26.0 45.6 40.1 33.6 25.2 13.5 6.6 45.4 17.5 34.5 21.1 22.9 1.7 29.9 34.9 21.3 38.
094 270.367 388.610 325.454 337.359 417.420 250.544 311.088 525.379 918. National Statistics Office (NSO).240 349.594 1.477 156.053 8.049 566.464 324.552 229.570 278.541 439.491 452.220 7.961 891.912 389.712 639.235.980 628.260 106.911 319.724 305.175 354.291 6.496 669.315 395.245 436.956 194.686 562.978 459.112.356 299.816 602.379.574 892. Number of Children 0–14 Years Old in Subsistence Poor Families.940 879.494 529.208.378 312.760 303.420 268.911 418.077 321.884 842.218 363.346 415.130 495.535 138.202 321.337 325.984 487. Series of Years Region/Year 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Total 347. by Region.406 450.997 549.242 539.999 485.101 727.204 58.208 7.028 453.818 321.237 445.790 510.284 370.350 331.751.057.685 519.739.994.391 810.699 587.928 Source of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES).Appendix Table II.229 258.293 64.602 435.810 157.197 393.293 110.915 413.198 41.132 386.472 369.649 421.575 375.015 742.322 136.459 271.432 122. 67 .417 299.475 737.9.351 458.836 312.242 444.318 498.917 892.558 980.116 465.473 251.289 117.613 331.094 73.707 566.346 268.735 568.680 644.072 785.578 220.692 364.879 358.759 475.170 372.072 422.908 237.323 411.873 526.997 5.460 466.381 6.477 349.146 7.677 333.957 228.539 53.957 530.006 725.383 357.527 94.785 398.514 311.872 1.144 197.141 7.043 885.354 257.763 205.963 209.250 484.376 373.619.933 387.073 248.249 374.250 396.930 558.330 426.094 558.076 126.036.
834 86.071 92.167 113.136 155.642 154.222 105.749 152.260.909 244.945 114.857 74.915 103.415 129.421 49.076 38.092 1988 116.348 141. by Region Region/Year Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Total 1985 84.221 96.065 2006 73.379 112.274 12.007 91.349 32.983 232.163 111.148 63.866 33.262 79.957 93.940 132.779 110.182 63.811 211.115 148.251 1.186 62.710 119.722 1.734 171.630 46.078 142.343 161.915 67.355 162.540 1991 148.950 27.450 92.417 70.362 133.353 92.750 133.439 105.088 111.181 122.557 118.681 104.470 107.041 2000 87.422 133.113 39.282 148.192 7.10.666 223.497 2.194 98.495 73.105.376 106.490 166.387 2.939 1.978 81.564 105.853 118.162 120.958 216.897 119.828 93.879 105. Appendix Table II.506 193.901 1.886 184.330 104.338 99.061 16.425 84.369 122.743 81.476 146.763 109.069 68 .382 60.263 236.626 112.103 191.876 140.900 48.331 14.652 117.578 136.931 70.644 27.058 63.080 83.700 36.708 234.046 71.181 257.695.810 188.607 32.556 1994 149.486 182.471 165.563.915 74.163 141.434 2.065 107.926 99.564 134.154 88.427 192.780 1997 100.206.257 150.761.356 54.287 74.001 106.581 73.561 55. Number of Subsistence Poor Families with Children 0–14 Years Old.562 30.553 270.535 10.951 83.789 86.779.569 197.493 1.398 82.417 124.227 99.225 244.594 279.798 82.124 168.603 103.317 2003 68.984.465 106.306 92.
76 1.789 78.212 89.383.368.981 12.685 506.58 0.67 0.300.106.904 1.60 0.375.55 0.793 2.579.382.033 3.426 4.735 20.315 305.317 15.071.550 1.492.697 984.238 1.43 0.69 0.349.374 26.586 545.832 3.152.768.446 1.443 12.891.79 0.37 0.29 1.981.506 967 5.070 85.778 2.553 1.788 1.19 0.909 7.220 45.879 21.72 0.550.293 29.586 37.220.93 0.146.479 7.05 13.054.29 2. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter1/.60 1. 69 .485.096 12.974.137 970.120.336 951.435 7.859 1.342 26.186 32.40 1.527 1.457.652 45.028.918 2.283 3.645.865 1.464 116.848 10.327 Total 1.042.56 1.475 6.700 2.782 2.Appendix Table II.248 4.234 184.108.40.2063.210 36.61 0.303.514 1.24 1.53 2.528 3.65 2.428 Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 184.478 16.501.44 0.42 1.385 300.94 0.058 1.52 Number 11.181.22 1.436.032 1.700 307.58 0. by Region Region 2000 % 0.207 4.666.307.943 Total 1.442 1. also when it is made of mixed but predominantly salvaged/makeshift materials.100 1.828 15.850 3.10 0.15 0.583 1.42 0.105.68 0.223.310 15.47 1.574 1.07 12.21 1.405.949 2.199.13 0.384 999.372 1.983 951.254 12.72 1.99 2.700 1.26 0.446.934 216.907 Number 4.073 12.36 0.71 1.300.04 13.332 114.464 37.522 7.50 0.296 1.67 0.553 9.222 2.349.188 2.773 11.468 6.602 1/ If roof of house is made of salvaged/makeshift materials.927 8.849 1.11.907 1.694 21.30 0.895 9.106 28.62 0.052 942.40 1.359 1.35 0.968 835.077.622 Number 5.17 2006 % 0.06 1.80 0.145 3.441 1.841 78.492.548 1.939.26 0.917 29.484 3.46 1.682 43.48 1.497.830 13.407 10.28 0.35 2003 % 0.842 846.124 814.18 0.418 Total 1.954 2.24 0.17 1.22 0.120 3.327 10.545.824 2.206 11.588.749 2.409 3.149 1.259 1.407.238 528.
85 0. Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Shelter.03 3.697 984.89 2.550 1.983 951.824 2.298 12.350 25.259 1.685 506.832 3.14 1.497.778 2.934 10.112.839 639.64 3.715 43.461 5.589 4.651 8.428 13.08 0.149 1.83 2.981.220.68 2.398 327.442 1.446.25 1.73 1.742 23.054.768.14 2.99 2.349.071.293 29.105.497 53.19 2.781 564.120 3.13 0.629 19.300.553 1.44 1.31 2.939.57 2.152.368.918 2.588.891.033 3.492.936 38.Appendix Table II.222 2.303.181.01 1.106 35.583 1.058 1.106 66.114 24.907 1.782 2.30 0.622 12.238 528.68 1.12.318 64.052 942.54 1.106 28.305 17.46 1.54 3.22 2.749 2.574 1.904 1.120.224 0.816 330.700 2.705 0.106.57 1.19 2.484 3.59 3.09 3.09 2.92 1. 70 .47 2.310 15.296 1.785 1.545.754 41.405.100 1.383.890 67.768 12.436.501.73 1.359 1.42 1.545 32.66 1.241 49.028.042.91 2.080 10.234 12.375.550.294 285.457.317 15.83 1.41 1.386 109.146.30 1.842 846. 1/ by Region (PIDS estimates) 2000 Region Number % Total Number % Total Number % Total 2003 2006 Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 21.197 36.666.983 26.239 19.95 2.404 21.850 3.31 3.137 970.889 53.828 15.188 2.169.949 21.79 2.586 545.283 3.700 1.968 835.28 1.793 2.313 24.13 1.199.372 1.236 8.223.52 2.82 1.514 1.349.962 90.974.238 1.300.336 951.45 0.342 123.529 21.259 39.895 17.866 67.82 2.12 2.907 13.50 3.579.077.645.124 814.237 25.303 348.949 2.39 0.446 1.307.83 1.382.45 3.148 42.946 61.323.10 2.946 290.433 18.424 16.143 1.932 69.47 1.602 1/ If roof of house is made of salvaged/makeshift materials.930 613.10 1.705 26.485.865 1.409 3.20 1.79 2.548 109.484 21.09 1.924 233.16 2.492.90 2. also when it is made of mixed but predominantly salvaged/makeshift materials.000 29.407.384 999.654 11.917 29.
259 1.687 196.294 306.55 1.850 3.071.793 2.222 2.790 22.419 63.354 55.820.382.307.384 999.666.359 1.526 80.668 78.348 373.323.83 5.90 14.358 2.994 407.38 1.188 2.43 18.090 753.446 1.891.59 18.06 17.06 30.562 260.778 2.31 8.100 1.685 863.949 2.120 3.96 17.19 5.66 22.48 5.67 1.983 951.383.406 102.484 3.662 138.579.106 28.236 116.159.10 21.054.907 13.181.12 13.81 2.87 1.033 3.11 10.059 156.645.77 4.676 498.684 2.51 6.768.365 63.034 89.149 1.42 17.602 1/ Severe deprivation to toilet facilities refers to the absence of any toilet facility.1/ by Region (PIDS estimates) 2000 Region Number % Total Number % Total Number % Total 2003 2006 Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 47.919 399.664 411.00 26.622 12.058 1.586 545.120.137 970.166 3.40 25.485.492.913.959 141.030 145.160 2.751 473.310 15.375. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Toilet Facilities.697 984.112.73 9.66 11.409 3.077.959 4.730 95.78 8.75 12.550 1.497.052 942.246 180.574 1. 71 .223.238 528.234 73.283 3.275 3.939.904 1.917 29.93 2.827 85.874 42.828 15.00 22.028.11 8.58 8.767 112.220.407.43 23.685 506.07 7.78 7.446.124 814.629.418 14.907 1.505 24.865 1.837 28.042 180.39 11.700 2.349.38 8.45 5.076 493.808 221.715 226.918 2.91 29.293 29.514 1.550.43 11.934 71.45 19.372 1.974.13.885 163.42 9.82 22.796 58.759 570.238 1.300.106.856 3.436.701 165.152.303.317 15.349.457.18 24.199.683.623 248.842 846.809 2.525 474.377 120.42 22.631 82.87 7.975 473.85 6.042.309 414.428 13.313 826.405.68 5.588.33 8.302 220.50 11.10 1.Appendix Table II.016 4.15 16.782 2.749 2.336 951.492.83 14.86 6.368.318 112.62 16.981.55 5.456.300.169.74 6.296 1.832 3.583 1.824 2.146.545.501.553 1.30 6.468 23.105.442 1.37 1.136 442.968 835.76 1.700 1.
501.133 307.037 348.709 503.98 12.152.19 13.504 1.212 534.67 32.845 % 8.727 195.778 2.666.181.37 74.83 29.995.405.442 1.91 11.907 1.175 6.47 20.21 24.904 1.574 1.492.028.020 203. Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Toilet Facilities.15 18.949 2.210 409.493 320.553 1.013 368.619.734 412.436.011 377.152 404.861 275.768.259 1.484 3.76 15.55 19.089 % 19.382.29 65.697 984.645. 72 .485.917 29.842 846.88 29.71 21.19 29.283 3.550.514 1.446 1.474.63 35.563.622 12.120.11 22.317 15.974.186 1.362.695 172.314 399.793 2.169.586 545.191 % 15.25 76.81 34.914 4.824 2.28 11.610 401.777 888.68 31.74 20.59 22.981.336 951.796 293.682 5.03 19.027 441.349.293 29.071.907 13.31 25.414 375.234 Number 126.238 528.06 Total 1.262 834.146.222 2.278 167.968 835.00 30.220.052 942.246.Appendix Table II.120 3.832 3.72 12.828 15.306 229.054.106.68 Total 1.602 2003 2006 1/ Less severe deprivation to toilet facilities refers to the use of closed pit.04 18.254 169.199.303.700 2.105.407.497.798.780 403.37 28.307.457.528 6.20 14.647 435.590 647.579.782 2.80 21.300.54 35.862 249.789 1.033 393.349.82 13.255 257.346 190.383.409 3.106 28.545.372 1.865 1.384 999.503 311.428 13.891.85 17.550 1.83 29.709 906.392 392.66 9.663 4.310 15.130 363.18 37.1/ by Region (PIDS estimates) 2000 Region Number Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 211.788 105.06 14.07 17.323.572 112.238 1.376 149.296 1.854.597 663.583 1.939.19 28.928 413.536 308.973 443.556 414.12 11.325 230.854 340.543 258.03 24.058 1.42 18.86 Total 1.13 30.685 506.124 814.80 19.33 6.300.02 16.223.100 1.446. open pit and other toilet facilities such as pail system.934 Number 288.359 1.137 970.850 3.07 28.745 107.35 20.368.918 2.983 951.560 323.23 7.251.042.375.149 1.588.85 28.22 10.11 14.24 8.112.163 3.32 20.033 3.64 36.492.14.188 2.077.72 23.700 1.749 2.
62 3.497.974.442 1.220.59 34.514 1.99 Total 1.79 14.292 125.782 2.100 1.372 1.787 96.008 3.88 4.030 3.19 34.223 243.34 12.052 107.12 16.Appendix Table II.824 2.310 15.999 205.505 334.961 166.01 12.96 9.162.443 92.028 86.966 2. rain and peddlers.303.711 171.60 11.11 9.13 23.34 19.56 20.44 2.52 9.949 2.602 2003 2006 1/ Those that obtain water from springs.363 253.106.749 2.293 29.384 999.054.457.917 29.75 6.300.19 24.793 2.778 2.120.188 2.234 Number 13.405.49 14.54 3.70 12.286 % 0.428 552.588.028.127 297.409 267.69 8.09 13.645.834 71.428 13.1/ by Region (PIDS estimates) 2000 Region Number Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 22.586 545.768.939.375.58 16.15.359 1.907 1.46 17.033 3.982 % 1.666.191 406.611 131.99 9.052 942.24 15.42 8.59 14.112.480 188.34 2.102 194.446 1.15 10.781 76.622 12. rivers and streams.409 3.638 94.296 1.583 1.357.12 13.105.685 506.349. 73 .33 14.336 951.761 266.255 2.223.74 10.891.545.120 3.77 13.22 9.13 11.553 1.071.832 3.149 1.56 17.349.485.106 28.300.897 1.314.505 93.732 423.471 2.59 9.983 951.697 176.743 412.368.181.62 11.407.92 15.47 21.079 1.49 10.673 210.492.283 3.119.697 984.44 11.00 17.64 Total 1.133 284.968 835.222 2.861 31.077.137 970.519.501.904 1.61 8.865 1.163 92.550 1.873 347.400.714. Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Safe Water.09 18.934 Number 41.822 341.446.550.574 1.700 1.016 3.82 12.637 198.320 247.23 Total 1.420.143 224.029 62.24 10.579.436.238 528.907 13.828 15.700 2.907 157.276 180.850 3.484 3.79 8.83 14.813 59.97 15.153 628.259 1.382.918 2.124 814.442 409.146.017 116.383.492.042.429 182.407 222.058 1.152.191 42.323.317 15.169.842 846.007 373.981.53 12.13 17.840 1.199.620 242.301.609 384.59 22.307.91 8.479 % 2.238 1.11 18.
73 31.465 562.784 386.457.793 65.492.011 134.330 270.446.188 48.968 835.29 4.782 2.645.317 15.36 1.865 1.323.300.778 2.545.780 118.25 2.40 15.290 394.23 7.090 437.981.67 8.850 3.372 1.632 150.907 2.405.383.112.930 161.120 3.090 3.492.216 457.375.922 46.917 29.842 846.058 1.72 21.169.974.55 1.51 10.88 16.630 % 9.586 545.793.69 13.697 984.052 942.869 217.539.89 32.684 139.666.314.40 10.82 36.349.83 3.Appendix Table II.303.553 1.29 Total 1.033 3.31 14.71 18.828 15.234 Number 91.583 1.46 12.740 104.83 12.336 951.96 19.96 9.220.283 3.939.238 1.982 500.53 6.934 Number 131.22 7.757 77.94 13.199.368.588.949 2.1/ by Region (PIDS estimates) 2000 Region Number Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 135.550 1.768.778 2.550.472.34 21.78 0.895 68.191 114. 74 .41 3.81 Total 1.81 16.382.58 11.385 9.223.457 116.585 185.501.188 2.82 3.105.563 % 6.385 23.16 15.11 5.131 23.918 2.983 951.832 3.238 528.028.042.613 86.151 212.56 25.59 10.310 15. Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Safe Water.640 220.152.540 2.25 9.137 970.361 188.054.975 377.907 1.497.365 98.891.222 2.442 1.750 20.307.953 134.41 0.904 1.106 28.622 12.43 Total 1.87 17.428 13.653 590.15 1.071.296 1.573 207.063.13 8.700 2.74 220.127.116.113 216.485.120.830 97.349.67 4.407.78 7.705 66.569 47.146.793 2.749 2.304 3.06 12.359 1.384 999.700 1.602 2003 2006 1/ Those that obtained water from dug well.183 360.57 14.293 29.44 10.824 2.907 13.124 814.484 3.13 12.51 6.409 3.565 310.579.034.757 568.168 187.75 7.241 495.446 1.68 12.574 1.67 10.16.167 128.671 211.436.685 506.077.26 2.60 13.250 40.63 18.100 1.780 122.149 1.300.514 1.082 % 8.12 21.13 10.15 3.657 3.107 316.259 1.545 520.410 15.
417 82.347 185.38 7.22 7.345.370 256.722 561.50 30.083 256.794 887. Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information.365 % 11.65 Total 815.338 1.55 21.26 35.80 32.712 7.066 226.01 17.179.31 7.177 314.629 169.872 312.955 1.166 16.971 208.42 25.089 120.127 645.41 35.03 23.791 287.992 1.420 2.835 566.35 20.240 288.086 509.369 16.050 292.08 2.861 183.55 29.Appendix Table II.917 % 10.739 903.264.25 28.58 Total 841.685 658.567 1.946 541.385.828 1.874.431 1.911 660.292 53.53 2.95 35.734 265.945 2.15 29.081 127.235.842 47.790.394 768.14 12.61 45.33 8.414.48 32.464 1.933 235.133 638.01 22.727 683.948 588.050 7.503 771.74 12.573 % 10.97 7.941 589.00 6.842 7.271.599 800.629 8.726 2003 2006 1/ Children 7 to 14 that do not have any of the following: radio.733 323.923 815.886 16.06 8.467 9.278.859 90.1/ by Region (PIDS estimates) 2000 Region Number Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 96.32 16.598 1.950 141.874.81 29.49 24.384 108.081.427 1.101.433 1.06 Total 831.195. television.49 24.181 160.171.846 47.093.240.02 23.83 39.86 30.804 554.288 162.00 20.836 Number 88.744 621.536 1.173 251.922.79 24.794 Number 84.89 16.537 138.326.466 543.851 123.608 251.244 3.322 182.496 871.62 17.985 799.44 21.389 698.413 2.983 345.249.49 21.186 739. 75 .490 163.623 151.759 187.001 174.56 26.308. phone and computer.17.546.600 163.841 9.712.485 785.73 24.010.80 14.673 2.472 164.73 20.47 18.029 464.414 35.152.002.823 1.849.865 1.88 17.39 24.16 20.326 67.008 287.346 52.197 1.710.937.36 20.914 2.868 752.83 18.239 1.12 27.27 18.324 258.845.852.305 127.998 169.914.45 34.033 816.51 2.164 265.60 5.14 22.789 554.937 268.498 122.415 1.160 2.402 187.422 42.929 1.824 248.73 8.566.896 491.
40 19.782 170.712 7.52 25.683 2.427 1.385.794 887.55 7.836 89.345.896 42.335 355.629 8.415 1.676 127.27 45.663 92.127 645.48 21.187 183.029 464.49 21.600 165.137 49.39 7.83 39.35 20.101.294 153.179.937 268.94 29.95 35.783 3.093.433 1.42 34.77 20.52 34.47 18.222 2.440 121.88 14.53 2.85 24.546.598 1.369 16.536 1.727 683.197 1.02 8.75 7.739 903. 76 .105 76.45 2.30 8.186 739.94 28.722 561.72 28.278.54 24.466 10.567 1.55 29.911 660.417 83.240.264.38 36.74 20.542.237 189.050 7.768 316.081.978 11.1/ by Region (PIDS estimates) Region 2000 % 2003 % 2006 % Number Total Number Total Number Total Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 96.431 1.992 1.713 218.104.22.168 16.91 815.71 21.53 23.158 188.845.95 32.710.457 139.685 658.221.033 816.913 254.823 1.44 14.712.47 18.467 9.431.693 227.Appendix Table II.733 323.99 16.008 287.841 9.271.249.60 8.89 31.955 1.866 11.852.795 141.800 49.842 7.171.010.03 23.370 256.326.985 799.813 288.173 251.464 1.30 29.91 36.31 22.389 698.929 1.394 768.86 21.13 831.884 330.411 213.922.239 1.791 287.849.937.64 841.914.61 38.072 3.744 621.462 189.765 154.466 543.284 47.896 491.789 554.89 9.086 509.169 289.67 7.045.886 16.22 3.324 270.983 345.914 2.207 613.352 161.828 1.608 251.60 5.794 98.292 55.868 129.472 164. Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Information.980 271.18.97 20.850 218.790.47 27.67 17.485 785.882.865 1.941 589.794 2.726 1/ Those children that do not have any of the following: radio or television.759 189.24 17.338 1.804 554.430 190.946 541.08 23.80 13.167 127.98 27.579 642.152.756 2.566.678 189.930 164.503 771.850 141.599 800.69 17.714 65.717 248.496 871.01 25.213 679.868 752.78 24.923 815.86 30.
563 307.949 70.081 23.364 10.921 14.567 1.481 54. NCR-4th Dist.685 558.947 126.663 19.084 38.063.283 17.492.327 31.221.016 5.173 10.572 92.693 506.900 94.845 3.573 3.733 4.685 9.168 3.385 638 492 12.638 41.552 22.160 21.803 13.246.951 8.069 775.929 65.457 23.697 0 911 12.796 42.556 0 52.313 5.444 20.497.375.505 1.803 5.125 65.000 362 1.292 100.420.740 21.837 25.971 8.082 16.356 921.981 91. by Region and by Province.191 928 70.052 167.487 5.414 5.032 613.242.662 1.475 0 0 109.117 8.253 3.585 1.488 236.456.602 3.251 58.435 112.651 1.345 14.461 9.155 7.669 0 773 23.191 2. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Toilet Facilities 1/ Region/Province Number of Children Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Toilet Facilities 2/ Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Safe Water 3/ Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Safe Water 4/ Children Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Shelter 5/ Children Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Shelter 6/ Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Severe Deprivation of Information 7/ Children 7–14 Years Old Experiencing Less Severe Deprivation of Information 8/ Philippines 29.831 11.326 4. NCR-3rd Dist.709 16.661 25. Children in Deprivation.654 30.597 423.102 13.928 0 23.204 22.857 4.959 44.350 5.831 9.286 3.901 35.224 2.346 8.083 31.866 NCR Manila NCR-2nd Dist.939 46.140 78.547 880 84.911 5.331 201.529 5.310 0 7.889 3.335 1.315 32.896 6.574 230.275 35.912 1.850 10.881 4.064 172.999 2.791 98.105 4.123 43.106 1.441 7.19.651 380 1.053 0 73.478 362 616 0 501 0 0 4.251 1. CAR Abra Benguet Ifugao Kalinga Mountain Province Apayao Ilocos Region Ilocos Norte Ilocos Sur 3.975 0 5.883 58.955 5.500 6.553 76.863 28.Appendix Table II.874.601 77 .
457 3.411 35.850 11.787 0 723 629 27.681 22.374 644 5.744 213.737 12.658 0 898 69.253 111.095 4.800 1.305 0 0 43.586 0 14.868 2.126 28.365 0 4.944 31.986 64.241 13.054.671 17.887 647.591 6.140 55.951 43.743 190.806 21.191 413.585 31.093 34.744 183.762 76.665 0 3.758 96.884 2.337 249.737 25.715 66.186 2.326 1.334 3.179 104.636 56.106 4.557 7.384 0 31.203 31.226 70.La Union Pangasinan Cagayan Valley Batanes Cagayan Isabela Nueva Vizcaya Quirino Central Luzon Bataan Bulacan Nueva Ecija Pampanga Tarlac Zambales Aurora CALABARZON Batangas Cavite Laguna Quezon Rizal MIMAROPA Marinduque Occidental Mindo Oriental Mindoro 218.872 7.122 25.939 3.677 13.456 64.230 74.437 108.912 66.897 6.437 0 178.621 46.052 3.873 113.757 19.216 3.067 23.217 1.777 0 66.306 98.460 25.574 3.682 0 2.101 2.876 67.899 57.219 11.011 0 248.409 186.879 116.210 20.890 644 1.076 25.042 0 3.485 24.460 212.380 4.830 30.669 5.569 0 95.957 90.479 229.237 3.011 20.015 264.073 14.475 357 0 180.582 37.902 49.876 9.798 5.379 6.958 8.096 28.331 1.985 24.298 86.167 51.172 13.771 190.932 0 2.575 21.006 7.027 141.615 70.464 5.987 8.408 124.289 305.713 2.448 3.164 15.862 0 48.490 3.591 934.628 18.778 88.592 34.359 699.377 5.151 0 9.548 14.263 2.634 125.190 409.795 0 36.811 47.146 942.903 72.671 12.623 14.153 434.246 10.725 16.162 42.198 8.471 30.062 20.882 3.335 9.214 92.303 208.077.607 29.690 3.978 645.219 134.711 1.766 3.377 4.339 46.459 44.866 814.899 7.928 4.771 10.896 721.237 5.514 14.421 34.129 20.871 15.557 61.048 22.890 576.411 693.939 4.038 37.659 7.777 16.435 24.812 78 .851 35.163 82.180 6.783 371.749 189.777 0 37.311 35.428 20.861 27.650 163.057 28.690 55.520 21.884 40.381 32.493 298 11.131 0 2.774 12.501.927 226.073 2.537 13.129 29.627 18.442 7.846 3.213 33.474 313.026 886.
961 248.302 355.328 89.914 50.987 289.525 38.320 21.437 33.251 316.737 117.448 43.913 52.857 152.371 78.264 79.250 27.023 470 341.924 49.371 4.787 0 3.740 105.815 29.145 7.285 348.711 84.912 17.288 21.610 11.550.130 6.751 62.397 79.518 912.642 36.260 31.298 12.Palawan Romblon Bicol Region Albay Camarines Norte Camarines Sur Catanduanes Masbate Sorsogon Western Visayas Aklan Antique Capiz Iloilo Negros Occidenta Guimaras Central Visayas Bohol Cebu Negros Oriental Siquijor Eastern Visayas Eastern Samar Leyte Northern Samar Samar (Western) 351.214 94.884 48.527 76.103 85.713 258.800 23.833 147.507 187.756 371.752 169.700 416.246 167.710 46.888 276.592 534.479 1.018 132.727 21.105.254 0 1.273 330.585 11.983 493.152 92.035 666.499 18.374 118.533 238.122 79 .198 271.899 127.722 41.278 33.284 188.840 81.819 473.975 13.711 642 131.757 25.718 24.737 42.857 70.933 46.383 118.433 41.726 55.686 2.504 45.671 46.517 62.786 320.302.188 120.713 185.254 171.233 15.409 1.127 0 8.554 14.062 27.296 174.656 16.555 71.224 80.050 44.672 5.310 218.169 68.524 2.247 2.897 213.349 49.024 4.923 179.938 2.227 50.454 0 1.481 60.646 0 201.822 0 6.316 232.996 288.687 66.761 0 18.014 0 1.620 19.980 3.093 91.290 1.789 53.494 0 20.558 568.212 95.570 674.700 156.792 67.245 0 12.231 25.298 11.117 2.958 0 4.846 0 0 3.223.309 76.056 67.468 2.735 2.680 26.390 96.270 404.854 3.441 312.656 668.680 2.273 292.600 56.263 33.267 71.265 36.734 54.241 2.327 45.007 15.762 33.082 151.200 104.435 1.624 119.313 312.350 310.173 248.192 83.991 10.909 242.762 8.779 34.114 5.749 464.463 33.565 34.502 161.573 792 26.742 3.350 21.094 265.037 38.084 18.522 68.715 17.791 54.347 32.107 44.044 17.625 3.737 74.617 1.599 37.541 457.979 178.454 0 2.064 185.127 2.146.876 79.522 6.367 47.364 101.737 43.266 14.324 3.247 80.574 57.751 52.055 2.747 0 7.730 23.606 5.296 21.361 69.264 2.378 2.901 0 474.611 90.409 414.
752 45.711 6.895 0 5.684 3.477 1.803 37.712 30.660 38.602 2.383.514 279.988 3.026 204.511 189.443 3.700 99.232 36.826 135.248 213.907 362.429 6.465 196.297 1.054 235.979 425.093 28.714 47.476 6.653 0 0 12.574 91.865 234.342 254.288 12.629 2.732 34.599 112.678 98.998 33.453 7.855 50.389 154.531 7.983 35.603 4.986 174.161 48.082 0 36.538 14.462 340.984 9.131 71.536 94.475 96.318 69.484 3.725 224.796 20.815 54.441 794 0 7.936 6.013 3.368 125.374 39.846 698.947 25.718 4.007 566.895 23.428 15.613 27.469 11.590 431.788 16.537 68.399 63.965 191.547 71.966 33.765 75.659 25.001 9.304 68.433 11.273 32.322 27.001 32.054 13.768 41.013 46.001 835.663 30.188 44.155 48.569 897 7.454 17.236 10.428 27.267 34.864 56.500 308.325 115.897 3.093 166.630 0 14.Southern Leyte Biliran Zamboanga Peninsula Zamboanga del Norte Zamboanga del Sur Zamboanga Sibuga Isabela City Northern Mindanao Bukidnon Camiguin Lanao del Norte Misamis Occident Misamis Oriental Davao Region Davao Davao de Sur Davao Oriental Compostela Valle SOCCKSARGEN Cotabato South Cotabato Sultan Kudarat Sarangani Cotabato City Caraga 121.796 153.442 0 9.962 17.127 55.424 5.887 285 0 4.460 4.934 143.143 111.183 0 43.057 79.815 0 19.284 285 0 0 6.523 139.765 68.275 114.718 26.631 4.300.532 70.835 24.587 232.191 32.223 77.992 82.558 1.241 43.529 6.548 887 8.795 0 12.789 571 0 247.327 0 0 23.356 35.313 15.882 40.841 887 3.225 105.429 59.462 33.017 48.248 24.001 89.919 55.196 69.283 367.617 58.902 33.384 169.266 38.417 39.047 368.130 138.528 26.092 4.372 448.967 86.238 1.477 4.512 77.626 41.961 35.990 112.144 189.888 305.405.346 44.245 22.079 65.715 7.902 170.523 122.553 2.046 3.169.603 6.002 3.660 34.724 293.678 2.734 18.162 116.985 42.325 0 185.063 8.494 0 243.876 77.106 18.213 80 .691 23.292 73.239 3.398 23.604 172.838 1.107 7.947 7.767 7.749 43.531 49.764 37.
983 0 0 26.379 31.084 30.645 56. also when it is made of mixed but predominantly salvaged/makeshift materials.498 15.227 163.207 0 0 8.789 204.773 55.136 21.553 218.902 12.909 33. 8/ Those children that do not have any of the following: radio or television.719 36.207 0 0 16. 81 .631 29. 7/ Children 7 to 14 that do not have any of the following: radio.902 34.082 64.574 6.403 20. rain and peddlers.781 906.229 406.834 27.216 45.600 186.504 208.718 38.137 58. 3/ Those that obtain water from springs. 2/ Less severe deprivation to toilet facilities refers to the use of closed pit.227 37.819 12.968 108.386 19.485 29.914 53.265 0 0 2.012 11.697 27.457 16.601 262.082 8.708 22.324 33.321 46.625 11.743 1.156 35.891 25.739 224.757 27.666 0 5. 4/ Those that obtained water from dug well. 5/ If roof of house is made of salvaged/makeshift materials. also when it is made of mixed but predominantly salvaged/makeshift materials.542 340.549 46.943 227.902 1/ Severe deprivation to toilet facilities refers to the absence of any toilet facility. television. 6/ If roof of house is made of salvaged/makeshift materials.142 202.096 26. rivers and streams.516 30.459 134.821 267.287 0 3.385 6.181.365 56.Agusan del Norte Agusan del Sur Surigao del Norte Surigao del Sur ARMM Basilan Lanao del Sur Maguindanao Sulu Tawi-tawi 218.773 63.121 22. phone and computer.005 181.788 60.197 43.587 34.510 138.973 377.247 12.179 15.063 16.263 2.342 85.092 117.340 111. open pit and other toilet facilities such as pail system.074 345.377 59.696 18.
81 6.55 84.89 7.77 66.67 8.09 69.11 61.5 94.26 79.Appendix Table II.13 70.15 71. respectively.43 63.49 66.02 67.29 59.03 7.45 71. Notes: Data on participation rate SY 1997–1998 to SY 2001–2002: The official school-age population for elementary and secondary are 7–12 and 13–16 years old.14 6.44 58.84 61. Cohort Survival Rate (EFA formula) 82 .69 8.32 78.97 71.31 69. Completion.5 68.67 6.71 70. respectively.97 6.51 8. Data on participation rate SY 2002–2003 to SY 2007–2008: The official school-age population for elementary and secondary are 6–11 and 12–15 years old.24 71.16 87.45 Source: Fact Sheet: Basic Education Statistics.99 84.72 9.91 75.11 59. and Dropout Rates in the Philippines Indicators SY 1999– 2000 SY 2000– 2001 SY 2001– 2002 SY 2002– 2003 SY 2003– 2004 SY 2004– 2005 SY 2005– 2006 SY 2006– 2007 SY 2007– 2008 Participation Rate Elementary Secondary Cohort Survival Rate Elementary Secondary Completion Rate Elementary Secondary Dropout Rate Elementary Secondary 96.99 7.62 7.32 68.37 5.00 72.55 96.06 75.54 70.20.91 73.53 90.89 8.55 74.43 77.98 7.33 69.84 77.37 8.35 69.38 69. Participation.59 73.99 71.36 12.44 76.95 65.51 83.06 72.74 60.68 66.33 71.45 88.46 69. Department of Education.06 63. Cohort.72 72.22 58.38 6.05 71.
4 7.5 3.7 4.4 5.3 5.6 8.MIMAROPA V .6 11.1 5.9 4.7 12.9 4 3.8 6.7 2 5.9 22.7 5 4.4 2.Davao Peninsula XII . 2003 Subgroups Sex Male Female Birth Order 1 2-3 4-5 6+ Residence Urban Rural Region National Capital Region Cordillera Administrative Region I .CALABARZON IVB .Appendix Table II.Central Visayas VIII .3 26.Ilocos Region II .2 7.7 7.4 4.Bicol Region VI . Percentage of Children without Vaccinations. National Statistics Office.5 7.Northern Mindanao XI .1 8.3 6.7 2.8 10 16.6 7.8 4.Cagayan Valley III .Zamboanga Peninsula X .5 5.5 % Not Immunized Source: National Demographic and Health Survey.Western Visayas VII .3 15.21.Central Luzon IVA . 83 .SOCCSKSARGEN ARMM Caraga Mother's Education No education Elementary High school College or higher Wealth Index Quintile Lowest Second Middle Fourth Highest Total 45.Eastern Visayas IX .5 5.
591 934.205 22.599 31.934 0 0 85.949 70.356 921.125 65.331 7.354 93.685 558.385 2.527 219.931 17.Appendix Table II.897 4.229 382.750 357.567 1.885 18.289 65.331 201.226 70.588 36.940 36.553 76.306 88.007 29.251 218.603 8.690 3.512 0 0 5.510 79.932 0 1.004 0 74.850 11.458 10.833 177.146 942.374 41.454. Children without Electricity and Security of Tenure.258 13.431 3.375.574 3.103 21.186 9.069 775.481 54.787 11.052 167.204 34.501.015 64.22. by Region and by Province.877 17.267 0 1.015 264.153 434.246 26.404 10.585 1.492.620 22. 2006 (PIDS estimates) Region/Province Number of Children Number of children 0– 14 years old without access to electricity Number of children 0–14 years old in informal settlements Philippines NCR Manila NCR-2nd District NCR-3rd District NCR-4th District CAR Abra Benguet Ifugao Kalinga Mountain Province Apayao Ilocos Region Ilocos Norte Ilocos Sur La Union Pangasinan Cagayan Valley Batanes Cagayan Isabela Nueva Vizcaya Quirino Central Luzon Bataan Bulacan Nueva Ecija Pampanga Tarlac Zambales Aurora CALABARZON 29.464 1.497.064 172.474 313.657 16.335 0 0 33.084 38.077.026 886.640 90.899 57.868 595 33.890 576.567 84 .825 18.409 186.888 55.257 36.228 13.359 6.181 28.896 721.052 2.353 212.783 371.275 131.027 128.242.549 173.831 2.634 125.602 3.222.693 506.
105.700 416.169.380 9.372 20.778 88.224 183.082 14.067 351.468 114.270 404.920 6.409 1.938 100.914 50.252 680.223.629 28.378 2.840 27.290 1.054 8.156 835 51.839 225.743 190.518 912.483 23.866 814.152 92.Batangas Cavite Laguna Quezon Rizal MIMAROPA Marinduque Occidental Mindoro Oriental Mindoro Palawan Romblon Bicol Region Albay Camarines Norte Camarines Sur Catanduanes Masbate Sorsogon Western Visayas Aklan Antique Capiz Iloilo Negros Occidental Guimaras Central Visayas Bohol Cebu Negros Oriental Siquijor Eastern Visayas Eastern Samar Leyte Northern Samar Western Samar Southern Leyte Biliran Zamboanga Peninsula Zamboanga del Norte Zamboanga del Sur 699.377 605.566 50.366 6.907 362.713 185.475 173.732 4.888 276.289 305.365 14.550.656 668.041 60.332 27.217 1.756 371.509 0 8.616 0 60.363 30.591 148.317 85 .674 0 8.248 45.624 119.839 451.399 63.254 52.570 674.013 11.741 175.465 39.333 63.058 5.180 22.978 645.887 647.487 9.449 23.143 1.526 173.938 2.504 121.999 96.055 2.173 248.146.582 0 84.214 1.054.611 535.460 17.484 456.869 37.778 72.961 248.057 28.518 34.897 213.429 5.700 156.321 0 14.845 208.716 92.786 17.411 693.707 82.668 92.017 58.712 20.996 288.730 23.582 1.503 489.297 1.256 277.296 174.545 6.830 65.324 25.749 464.302.553 3.465 3.269 217.647 2.674 218.246 64.417 112.088 80.593 225.007 566.035 666.
132 44.600 186.386 86.865 234.294 43.048 77.364 200.181.391 24.247 177.582 80.950 10.701 8.943 227.590 431.403 123.888 305.131 71.558 1.969 5.959 87.238 1.887 71.593 30.454 35.068 405 3.215 176.604 172.026 204. 86 .417 18.280 401.109 7.587 232.587 17.428 218.142 202.838 1.074 345.227 163.625 120.133 3.Zamboanga Sibugay Isabela City Northern Mindanao Bukidnon Camiguin Lanao del Norte Misamis Occidental Misamis Oriental Davao Region Davao Davao de Sur Davao Oriental Compostela Valley SOCCSKSARGEN Cotabato South Cotabato Sultan Kudarat Sarangani Cotabato City Caraga Agusan del Norte Agusan del Sur Surigao del Norte Surigao del Sur ARMM Basilan Lanao del Sur Maguindanao Sulu Tawi-tawi 213.252 69.045 Source of basic data: Family Income and Expenditure Survey.665 598.965 191.542 340.283 367.715 56.255 27.743 1.001 835.514 279.985 604 17. National Statistics Office .139 13.959 6.474 8.666 73.946 19.665 10.517 7.833 32.489 200.356 3.663 30.093 28.537 396.605 3.967 11.072 82.739 224.868 862 55.968 108.471 79.658 52.313 51.662 1.405.738 453.846 698.502 185.300.372 448.079 65.997 72.808 7.979 425.748 11.710 1.383.303 175.
326 CAR 506.597 16.681 4.476 4.64 2.50 13.968 138.669 Rural Total 29.375.81 16.602 3.315 154.658 35.70 30.02 10.979 83.Appendix Table II.31 8.850 22.73 9.61 16.346 Cagayan Valley 942.93 2.018 Central Luzon 3.191 42.146.95 18.463 9.296 471.631 Caraga 835. 87 .514 116. Children Experiencing Only One Severe Deprivation.051 368.700 410.492.931 67.513 230.67 0. 2006 Region Total Sanitation only 1/ % Water only 2/ % Shelter only 3/ % Ilocos Region 1. 23.750 107.287 Western Visayas 2.58 0.930 978 16.383.926 197.598.39 14.054.34 5.749 483.78 2.12 0. 2/ Severely deprived in water but not in sanitation and shelter.468 41.787 82.55 2.278 341.428 79.86 10.828 146.19 1.703.49 1.66 15.34 10.018 Central Visayas 2.33 7.30 11.342 37.56 11.343 0.91 0.939.88 4.300.233 183.207 1.21 8.409 172.17 22.00 0.077.266 212.37 0.436.501.293 2.16 0.372 107.879 Eastern Visayas 1.295 NCR 3.15 0.93 8.32 0.33 1.028 134.778 223.767 SOCCKSARGEN 1.492 0.283 108.09 0.67 9.299 Bicol 2.105.78 21.181.06 0.379. and 3/ Severely deprived in shelter but not in water and sanitation.52 0.67 15.68 8. by Region.60 6.907 191.223.55 5.41 16.44 21.550.75 8.75 3.624.74 0.310 780.497.098 2.567 MIMAROPA 1.140 921.498 0 7.169.104 Northern Mindanao 1.779 12.052 71.78 1/ Severely deprived in sanitation but not in water and shelter.99 31.66 0.926 9.54 2.040 86.359 237.433 Zamboanga Peninsula 1.500 2.553 28.161 ARMM 1.808 Urban 15.349 25.700 465.245 1.04 6.50 5.387 CALABARZON 3.22 1.146 Davao Region 1.157 183.439 371.443 8.685 52.316 4.10 6.405.340 71.813 13.78 0.58 5.
047 2.57 1.501.383.24 0.907 1.27 0.092 20.78 5.95 0.413 62.12 3.540 0.254 5.052 942.300.02 0.236 11.665 155.436.938 0.24 1.18 1.778 2.Children Experiencing Two Severe Deprivations.71 2.26 0.310 15.602 % % Shelter and Sanitation 3/ % 7. 2/ Severely deprived in water and shelter but not in sanitation.514 1.14 3.968 835.53 3.181.757 153.353 31.93 1.159 2.21 0.214 5.529 3.700 2.36 2.851 936 428 444 1.26 5.223.51 3.891 34.749 2.024 8.375.025 63.553 1.169.196 0.198 822 3. 88 .22 0.415 26.11 0.405.105 591.1 0.409 3.Appendix Table II.12 2.19 0.32 0.287 54.550.11 0.187 76.022 4.296 1.48 0.090 0 4. and 3/ Severely deprived in shelter and sanitation but not in water.646 3.091 744.500 45.14 0.34 0.3 0.637 32.283 3.75 1.09 0.146.06 0.21 0.81 5.777 10.293 29.639 37.21 0.510 501 2.105.077.876 88.24.372 1.501 6.428 13.939. 2006 Safe Water and Sanitation 1/ Safe Water and Shelter 2/ Region Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total Total 1.1 0 0.359 1.759 30.956 7.59 0.03 3.02 0.26 1/ Severely deprived in water and sanitation but not in shelter.700 1.36 0.02 0.850 3.685 506.931 90.2 0.903 4.497.45 0.148 2.37 0 0.35 0.99 7.217 27.087 62.492.111 25.110 7.24 0.054.
786 5.19 21.55 27.778 2.171 35.791.257 217.602 86.550. Children Experiencing Deprivations.865 144.25.12 12.254 93.62 3.695 215.1 0.372 1.25 1.45 25.38 23.9 2.17 0.317 295.383.933 29.01 17.293 29.87 1.024 15.853 69.310 15.23 41.798 478.470 422.47 3.514 1.621 162.222 47.51 3.105.052 942.684 542.21 0.497.939.177 5.02 5.428 13.767 3.639 37.951 16.341 69.297 5.28 21.02 0.553 1.700 1.851 501 12.55 1.306 222.221 1.094 294. by Region.881 3.08 0.86 3. 2006 Any one deprivation Region All Children Number % Any 2 deprivations Number % All 3 deprivations Number % Ilocos Region Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao Region SOCCSKSARGEN NCR CAR ARMM Caraga Urban Rural Total 1.903 7.809 0.957 75.21 7.79 18.146.14 0.968 835.023 1.1 0.865 0.91 2.07 15.406 7.181.159 2.11 17.300.1 0.82 21.52 2.492.409 3.858 3.455.462 279.683 1.568 448.06 89 .738 74.296 1.850 3.054.646 621.219 838.16 5.56 6.05 0.57 2.29 0.663.78 21.685 506.39 20.36 1.907 1.359 1.749 2.223.289 505.26 27.Appendix Table II.604 57.99 2.283 3.24 12.37 9.549 107.327 93.077.21 0.700 2.307 27.375.53 4.073 538.405.552 485.169.82 7.578 318.501.436.51 23.
22 25.033 3.891.842 3.382.Appendix Table II.281 8.6 26.49 77.26 58.84 54.058 807.273 4.317 15.697 984.412 29.349.459 957.988.369 755.65 44.457.446.999 26167650 3181584 41.CAR 15 ARMM 16 – Caraga 4A – CALABARZON 4B – MIMAROPA Residence Urban Rural Number of children in relevant cohort 40.Central Luzon 5 – Bicol 6 .542 3.446 1.Zamboanga Peninsula 10 .18 24.492.220.234 10.41 20.130 1.2 33.57 47.583 1.589 415.871 864.672 594.237.565.442 1.322.590 5.249.71 25.91 56.917 90 .Northern Mindanao 11 – Davao 12 – SOCCKSARGEN 13 .120.949 2.238 528.831 567.323.73 41.100 1.992 722.214.171.1245. Combined Child Poverty Incidence Children 0–14 Years Old Who live in households under the national poverty line (%) Who live in households under the national poverty line (Magnitude) Country All children (0-14 years old) Household dimension Household size Less than 3 3-4 members 5-6 members 7+ Household head’s education None Elementary graduate At least secondary undergraduate Gender of the head of the household Male Female Geographic dimension Region 1 – Ilocos Region 2 .907 3.26 614.09 30.733 326.976.623.36 64.384 999.508 1.089.124 814.17 60.63 54.803.137 970.620 733.574 1.34 38.512.Eastern Visayas 9 .556 644.588.573 11.007.125 689.Cagayan Valley 3 .152.26.672 624.22 11.754 1.14 36.484 2.793 2.704 1.73 23.057.447 4.028.167 586.Central Visayas 8 .37 50.999 217.140.158 10.21 11.545.501 16.74 61 51.4 59.1 54.222 13.22 42.043 526.106.NCR 14 .884 6.429 6.440 11036891 766520 294.Western Visayas 7 .120 3.
4 29.2 34 24.3 22.Appendix Table II. 2005.8 16.3 28. 2003 (in %) Region Under-5 Mortality Rate Poverty Incidence Rate Philippines NCR CAR Ilocos Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga ARMM 26. FNRI.1 45.3 13.4 Source: Food and Nutrition Research Institute-Department of Science and Technology Regional Updating of Nutritional Status.9 17. 91 .4 4.9 40.6 31.6 30.7 28.1 21.6 29.5 24.7 22.4 34.8 32.3 30.8 25. Correlation between Under-Five Mortality Rate and Income Poverty at Sub-National Level.0 37.9 31.3 44.1 47.4 14. Source of basic data: 2000–2003 Family Income and Expenditure Survey.2 32.27.5 39. 2003. National Statistics Office. Philippines 2001.9 34.6 35.4 23.5 32.4 19.8 24.
150 13.800 14.128 15.137 13.405 12.616 11.781 2006 15.349 13.727 15.676 12.209 11.223 16.501 13.417 12.298 17.698 12.125 17.553 ALL AREAS 2003 12.937 12.28.742 12.687 13.463 14.359 12.670 15.830 17.463 16. 2003.720 15.665 17.978 12.921 13.713 13.057 20.434 13.090 16.281 12.412 11.761 19.218 15. Annual Per Capita Poverty Threshold: 2000.143 13.824 13.970 12.372 15.928 14.868 20.378 12.309 16.903 12.754 14.882 14.243 16.124 14. and 2006 Annual Per Capita Poverty Threshold Region/Province 2000 PHILIPPINES NCR 1st District 2nd District 3rd District 4th District Region I Ilocos Norte Ilocos Sur La Union Pangasinan Region II Batanes Cagayan Isabela Nueva Vizcaya Quirino Region III Aurora Bataan Bulacan Nueva Ecija Pampanga Tarlac Zambales Region IV-A Batangas Cavite Laguna Quezon Rizal Region IV-B Marinduque 11.275 15.880 12.402 11. Appendix Table II.538 17.957 16.922 16.724 16.611 10.264 10.024 16.791 14.394 15.898 13.041 92 .298 16.325 14.013 11.148 13.578 12.808 11.893 12.464 14.866 12.685 17.616 18.320 11.607 15.363 11.356 13.582 15.566 20.908 20.458 15.656 13.737 17.722 16.192 14.956 16.718 17.750 14.085 20.715 16.733 13.279 10.760 11.515 12.768 17.027 14.
296 10.659 9.587 11.390 13.146 11.600 9.122 11.221 12.745 13.687 14.668 11.145 15.960 12.850 13.723 13.805 10.811 14.028 13.032 10.998 13.131 9.150 14.873 13.375 12.975 13.898 9.019 11.310 9.980 11.505 11.459 10.858 9.298 11.605 11.974 12.813 11.810 13.126 9.377 11.155 11.184 11.379 12.417 8.Occidental Mindoro Oriental Mindoro Palawan Romblon Region V Albay Camarines Norte Camarines Sur Catanduanes Masbate Sorsogon Region VI Aklan Antique Capiz Guimaras Iloilo Negros Occidental Region VII Bohol Cebu Negros Oriental Siquijor Region VIII Biliran Eastern Samar Leyte Northern Samar Southern Leyte Western Samar Region Ixa Zamboanga Norte Zamboanga Surb Zamboanga Sibugayc Isabela City Region X Bukidnon Camiguin Lanao del Norte Misamis Occidental d 11.741 12.530 9.128 9.871 10.634 13.017 9.015 16.219 16.938 10.108 9.222 9.201 12.945 10.291 11.981 8.504 12.711 93 .054 11.509 9.610 13.115 14.527 10.447 8.832 15.869 13.767 10.769 12.580 10.759 12.919 14.758 11.892 9.650 14.915 12.804 11.199 12.429 14.727 11.128 14.452 12.694 13.242 14.338 9.109 12.103 11.536 10.815 12.144 11.947 12.762 9.975 12.407 10.188 14.248 15.275 13.873 11.591 11.510 11.522 13.914 8.654 14.405 15.555 10.083 12.225 14.314 11.219 13.854 14.186 16.163 10.733 13.144 11.159 12.675 10.025 10.
473 11.No separate estimate yet.431 13.855 12.810 17.986 14.458 9.544 12.2000 estimates still include Zamboanga Sibugay c .652 15.961 15. b.122 12. still included in Davao del Norte g .017 11. 2.031 16.906 11.249 13.933 11.003 10.328 10.741 10.765 15.903 10.567 15.2000 estimates include Compostela Valley f .199 9.972 10. Isabela City (Region IX) and Cotabato City (Region XII) have been separated from their respective mother provinces .256 14.264 10.544 16.998 11.785 15.014 11.741 15.707 11.651 14.809 11.No separate estimate yet.837 17.900 17.033 14.654 12.284 14.421 11.150 12.426 11. still included in Zamboanga del Sur.368 14.686 10. Zamboanga Sibugay (Region IX) and Compostela Valley (Region XI) are new provinces created under EO 36 and EO 103. d .483 15.942 15.176 10.987 13.746 15.533 13.470 10.987 9.787 14.753 14.990 10.322 13.225 13.556 15.Misamis Oriental Region XI Davao del Norte Davao del Sur Davao Oriental Compostela Valley Region XII North Cotabato Saranggani South Cotabato Sultan Kudarat Cotabato City CAR Abra Apayao Benguet Ifugao Kalinga Mt.255 16.594 11. still included in Basilan e .846 11.Basilan and Maguindanao (both ARMM) under the present 94 .452 13.805 14.672 12.702 12.447 13.2000 estimates include Isabela City Notes: 1.580 11.399 11.822 14.870 13.036 17.892 11.335 16.2000 estimates do not include Isabela City.148 13.419 10.071 13.833 11.460 12.566 9.670 13.227 Lanao del Sur Maguindanao Sulu Tawi-tawi Caraga Agusan del Norte Agusan del Sur Surigao Del Norte Surigao Del Sur a .906 11.No separate estimate yet. Province ARMMg Basilan g f e 11.733 10.315 13.278 10.509 13.160 10.996 11.422 14.556 15.
783 9.399 9.807 11.106 10.212 7.570 9.303 9.356 ALL AREAS 2003 8.764 8.328 7.835 10.570 9.802 8.078 8.149 9.098 9.025 11.210 7.974 8.570 9.898 10.781 9.839 10.807 11.248 10.505 9.707 9.307 10.010 8.259 9.673 95 .560 9.570 8.797 8.209 8.815 8.305 8.997 8.021 7.336 8.764 8.608 11.347 8.29.788 10.018 9.897 10.152 7.974 9.045 8.564 8.881 9.266 10.807 11.970 8.328 8.459 9.793 8.543 8.807 10.973 7.974 9.807 11.781 11.389 9.661 9.447 10.680 9.552 8.939 9.224 9.461 8.719 8.565 9.741 11.300 8.599 10.795 8.124 11.366 8.Appendix Table II. 2003 and 2006 Annual Per Capita Food Threhold Region/Province 2000 PHILIPPINES NCR 1st District 2nd District 3rd District 4th District Region I Ilocos Norte Ilocos Sur La Union Pangasinan Region II Batanes Cagayan Isabela Nueva Vizcaya Quirino Region III Aurora Bataan Bulacan Nueva Ecija Pampanga Tarlac Zambales Region IV-A Batangas Cavite Laguna Quezon Rizal Region IV-B Marinduque Occidental Mindoro Oriental Mindoro 7.235 9.497 8.299 11.316 8.760 9.346 10.768 10.570 9.043 2006 10.898 9.674 8.974 9.693 8.937 8.386 7.281 8.532 9.636 9.787 10.991 7. Annual Per Capita Food Threshold: 2000.530 10.707 9.455 8.820 8.824 9.974 9.
914 6.670 6.297 7.026 7.929 7.385 7.161 8.406 9.861 9.717 7.497 7.046 7.936 7.502 9.381 7.418 10.271 7.216 9.276 10.424 7.987 7.612 6.803 9.828 8.087 7.812 9.851 6.638 10.229 9.999 8.732 6.162 6.115 9.714 8.717 9.757 9.978 9.196 9.497 10.227 8.265 7.331 7.147 6.Palawan Romblon Region V Albay Camarines Norte Camarines Sur Catanduanes Masbate Sorsogon Region VI Aklan Antique Capiz Guimaras Iloilo Negros Occidental Region VII Bohol Cebu Negros Oriental Siquijor Region VIII Biliran Eastern Samar Leyte Northern Samar Southern Leyte Western Samar Region Ixa Zamboanga Norte Zamboanga Sur Isabela Cityd Region X Bukidnon Camiguin Lanao del Norte Misamis Occidental Misamis Oriental Region XI b 7.514 8.473 7.696 8.950 7.737 7.067 9.325 Zamboanga Sibugay c 7.047 8.544 7.426 8.021 6.617 8.527 10.219 10.983 7.959 8.787 8.673 8.933 6.973 9.856 96 .816 7.200 7.095 8.177 7.080 7.384 8.951 8.689 7.649 8.296 6.486 7.174 10.283 7.008 7.414 9.172 8.003 7.574 6.671 8.638 9.244 7.542 6.962 9.995 7.775 9.914 10.615 9.453 10.501 10.205 9.193 7.836 7.906 7.830 10.646 8.414 9.692 7.992 7.987 7.693 8.304 7.463 8.379 8.843 8.759 6.706 7.832 7.016 7.982 8.500 8.916 7.913 9.165 9.837 9.
Province ARMMg Basilang Lanao del Sur Maguindanao Sulu Tawi-tawi Caraga Agusan del Norte Agusan del Sur Surigao Del Norte Surigao Del Sur a . still included in Basilan e .571 10.256 10.601 7.807 7.242 8. still included in Zamboanga del Sur.860 7.792 9.114 7.706 8.190 9.347 8.839 10.919 10.874 10.528 7.119 8. f 7.744 8.724 7.325 9.136 b.542 7.998 7.454 7.845 7.190 11.965 8.635 8.702 8.880 7.No separate estimate yet.496 9.919 8.234 10.784 10.505 11.900 8.080 10. Isabela City (Region IX) and Cotabato City (Region XII) have been separated from their respective mother provinces .207 6.623 8.342 9.235 7.2000 estimates still include Zamboanga Sibugay c .799 8.188 7.755 8.204 7.318 9.027 8.519 7.385 10.2000 estimates do not include Isabela City.No separate estimate yet.620 9.Basilan and Maguindanao (both ARMM) under the present 97 .2000 estimates include Isabela City Notes: 1.615 7.063 7.769 7.655 7.116 10.694 10.Davao del Nortee Davao del Sur Davao Oriental Compostela Valley Region XII North Cotabato Saranggani South Cotabato Sultan Kudarat Cotabato City CAR Abra Apayao Benguet Ifugao Kalinga Mt. d .988 8.667 7.980 8.2000 estimates include Compostela Valley f .730 7.616 10. Zamboanga Sibugay (Region IX) and Compostela Valley (Region XI) are new provinces created under EO 36 and EO 103.085 9.848 9.830 10.490 8.141 9.994 9.846 8. still included in Davao del Norte g .361 7.410 8.194 9.402 9.932 7.956 8.099 10.No separate estimate yet.969 8.313 6.288 8.837 11.061 10.726 8.322 7. 2.336 9.429 10.
Population and poverty: a review of the links. References Orbeta. A. evidence. 98 . Philippine Journal of Development 30 (2). (2003). and implications for the Philippines. Makati City: Philippine Institute of Development Studies.
The Philippine government agreed to attain this goal. To address this special need of children. Malnutrition is estimated to be one underlying cause of child mortality. These are nutrition. also known as the pillars of child well-being. at the community centers. Policies. education. nutrition education. or if there were significant improvements in their condition. various breastfeeding promotions were enacted into laws. Having a spatial picture helps planners and decisionmakers to effectively point out the ‘hot spots’ and to prioritize where meager but precious resources should be directed. Among the interrelated dimensions of child deprivation. and home and community food production. Due to the wide disparities in the situation of children across the regions of the country. micronutrient supplementation. As far as data are available. and pathways were laid out to address the gaps or to engender more positive outcomes. Among the many components of this program are growth monitoring and promotion. Chapter III: The Pillars of Child Well-Being Introduction The previous chapter demonstrated that income indicators alone cannot capture the true condition of deprivation among children. especially when there are economic and social shocks. social protection. It also illustrated that there are dimensions and correlates of income poverty that have to be tracked and monitored to come up with adequate and appropriate responses. The fifth. it is helpful to trace these indicators geographically. 1. 99 . among others. As a response to the 1981 International Code on Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes by the World Health Organization (WHO). The World Fit for Children goal states that children should be exclusively breastfed for six months and continue to be breastfed with safe. Nutrition National Laws. childspecific protection. This chapter discusses the Philippine efforts in building up and strengthening the five pillars of child well-being. The Bright Child Program (Executive Order [EO] 286) seeks to promote a National System for Early Childhood Care and Development by pursuing an integrated approach through convergence at home. among others. and Key Programs The fourth Millennium Development Goal (MDG) aims to reduce under-five mortality by two-thirds from 1990 to 2015. and social protection. it also discusses the outcomes of these efforts via a standard set of indicators that show if there are still proportions of children that were left behind. health. when it committed to achieve the MDGs by 2015. various policies were put in place—from infant feeding to micronutrient supplementation to weight and height monitoring. serves to reduce the risk of families with children from falling into the cracks of poverty and deprivation. there are five counterpoints. There are cases in all the five pillars. The first four comprise the core minimum components of a child’s well-being as enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). and in schools. complementary feeding/food assistance.
Starting in 2005. which provides a daily ration of one kilo of rice to families of Grade 1. focus to needier areas. PhP5 in 2008. Aside from vitamin A supplementation. through the Garantisadong Pambata Program. NNC’s budget increased 8 times to PhP473 million. This program is a bi-annual weeklong delivery of health services to children 0–59 months old. stunting. and day care center children. iron deficiency. which served as its chair from 1988 to 2005. which sells low-priced rice and noodles. and Gulayang Masa/Barangay Food Terminal programs of the Department of Agriculture (DA). and attention to children 0–3 years old.8 billion in 2009. which aims for the virtual elimination of vitamin A deficiency and its consequences. edible oil. Tindahan Natin Project of the National Food Authority (NFA) and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). preschoolers are also given regular weighing and deworming. Prior to 2006. NNC is the highest policymaking and coordinating body on nutrition. the NNC was allocated a relatively stable budget of PhP42– PhP51 million every year. a role it took from the DA. which was further increased to PhP3. reduce underweight. and Vitamin A deficiency disorders among children. The Food Fortification Act (RA 8976) requires that mandatory food fortification be carried out by manufacturers and producers of rice. The Philippine Plan of Action for Nutrition (PPAN) 2005–2010 and Accelerated Hunger Mitigation Plan (AHMP) are the Philippines’ two main national plans for nutrition. the Milk Code (EO 51) of 1986 limits the marketing of breastmilk substitutes. The National Nutrition Council (NNC) is the lead agency in implementing nutrition and hunger-mitigation programs. and sugar to compensate for inadequacies in Filipino diet. and PhP43 in 2009. the DOH serves as the chair of NNC. On a per capita level. The AHMP aims to help solve the problem of unavailability of food to eat. appropriate. provides vitamin A to children 6–71 months old. Hunger mitigation was only given priority in the national budget in the last three years. Prior to this. In 2008. it has increased to PhP2 in 2007. (b) (c) Following the 1990 World Summit for Children. The PPAN aims to reduce the proportion of households with food intakes below the dietary requirement. Created in 1974 through Presidential Decree 491. and contribute to the reduction of low birth weight prevalence. flour. the DOH. while expenditures of NNC amounted to barely PhP1 until 2006. The Rooming-In and Breastfeeding Act of 1992 requires public and private hospitals to promote the practice of breastfeeding. Among the strategies rolled-out to attain these goals are food-based interventions through food fortification. Among its interventions are: (a) Food-for-School Program of the Department of Health (DOH). 100 . which promotes backyard gardening to provide alternative food sources. preschool. and adequate complementary feeding for up to two years and beyond (MICS 2007).
73 2.859. Nutrition and Population Expenditure per Capita.39 Health. HNP expenditure as a percentage of total LGU expenditure was down by 2% at the provincial level and 1% at city and municipality level.31 17. and Population Control Expenditures as Percentage of Total LGU Expenditure (in %) Provinces Cities 19.000 52.000 42.46 38. nutrition. Nutrition.000 45.000 45.976.02 7.286.41 2. in 2000 prices Provinces Cities Municipalities 88.816. 1997-2009 Actual (PhP) Proposed (PhP) 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 84.304.000 49.04 8.71 Health.52 33.000 NNC under DA NNC under DOH Source: National Expenditure Program.593.941. and Population Control.287. National Nutrition Council Expenditures.50 7.12 Source: Statement of Income and Expenditures.337.400.52 8.98 66. and population (HNP) of provinces.1.627.573.49 35.52 81.756. While expenditures slightly increased in 2006. cities.838.77 73.74 145.97 18.617.867.828.590.024.61 69.000 51.2.000 473.77 80.43 89.000 42.51 2.37 8.000 46.19 7.000 45.122. and municipalities have been decreasing at constant prices from 2003 to 2005.000 48.318.144.000 – – 46.196.000 177.455. Department of Finance.05 36.87 140.602. What can be gleaned from Table III. Department of Budget and Management.188.98 2005 70.948. compared to its share in 2003.000 3. 101 .696. Nutrition.087.000 45.892.813.2 is that aggregated expenditures on health.11 20.57 2.08 128.047.000 49. Table III.000 45.673.10 2006 71.000 41.000 46.02 68.325.000 46.000 47.000 48. Table III.920. Expenditure on Health.14 132.69 Municipalities 8.64 2004 79.000 46. Actual expenditures of LGUs on nutrition are difficult to ascertain because their reports are usually lumped with health and population expenditures.327. in 2000 prices 2003 Provinces Cities Municipalities 78.327.40 7.
7 3. and (ii) breastfeeding initiation within one hour of birth.6 months. Davao. NCR.6 4.1 Source: National Nutrition Survey.9 2. C.1% in Bicol region and 32.7 23. and ARMM posted the shortest duration ranging from 0. Cagayan Valley III Central Luzon IV-A CALABARZON IV-B MIMAROPA V.7 15.7 3. 2003.4 3. Visayas IX Zambo. by Region Region I.7 22. W.4 2. 102 . In NCR. Causes of Disparity and Inequality Breastfeeding for the first few years of life protects children from infection. Central Visayas.5 to 0. Ilocos II. Mindanao XI.8 19. Infants in Western Visayas are exclusively breastfeeding longer than the rest of infants in the Philippines. provides an ideal source of nutrients. Bicol VI. the average duration of exclusive breastfeeding across the country is only 2.2 months.4 4.9 3. Using the 2003 NDHS dataset. 3. SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga NCR CAR ARMM Sample Size 201 164 275 280 176 205 221 262 225 138 156 150 195 186 285 132 185 % Underweight 28. Davao Region XII. and is economical and safe (MICS 2007).1 30.6 months (Table III.7% compared to 36. Disparities.5 17.9 2. Despite the recommendation of exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of an infant. Food and Nutrition Research Institute.5 3.5 4. Ilocos.8 25 35 29.4 4. 27.6% of children below 5 years old in the Philippines are underweight. underweight prevalence is 15.7 22. among the WHO and UNICEF feeding recommendations that will be examined are: (i) exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months.4 3. Women with lower education and those from the poor quintiles are exclusively breastfeeding their infants longer than infants from richer quintiles. Visayas VIII.5 32.3 4.7 21.8 2.4).7 31. E. Female and infants from the rural areas are breastfed longer compared to males and those in urban areas.3 29. There are disparities in malnutrition incidence among regions.3 4. N.2 36. Visayas VII. Underweight Children. Child Outcomes.7 Standard Error 3. with duration of 3. and Gender Inequalities Child Outcomes According to the National Nutrition Survey of 2003. Table III.9 26. Peninsula X.2% in MIMAROPA.
9 1.6 59.2 55.0 34.6 Data source: National Demographic and Health Survey.0 52.1 54.7 54.5 63.6 1.2 1.6 0.7 56.4.8 0.7 0.8 53.5 0.7 0.6 9.6 54. Breastfeeding Indicators % of children breastfed within one hour of birth Exclusive breastfeeding (median duration of months) Total Incidence/Prevalence Individual Dimension Sex Male Female Household Dimension Women's education None Primary Secondary Tertiary+ Wealth Index Quintiles Q1 (lowest) Q2 (second) Q3 (middle) Q4 (fourth) Q5 (highest) Geographic dimension National Capital Region Cordillera Autonomous Region I-Ilocos II-Cagayan Valley III-Central Luzon IV-A-CALABARZON IV-B-MIMAROPA V-Bicol VI-Western Visayas VII-Central Visayas VIII-Eastern Visayas IX-Zamboanga Peninsula X-Northern Mindanao XI-Davao XII-SOCCSKARGEN XIII-Caraga ARMM Residence Urban Rural 54. 2003.0 1.5 0.1 1.6 66.6 49.8 0.4 0.0 60.6 53.1 35.3 1. Table III.0 2. National Statistics Office.9 55.5 63.9 0.7 2.0 61.9 1.9 60.8 54.0 0.8 60.0 48.2 1.9 52.4 53.1 51.1 28. 103 .7 66.3 0.7 55.6 3.7 2.9 56.6 0.4 2.9 0.5 2.5 1.8 53.6 2.7 1.
the likelihood of supplementation increases among mothers with higher education and among richer households.5 83.6 65. It is essential that breastfeeding be initiated within one hour of birth because the first milk called colostrum contains high levels of antibodies to protect infants from disease. Unlike breastfeeding. and NCR.3 79. Vitamin A capsules are provided to children 6–71 months old in government health centers and clinics. While there is not much data difference between supplementation intake among male and female infants.5).0 76.8 74. the coverage is only 50.7 87.4 73. Bicol. Infants in Ilocos. NCR and its neighboring regions (Central Luzon and CALABARZON) posted the highest percentage of supplementation among regions at more than 80%. Central Visayas. Six months prior to the NDHS survey.9 74.3 83.7 36.4 77. more children from urban areas receive vitamin A compared to those in rural areas. Early breastfeeding seems to have an inverse relationship on mother’s educational attainment and wealth status.7 85. Approximately 15% did not receive the supplement in the last six months but did receive one prior to that time.5. and Central Luzon are less likely to be breastfed early compared to those in Northern Mindanao.3 64. 76% of children 6–59 months old were given vitamin A supplementation (Table III.2 104 . Vitamin A Supplementation among Children 6–59 Months Old Consumed Vitamin A Supplements Total Incidence/Prevalence Individual Dimension Sex Male Female Household Dimension Women's education None Primary Secondary Tertiary+ Wealth Index Quintiles Q1 (lowest) Q2 (second) Q3 (middle) Q4 (fourth) Q5 (highest) Geographic dimension National Capital Region Cordillera Autonomous Region I-Ilocos II-Cagayan Valley III-Central Luzon 76. There is not much data difference within males and females and urban and rural residents in this regard.3 80. Table III. In contrast. Data from the 2003 NDHS show that half of the infants were given breastmilk within an hour after birth.3 75.9 67.5% in ARMM.
2003. Causes of Malnutrition The conceptual framework developed by UNICEF identifies three underlying causes of malnutrition: social care environment. 1998–2006 NATIONAL 1998 1999 2005 2006 Vitamin A Children (9–11 months old) given supplementation Children (12–59 months old) given supplementation 72. Micronutrient Supplementation.80 89. various years. public health and hygiene.7 72.10 80.1 64.00 97.3 79.00 84.5 79.2 79.00 95.70 Data source: Field Health Service Information System. 105 .7 50. National Statistics Office. Table III.9 76. Agency Data.9 77.80 81.4 76.9 72. and household food security (Figure III.9 76.0 Data source: National Demographic and Health Survey.6. IV-A-CALABARZON IV-B-MIMAROPA V-Bicol VI-Western Visayas VII-Central Visayas VIII-Eastern Visayas IX-Zamboanga Peninsula X-Northern Mindanao XI-Davao XII-SOCCSKSARGEN XIII-Caraga Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao Residence Urban Rural 82.3 68.6). Department of Health. The survey finding is complemented by reports from the Field Health Service Information System of the DOH which showed an increase in Vitamin A supplementation from 1998 to 2006 (Table III.1).60 74.5 70.
UNICEF 106 .1. Conceptual Framework of Malnutrition. Figure III.
Child Nutrition and Social Care Environment The nutritional status of children depends on the kind of “care” they receive. In the same context, it also depends on the kind of care mothers receive while pregnant. Maternal care during pregnancy and delivery has a major influence on health, wellbeing, and nutritional status of both mothers and babies (Mason et al. 2001). Low birth weight is strongly associated with under nutrition of pregnant mothers. About 60% of women in South Asia and 40% in Southeast Asia are underweight (>45 kg). Low birth weight is probably the main reason why over 50% of children in Asia are underweight. This also increases the risk of other health and developmental problems (Allen and Gillespie 2001). Breastfeeding is vital to infant nutrition. Based on WHO and UNICEF feeding recommendations, it is essential that breastfeeding be initiated within one hour of birth, to ensure that infants get colostrum, which has high levels of antibodies to protect them from diseases. Exclusive breastfeeding—which means nothing except breastmilk is given, not even water—has been established as beneficial to infants up to 4–6 six months old (Mason et al. 2001). In a 1996 study by Yoon et al., it noted the increase in mortality rate associated with diarrhea and acute respiratory infection if a child is not breastfed during the first six months of that child’s life. The risk of mortality associated with not breastfeeding was also greater for infants with low birth weight, and infants whose mothers had little formal education. Partial breastfeeding also had no protective effect and presented risks of giving contaminated weaning foods (Kanade 1992). NDHS 2003 data show that 54% of infants were breastfed within one hour after birth, 33.5% of infants six months old and below were exclusively breastfed, and 32.7% of infants 6–9 months old were not breastfeeding. Mothers play a crucial role in effective infant feeding practices. In a study done by Liaqat, Rizvi, Qayyum, and Ahmed in 2007, there is a positive correlation between the nutritional status of infants and the educational status of mothers. Majority of infants with evidence of malnutrition belonged to mothers with no education. With better educational status of mothers, complementary foods were introduced at an appropriate age. At the household level, a study on Philippine households by Agdeppa and Barba (n.d.) shows the different factors influencing the prevalence of over/underweight children. These include the following: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) a mother’s educational level, a mother’s occupation, number of children in the household, energy and nutrient intake, children’s preference of meats, sweets and sugars, a mother’s preference of meats and fried foods, a mother’s perception on body size, and a mother’s and child’s physical activities.
Child Nutrition and Provision of Safe Water and Sanitary Facilities Access to water and sanitary facilities have a major effect on malnutrition. In a fivecountry analysis by Fuentes, Pfutze, and Seck in 2006, findings were consistent on the importance of safe water in rural areas, and that access to improved sanitation
facilities can increase the chances of child survival in cities. Non-shared water source and private toilets also have a positive impact in the survival chances of children. For shared water sources, lack of clear accountability may lead to pollution of water source, and to a higher risk of early death. Having to transport water from relatively long distances can be another source of possible contamination. In the Philippines, the DOH’s Field Health Surveillance Information System (FHSIS) reports that in 2007, 85.7% of households have access to safe water while 77.5% have sanitary toilet facilities. Child Nutrition and Food Insecurity The cheapest foods generally have the lowest content of nutrients except energy, yet, it is the types that the poor can afford and consume (Mason et al. 2001). Risk factors for food insecurity, as identified by Campbell in her 1991 study, are anything that limits the household resources (money, time, health, and others) or the proportion of those resources available for food acquisition. Because food insecurity is the limitation or uncertainty of the availability or the ability to acquire food, it can be argued, based on that study, that this is also a nutrition issue that should be addressed. Building Blocks and Partners for Strategy The introduction of AHMP marks the first time that hunger mitigation is considered a top government priority. The NNC stated that the next step in ensuring that AHMP is implemented is to focus on needier areas and population groups using a lower level of data aggregation and improved monitoring and evaluation systems. At present, collection of anthropometric data is currently under the Food and Nutrition Council (FNRI) of the Department of Science and Technology. However, the dataset is not available to researchers outside of FNRI, making it difficult to understand the correlates of under-5 malnutrition in the Philippines. Because FNRI data could not be used in identifying policies, the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) is used to identify vulnerable areas. This current method of identifying hungervulnerable provinces, based on food poor ranking using the FIES, give results that are not consistent with the findings of the National Nutrition Survey (NNS). For instance, the NNS showed that underweight prevalence is highest in Bicol and MIMAROPA regions but only 2 of 6 provinces in the Bicol Region were included in Top One Priority areas of AHMP while all provinces in MIMAROPA were included in Top Two Priority Areas. Most of the provinces in Top One areas are from ARMM. But in the NNS survey, ARMM had an average incidence of underweight children with 23.7%—almost at par with richer regions such as Davao (22.3%) and CALABARZON (22.5 %). This discrepancy underscores the point out that the food poor threshold may be inferior in capturing data of undernourished children. A possible solution to lack of access to anthropometric data is to include this indicator in the next round of MICS surveys of UNICEF. Another pragmatic solution is to include underweight data in FHSIS reports. At present, weight and height data are routinely collected during Garantisadong Pambata and Operation Timbang. however, data collected are at the national level and, therefore, not used for policymaking.
National Laws, Policies, and Key Programs The Philippine government is one of the signatories in the global formal commitment to achieve the MDGs. Achieving improvements in child health is explicit in MDG Goal #4, which aims to reduce under-five child mortality by two-thirds in 2015 and implicitly, MDG Goal #5, which aims to reduce maternal mortality ratio by threefourths. To achieve these goals, the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) for 2005–2010 was designed to attain the goals of the MDGs, and to address the problems of poverty. The MTPDP, in general, includes goals focused on reducing prices of essential drugs, expanding the coverage of health insurance, improving local health systems, improving the healthcare management system, and improving health and productivity through research and development. The MTPDP is reflected in the DOH’s National Objectives for Health (NOH) for 2005–2010. The NOH has three specific goals: better health outcomes, more responsive health systems, and more equitable health financing. The Fourmula-1 for Health was designed as the implementation framework to achieve these primary goals. For the manageable implementation of the framework, four components were identified, namely, health financing, regulation, service delivery, and good governance. In maternal and childcare, the NOH states that: “Although infant and mortality rates have improved over the years, the rate of decline is slow, thus, the Philippines still lags behind our close neighbors in the Southeast Asian Region.” Policies were put in place to support the achievement of the NOH goals. These policies are then translated into programs specific to the special needs of women and children. Among these are the Bright Child Program (EO 286), which promotes a comprehensive policy on children’s welfare, and a National System for Early Childhood Care and Development, which pursues an integrated approach through convergence of services at home, at the community centers, and in schools. In 2007, the national government reiterated its commitment to WHO goals of eliminating measles, neonatal tetanus and polio, and controlling Hepatitis B and other vaccinepreventable diseases through EO 663. Another law enacted in 2004 is the Newborn Screening Act (Republic Act [RA] 9288) which institutionalized a national newborn screening system for every infant born to spare them of conditionals that can lead to mental retardation and death. The Maternal, Neonatal, and Child Health and Nutrition (MNCHN) Strategy, through DOH Administrative Order (AO) 2008–2009, was also issued, which identifies a standard set of interventions to ensure healthy mothers and newborns. The set of services include: (a) pre-pregnancy services;
antenatal care, including iron and folate supplementation and tetanus toxoid immunization to name a few; care during delivery by shifting from home-based to facility-based deliveries in either a Basic Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care (BEmONC) or a Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care (CEmONC) facility; and post-partum and postnatal care for mothers and neonates.
The AO, a reiteration of the Philippines’ commitment to the Safe Motherhood Initiative, was also adopted in 1988 with the basic premise that “childbirth must not carry with it the risk of death or disability for the woman and her infant (DOH 1988). This initiative recommends that all pregnant women have at least four antenatal visits during each pregnancy and the first antenatal check-up should occur in the first trimester of the pregnancy to detect complications early. To prevent anemia, it is also essential that women had iron or folate supplementation (NSO 2004). Delivery should be conducted in health facilities or birthing centers with a skilled professional birth attendant. The Philippine Midwifery Act of 1992 (RA 7392) institutionalized the professionalization of midwives, and defined their role in the provision of care to pregnant women during pregnancy, labor, and management of delivery. Other pertinent laws and policies on mother and childcare include the Breastfeeding Act of 1992 (RA 7600), which stipulates that newborns are to be roomed-in and breastfed immediately after birth. The practice of breastfeeding is said to be advantageous, and benefits both the infant and the mother. EO 51, or the National Code for Marketing Breastmilk Substitutes and Supplements, mandates that only authorized and approved advertisements of breastmilk substitutes and supplements shall be allowed, and that breastfeeding shall be encouraged and promoted. The National Newborn Screening Act (RA 9288) aims to ensure that every baby born in the Philippines is given the opportunity to undergo newborn screening and to be spared from hereditary conditions that can lead to mental retardation and death if undetected and untreated. These laws are crystallized into national programs for children such as The Philippine Plan of Action for Children of 1991, the Philippine National Strategic Framework for the Development of Children, 2000–2025, and Children’s Health 2025, a DOH plan for children. DOH programs focused on child health are abundant. National programs to protect newborns, infants, and children include: (a) infant and young child feeding (IYCF), which presents guidelines for optimal feeding, thus, improving the nutritional status, growth, and development of infants and young children; newborn screening; expanded program on immunization (EPI), which aims to protect children against vaccine-preventable diseases; integrated management of childhood illnesses (IMCI), which was established as an approach to strengthen the provision of comprehensive and essential health package to children; and micronutrient supplementation, dental health, early child development, and child health injuries.
(b) (c) (d)
Implementation of these programs was strengthened by the passage of the National System for Early Childhood Care and Development (RA 8980). This law recognizes the rights of children to survival, development, and special protection, and the role of parents as primary caregivers and as their first teachers. The system refers to the full range of health, nutrition, early education, and social services programs that provide for the basic needs of children up to six years of age. These programs include centerbased and home-based programs. Budget Allocation for Health The government declares public health programs and primary healthcare services as its main priority. Responsibility for funding health education, immunization, maternal care, and eradication of communicable diseases falls primarily on the government. However, a look into the uses of funds for health in the national government budget shows that only 39% was used for public health in 2005. Figure III.2 shows that DOH used 64% of its budget for personal services, primarily for the upkeep of its retained hospitals, and only 17% left for public health. Even LGUs, which were placed at the helm of public health program implementation due to the decentralization of health services, spent only 45% of their budgets for such expenditures.
Figure III.2. Total Health Expenditure, by Uses of Funds (National Government, Department of Health and Local Government Units), 2005
and 0. particularly for the poor when they get sick.3) of which out-of-pocket expenditures constitute around 80% (Figure III.99% of its total budget in 2005. the amount directly spent for child health programs was only 0.7) comprised 4. safety nets are not adequately provided. With a very limited mechanism for risk pooling in the country. 112 . 5. National Statistical Coordination Board.04% in 2007. Central government expenditure on all these programs (Table III. 2005.05% of total expenditures in 2005 and 2006. There has been an increasing contribution of health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and private insurance in the last five years.4). Relative to total government expenditures. but their overall share remains insignificant.8% in 2007.26% in 2006 and 3. Source: Philippine National Health Accounts. At least three-fifths of total health expenditures come from private sources (Figure III.
67 627.270.87 28.00008 0.600.475.404.435.264.700.00 20.03536 0.00195 0.666.27 24.88 0. 1992–2005 Source: Philippine National Health Accounts.375.00141 no data 0.551.00 43.00742 0.168.000.00 14.00481 0.000.836.000.00210 45. by Source.00239 0. Table III. National Statistical Coordination Board.000.13 0.09 0.77 408.952.743.499.00 738. 113 .00002 0.994. Budget Division. Department of Budget and Management.00591 0.717.00211 0. Artificial family planning Natural family planning Family health and primary health care 318.7. spending in 2005 Total spending as % of govt.275.00 70.00054 0.00374 Sources: Total Spending per Line Item: Statement of Allotment and Obligations Incurred. Central Government Expenditure on Health Programs.034.00 5.691.845.00 487.03367 56. 2005–2007 Total spending as % of govt. spending in 2007 Programs Total spending in 2005 currency Total spending in 2006 currency Total spending in 2007 currency Vaccinepreventable disease control Expanded program on immunization Vaccine selfsufficiency Prevention and control of other infectious diseases including foodand water-borne diseases. Figure III. National Government Obligations: National Expenditure Program. Composition of Total Health Expenditure. Department of Health – Central Office.160. spending in 2006 Total spending as % of govt.768. acute respiratory infection.089.576.04669 0.296.796. 2005.3.00 24.00303 0.00002 0.96 255. etc.16 25.
Child Mortality Rates. Figure III.8. Unfortunately. efforts to improve the survival of infants within the first month of life have not resulted in any improvements in the past 10 years. 29 in 1. and disorders related to short gestation and low birth weight. 1998 and 2003. 1992–2005 Source: Philippine National Health Accounts. National Statistical Coordination Board.000 live births during the first 12 months of life. Improvements in IMR in the past decade can be traced from reductions in PNN from 16 to 12 per 1. 114 .000 live births. Because the level of mortality is higher at the early ages than at the later ages of infancy. Philippines 1993–2003 Year Neonatal Mortality Post-Neonatal Mortality Infant Mortality Child Mortality Under-Five Mortality 2003 1998 1993 17 17 18 12 14 16 29 31 34 12 12 19 40 43 52 Source: National Demographic and Health Surveys. Disparities. This figure is lower than the IMR of 34 in 1993. and post-neonatal mortality (PNN) or the probability of dying after the first month of life but before one year old. In the Philippines. IMR is disaggregated into neonatal mortality (NN) or the probability of dying within the first month of life. 2005. Composition of Private Health Expenditure. by Source.4. It is described as the probability of dying between birth and one year of age. Child Outcomes. 1993. bacterial sepsis. and Gender Inequality Child Outcomes Infant mortality rate (IMR) is defined as the number of infant deaths per 1. National Statistics Office. Table III. the leading causes of infant deaths are pneumonia. According to DOH.8).000 infants died before reaching their first birthday in 2003 (Table III.
National Statistics Office.000 children surviving up to age 12 months. Child mortality rate (CMR) is the probability of dying between the exact age of 1 and age 5. DOH contends that the decline has not been at par with the Philippines’ neighboring countries (Figure III. The World Bank.5. and born at birth parity of seven and above. Source: World Development Indicators. by Socioeconomic Characteristics. 2003 Neonatal Mortality Wealth Index Quintile Post-Neonatal Mortality Infant Mortality Child Mortality Under-Five Mortality Lowest Second Middle Fourth Highest 21 19 15 15 13 21 13 10 7 6 42 32 26 22 19 25 15 6 4 1 66 47 32 26 21 Source: National Demographic and Health Survey. per 1. 115 . Children born in wealthier families are more likely to survive than children born from poorer households. 2005.5). From a U5MR of 52 in 1993. There is also a greater tendency of death for infants born below two years interval. 2003. High IMR is prevalent among infants born to mothers with no education. Adding IMR and CMR will yield under-five mortality rate (U5MR) or the probability of dying between birth and exact age five. the Philippines was able to reduce its rate to 40 in 2003. CMR was reduced from 19 to 12 in 2003. defined as the number of deaths of children 1–4 years old. and those who are either too young or too old for pregnancy. Rep. Childhood mortality rates are an inverse function of income. Table III. Early Childhood Mortality Rates. Figure III. 1960–2003 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1960 1970 1980 Thailand 1990 1995 Vietnam 2000 2003 Philippines Korea. This means a reduction of 23% in 10 years. no antenatal and delivery care. Trends in Children Under-Five Mortality Decline in Selected Asian Countries.9. Table III.9 clearly shows different mortality rates among wealth quintiles. Despite the reduction.
helping ensure healthy newborns. and prevent infectious diseases. skilled attendance at delivery. instead of single. thus. neonatal care. disease prevention and treatment. It is worrisome that those considered high-risk pregnancies of young women (15–20 years old) and older women (36 and above) have lesser percentage of having sufficient number of check-ups when compared to the sample falling under the safe age range of pregnancy. characteristics of women who gave birth one year before the survey period was analyzed. and compliance is higher among richer women. Using available data. treat. Using the NDHS 2003. The same trend was observed for women who had their first antenatal visit during the first trimester of pregnancy (Table III. The higher the educational level a woman has. A woman with no education has the least percentage of having adequate antenatal care visit (36. As expected. basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric and newborn care.10. and hygiene facilities and practices. sanitation. UNICEF and WHO recommend a minimum of four antenatal visits from a skilled health provider to enable women to receive key interventions such as tetanus toxoid immunization. as well as those belonging to the richer and richest quintiles. which suggests service interventions during critical points in the life cycle of mothers and children. screening and treatment for infections. adequate antenatal care. the more likely she will have her first check-up at the first trimester. and Integrated Management of Neonatal and Childhood Illnesses. disease-specific interventions. 116 . The essential services (UNICEF 2008) required to support the continuum of maternal and newborn care include: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) enhanced nutrition.7%) as opposed to college-educated women (83%).11). quality reproductive health services. safe water. postnatal care. this section probes the causes of disparity and inequality in the provision of continuum care for mothers and children. Maternal Care to Ensure Healthy Newborns Adequate Antenatal Care Antenatal visits will help detect. and vital information on complications during pregnancy and delivery. The number of antenatal care and the corresponding characteristics of the sample are shown in Table III. those residing in urban areas are more likely to have adequate number of visits. More women are following this recommendation in the urban areas than in the rural areas. Causes of Disparity and Inequality UNICEF applies the framework on the continuum of care.
5 12.3 53.0 100.0 100.2 1.9 5.0 100.0 100.0 100.9 68.6 22. Table III.3 26.3 20.5 1.0 179 414 384 277 165 61 5.5 61.0 100.6 5.5 4.0 100.7 60.7 33.4 11.Eastern Visayas IX .0 100.5 75.9 21.CALABARZON IVB .8 79.2 72.Ilocos II .0 100.SOCCSKSARGEN XIII – Caraga ARMM RESIDENCE Urban Rural WEALTH INDEX QUINTILE Poorest Poorer Middle Richer Richest Total 1 visit (%) 2 to 3 visits (%) 4+ visits (%) Don’t know (%) Total (%) No.9 19.4 1.1 66.9 1.0 100.0 100.4 13.1 42.6 3.7 51.1 7.6 0.6 66.2 6.8 57.7 4.1 16.3 4.0 1.8 57.0 100.7 54.6 28.0 100.9 6.8 – 1.0 6.7 7.10.2 23.0 5.3 69.9 5.9 7.0 100.2 6.0 5.0 100.0 9.5 1.6 20.7 28.2 31.7 20.0 100.Zamboanga Peninsula X .4 5.3 2.4 73.8 1.0 – 100.7 17.6 1.3 1.6 67.6 11.0 7.9 2.3 4.4 58.8 67.0 100.7 5.5 50.6 4. Region I .3 62.0 202 22 73 53 135 180 55 101 101 115 75 58 69 63 73 43 57 5.1 5.7 4. of women 20.5 83.8 3.0 100.3 – 1.5 1.0 100.2 4.0 383 342 307 251 194 1.Western Visayas VII .0 100.4 4.4 74.5 36.6 6.7 – 1.7 10.1 3.Central Visayas VIII .0 10.4 – – 100.3 5.7 12.5 3.5 8.3 2.8 5.7 1.0 100.0 6.2 8.0 5.4 16.4 26.1 53.6 7.8 57.5 20.5 9.Bicol VI .2 0.5 15.5 – – – 0.6 0.3 1.2 4.6 18.6 9.0 30 416 627 406 5.3 26.8 9.0 0.0 734 741 11.0 – – – – – 1.6 77.3 31.0 100.6 28.0 100.4 11.5 26.4 91. 117 .1 19.MIMAROPA V .6 45.1 100.9 69.5 4.3 37.0 0.477 Source: Author’s calculations based on the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey.6 0.0 6.3 12.1 71.3 6.4 11.8 21.Central Luzon IVA .0 5.4 16.2 1.0 100.0 100. 2003 No antenatal visits (%) EDUCATION No education Primary Secondary Higher AGE 15–20 21–25 26–30 31–35 36–40 41+ REGION National Capital Region Cordillera Admin.8 100.3 8.0 12.Cagayan Valley III .0 100.6 4.4 0.Northern Mindanao XI – Davao XII .0 4.4 5.8 30.8 54.8 9.8 69.7 33.9 6.0 100.0 65. Number of Antenatal Visits.6 4.0 100.9 27.0 100.0 100.1 81.0 100.
0 1. Number of Months Pregnant at the Time of First Antenatal Visit.0 382 342 307 252 193 1476 5.11.8 30.2 50.9 28.0 34.1 10.0 48.3 40.0 5.0 100.3 2.4 41.8 60.1 51.8 45.6 47.1 5.6 40.8 8.5 55.8 53.5 46.6 5.1 27.3 39.4 4.5 40.6 4.3 12.5 8.7 4.3 100.0 15.0 185 416 389 277 165 60 20.8 49.4 40.8 7.8 5.0 203 25 73 52 136 179 55 99 102 117 77 59 68 63 72 44 57 5.9 45.8 26.SOCCSKSARGEN XIII – Caraga ARMM RESIDENCE Urban Rural WEALTH INDEX QUINTILE Poorest Poorer Middle Richer Richest Total 11.2 42.5 1.0 100.3 35.0 100.6 2.0 100.0 100.6 40.5 44.6 44.9 2.5 100.CALABARZON IVB .6 28.0 57.4 8.7 41.0 6.0 10.4 11.9 30.Eastern Visayas IX .9 7.2 100.0 100.3 63.1 31.6 7.1 9.5 34.0 100.0 30 414 628 406 First Trimester (%) Second Tri-mester (%) Third Trimester (%) Total (%) Number of women Source: Author’s calculations based on the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey 118 .Central Luzon IVA .8 59.4 28.0 735 742 5.Cagayan Valley III .0 12.3 3.4 5.3 9.0 100.1 1.0 100.0 100.4 7.9 4.7 6.8 9.0 100.0 100.0 100.1 5.7 28.1 100.Zamboanga Peninsula X .0 53.0 100.8 37.0 9.0 100.7 26.2 100.2 47.0 100.7 9.2 28. Region I – Ilocos II .6 17.0 100.7 10.5 6.2 11.7 56.8 5.0 100.7 11.0 50.6 9.0 33.9 41.0 100.8 57.0 42.1 7.0 42.8 4.3 7.0 50.8 32.5 33.9 6.5 46.6 55.6 4.MIMAROPA V – Bicol VI .0 100.0 100.3 6.7 4.7 7.9 35.2 38.0 6.6 48.8 47.Northern Mindanao XI – Davao XII .0 100.3 26. Table III.0 11.6 39.Central Visayas VIII .0 1.0 100.2 34.0 16. 2003 No antenatal visit (%) EDUCATION No education Primary Secondary Higher AGE 15–20 21–25 26–30 31–35 36–40 41+ REGION National Capital Region Cordillera Admin.4 12.0 100.1 21.0 100.1 4.5 76.6 58.Western Visayas VII .6 2.0 36.2 21.9 6.5 11.4 6.0 42.0 100.0 100.3 34.3 25.0 100.6 6.4 1.0 100.3 4.2 32.0 100.
8 17. dietary diversification. Compared to other indicators. Vitamin A supplementation.0 100.2 – – – 0.0 100.0 100.3 27.5 – – – – – 0.9 77.0 100.0 100.0 100. Richer and more educated women are more likely to have taken iron supplements during their pregnancy (Table III.0 100.0 100.2 82.2 37.0 100.0 28.Central Luzon IVA .9 – 0.2 81.Davao XII .3 0.2 23.0 100.1 55.9 10.0 100.8 76.0 – – – 1.7 28.1 20.0 100.8 18.8 18.0 100.0 100.CALABARZON IVB .2 81.9 73.5 81.3 85.7 72.3 71.Ilocos II .8 62.0 100.MIMAROPA V .8 84.8 75.0 100. 2003 During pregnancy.9 44. Table III.9 30.0 30 417 626 406 178 414 386 273 163 62 203 24 74 52 134 179 54 101 101 117 76 59 68 62 71 44 58 736 743 384 119 .0 33.6 36.1 26.4 78.3 80.0 100.9 18.5 81.0 100.Bicol VI .2 15.3 60.0 100.9 33.5 26.7 18.0 71.12.6 27.0 100.0 100.0 100.1 69.7 39.5 – – – – – – – – – – – 1.5 18.0 100.8 65.2 11.8 22.0 100. the difference between urban and rural residents is not as pronounced in iron intake.6 21.1 78.7 13.0 100.0 100.2 0. Adequate nutrition for adolescent girls and mothers is important to ensure desirable health and nutrition prospects of both mothers and newborns.9 21.6 21.0 100. The high-risk pregnant women are again less likely to take iron supplements than those in the normal child-rearing age.0 77.Western Visayas VII .3 100.Northern Mindanao XI .2 24.1 89.Eastern Visayas IX .Central Visayas VIII .0 100.6 88. given or bought iron tablets/syrup No (%) Yes (%) Don't know (%) Total (%) Number of women EDUCATION No education Primary Secondary Higher AGE 15–20 21–25 26–30 31–35 36–40 41+ REGION National Capital Region Cordillera Admin Region I . Iron Supplements.5 73.4 72.4 63.9 79.12) to prevent anemia.Caraga ARMM RESIDENCE Urban Rural WEALTH INDEX QUINTILE Poorest 66.Zamboanga Peninsula X . salt iodization. and iron supplementation promote health of pregnant women and mothers.SOCCSKSARGEN XIII .0 100.Cagayan Valley III .
0 100. health center Private hosp.2 1.2 – – – – – – 0.8 3.3 25.Ilocos II .1 78.0 181 413 385 275 161 61 93. and middle wealth quintiles.5 17.8 25.5 8.2 51. 82.13.0 15.7 14.8 17.6 14. depending on a woman’s educational attainment and her household wealth.6 – – – – 100.2 27.3 4.3 1.2 3.8 6.Western Visayas VII .7 4. Places of Delivery.5 2.9 16.0 – 13.9 1.6 40.3 1.4 – – – – 1.5 91.7 14.6 10.9 3. hospital Govt.5 57.MIMAROPA V .8 – 0.7 1.0 100. poor. based on the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey.0 4.7 79. hygienic facilities and good sanitation practices.6 4.8 27.9 40.13.7 – – 0.0 100.6 52.7 3.2 5.3 2.6 1.5 3.7 9.0 100.0 100.9 – – – – 0.1 0.5 16.5 3.2 84.7 1.2 75.0 100.7 3. Women in the rural areas had more deliveries at home than women in the urban areas.0 100.5 3.9 43.4 24.0 100.1 100.0 100. In Table III.0 100.2 59.7 4. Poorer Middle Richer Richest Total 21.3 29.3 – – 0. These ensure that mothers are protected from infections.0 100.0 3.3 60.9 3.2 100.Central Luzon IVA-CALABARZON IVB .5 28.7 – – – – – – – – 1.8 8.0 100.9 – – – – 2.0 – – – 100.7 1.4 11.0 203 23 74 53 135 178 54 101 102 119 76 68.2 1. The indicator on deliveries in a medical facility shows wide differences.1 43.3 2.0 100.Eastern Visayas 25.3 – 1.1 1.3 20.0 6.0 30 416 627 407 Other home Govt.9 60.8 17.0 100.7 76. A very high percentage of women have their deliveries at home if they have secondary or lower level of education and if they belong to the poorest.9 4.3 64.2 30.0 100.6 4.1 8.0 4. 2003 Places of Delivery (in %) Respondents’ home EDUCATION No education Primary Secondary Higher AGE 15–20 21–25 26–30 31–35 36–40 41–49 REGION NCR CAR I .2 82.3 54.5 3.3 77.0 100. Table III.0 100.9 2.0 342 308 252 194 1480 Source: Author’s calculations.2 17./ clinic Other private facility Other Total Number of Women 120 .1% for those in the richest quintile. Basic and Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care Birth delivery in a medical facility is very much encouraged among pregnant women to ensure the use of safe water.4 0.0 100.8 1.7 9.Central Visayas VIII .0 4.9 67.2 – – – 0.5 70.7 2.0 6.2 0.9 22.7 25. Again.8 22.8 19. a higher percentage of birth deliveries happened at home for high-risk pregnancies.2 77.0 100.0 100.Cagayan Valley III .2 24.8 48.0 100.1 47.9 7.0 100.Bicol VI .1 0.1 27.2 3.5 28.6% of birth deliveries happened at home for women belonging to the poorest quintile and only 20.
Zamboanga Peninsula X .7 2.1 20. and to promote hygienic childcare (UNICEF 2008).8 31.9 9. However.1 1.8 0.0 100.5 1.0 100. which reported 66% coverage rate for at least four antenatal visits.6 5.6 11. accounting for only 1.3 – – – 0.0 8.0 100. 60% had skilled attendants at birth. IX .8 4. this may be attributed to the fact that government health centers. The number of deliveries in private clinics and hospitals was only half the number reported in government hospitals. supplies. majority were in government hospitals.8 34. UNICEF reports that in the Philippines.9 0.8 2.5 3.7 0.9 74. Thailand. Birthing facilities with complete medical equipments. 70% of pregnant women had at least four antenatal check-ups.0 100.9 19.6 70.7 13. rural health units in particular.Northern Mindanao XI . Government health centers are underutilized.5 3. Postnatal care for both mother and newborn is also recommended to check and monitor neonatal health and breastfeeding practices. Indonesia.9% of births in the sample.1 56. However.3 – – 2.2 1.0 100.0 100.7 41.3 2.0 100.8 52.3 43.6 17.3 5.3 64.5 2.2 8.2 22. only 121 . achievements in skilled birth attendance and facility-based deliveries are trailing below the regional average of 87% and 73%. and 38% had institutional deliveries.0 100.1 100. a leading cause of maternal deaths.3 9. Among births delivered in a medical facility.6 5.0 60 68 62 71 44 59 WEALTH INDEX QUINTILE Source: Author’s calculations based on the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey.0 735 743 384 342 306 251 194 1477 78.4 37.9 24. medicines.0 100.5 22.0 100.4 – 0.5 2.9 82.3 2.3 25. and Vietnam had much lower immunization rates than the Philippines.3 – 3. In its State of the World’s Children 2009.3 – 0.4 3.1 – – 0.8 21. were only upgraded or accredited recently as birthing facilities.6 67.3 3.2 5. In Vietnam.6 32.Davao XII SOCCSKSARGEN XIII. In 2003.3 3.1 – 0.0 24.0 100.0 100.9 83. Child Immunization In 1983.9 33. only 4% of children below 23 months old were immunized against diphtheria.Caraga ARMM RESIDENCE Urban Rural Poorest Poorer Middle Richer Richest Total 41.8 13.6 65.1 5. respectively.3 26.0 4.6 1. Skilled birth attendance is helpful in reducing the risk of post-partum hemorrhage.8 – – – – – – – – – – – – 100.1 0.8 1. The country achieved higher in antenatal care than the regional figures for East Asia and the Pacific.3 6. There is always the risk of having complications during childbirth. Timely care in a medical facility is always necessary to save a mother’s life if complications arise during childbirth. and trained personnel ensure quality medical care.3 – 0.9 11.7 2.5 1. pertussis and tetanus (DPT) and measles.
1983–2003 100 80 60 40 20 0 19 90 19 88 19 94 19 92 19 98 20 00 19 84 19 86 19 96 20 02 Philippines Indonesia Thailand Vietnam Source: World Development Indicators. increases in coverage every year.7.6. 1983–2003 100 80 60 40 20 0 19 89 19 93 19 85 19 91 19 95 19 97 19 99 19 83 19 87 20 01 20 03 Philippines Indonesia Thailand Vietnam Source: World Development Indicators.6 and III. Among the four countries presented in Figures III. DPT Immunization Rates in Selected Asian Countries. only the Philippines exhibited a drastic decline in immunization rates. 122 . Figure III. Figure III.7. 2005. 2005. Indonesia may have lower rates but it has shown. albeit modest. Measles Immunization Rates in Selected Asian Countries. The World Bank. Indonesia exhibited a lower immunization rate. The World Bank.
only 57% of the poorest children are.15 examines the characteristics of children with complete vaccination. only 58% was reported for those in the birth order of six or higher. immunization coverage still varies with wealth status. There is not much difference in the treatment of a female or male child in the Philippines.70 82. Some 85% of children whose mothers had university education have complete vaccination compared to only 33% of children whose mothers had no education. While agency data report that FIC rates have somehow been constant. While 80% of the firstborn children were fully immunized. More alarming is the inconsistent finding of NDHS that only 70% of children were fully immunized in 2003. immunization rate remained below 85% from 2004 onward. It may be noted that the rate has been decreasing each year. Based on FHSIS data. 123 . survey data reveal a substantial decrease in the percentage of children being immunized. Fully Immunized Children. Table III. and hepatitis B range from 87% to 92%. while East Asia and the Pacific region coverage rates range from 87% to 93%.80% 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 84.70 FHSIS – Field Health Surveillance Information System NDHS – National Demographic and Health Survey Sources: Department of Health and National Statistics Office Table III. polio.80 83.90 82. More children are reached by immunization programs in urban areas (77%) than in rural areas (68%). While 84% of children whose households belong to the richest quintile are immunized. Although routine EPI vaccines are 100% financed by the government and offered free at health centers. The percentage of children below 5 years old with complete immunization increases with mother’s education. there remains some gap in the distribution of vaccines. This may suggest that despite the subsidy. 2003–2007 NDHS Year FHSIS (9–11 months old) (%) (12–23 months old) 69. UNICEF’s 2009 State of the World’s Children reports that the country’s immunization coverage rates for 2007 for bacille Calmette-Guérin or BCG. DPT. measles. Birth parity is inversely related to immunization.14.
426 943 1.Northern Mindanao XI .83 23.18 27.02 29.70 35.06 75. 2003 No complete immunization (%) MOTHER'S EDUCATION No education Primary Secondary Higher CHILD’S AGE 1–2 2–3 3–4 4–5 BIRTH PARITY One 2–3 4–5 6+ GENDER Male Female REGION NCR CAR I .05 57.Caraga ARMM RESIDENCE Urban Rural WEALTH INDEX QUINTILE Poorest Poorer Middle Richer Richest Total 66.99 27.72 32.73 27.06 22.20 42.83 81. 124 .51 76.65 27.364 688 562 1.79 68.27 18.20 42.00 22.45 21.37 28.19 72.73 20.65 28.217 903 783 498 787 1.20 22.Bicol VI .74 26.19 35.W.27 79.59 22.33 61.41 77.27 68.98 70.44 70.35 84.10 16.77 18.17 18.64 78. Children’s Immunization.68 38.65 15.17 24.19 26.23 27.20 26.Zamboanga Peninsula X .95 42.53 51.C.28 67.52 61 971 1.25 28.20 75.32 61.33 26.21 31.36 26.16 15.71 37.SOCCSKSARGEN XIII .15 30.16 25.73 76.81 27. of children 10.MIMAROPA V .96 34.80 57.Cagayan Valley III .38 31. Visayas VIII .84 74.73 31.49 23.80 24.56 19.81 73.98 78.47 48.18 25.62 29.47 19.CALABARZON IVB .82 23.94 24.84 84.46 26.82 72.Central Luzon IVA .56 68.88 20.33 22.67 77.07 33.82 25.54 73.25 60.62 27.401 Source: Author’s calculations based on the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey.694 486 124 141 150 256 310 142 194 188 213 184 166 158 167 192 162 168 1. Visayas VII .707 1.766 888 748 634 588 543 3.56 29.56 29. Table III.27 72.E.05 25.67 38.16 24.30 25.75 39.25 19. Visayas IX .27 23.44 80.93 13.44 31.88 30.37 31.01 72.36 21.Davao XII .85 69.635 1.18 With complete immunization (%) 33.77 72.83 75.00 22.Ilocos II .38 70.61 25.18 74.82 Vaccination card % No.01 30.02 21.80 73.15.
5 45.6 51.4 4 16.5 55 41.7 46.5 15.8 24.9 49.1 9.7 7.3 9.6 19.2 9. Some 59% of children with diarrhea were given oral rehydration therapy (ORT) while 46% of those with ARI symptoms were brought to a health facility (Table III.5 9.6 58.9 20.5 25.7 45.8 44 69.1 27 23. Table III.8 20 31.16.9 10.4 13.7 71.6 10.4 15.7 16.2 10.1 43.2 10.1 38.0 67.4 68.1 10.0 9.9 62.7 11.8 4.5 43.5 11.4 27.4 11.6 20.3 50.2 15.9 11.4 49.6 42.2 46.1 15.8 21.4 46 57 53.5 29.7 64.8 17.9 6.6 20.2 125 .8 9.5 9.9 22.5 15.9 25.3 17.8 39.9 10.16).4 38.8 59.2 23. treatment was sought from a health facility/provider Total incidence/prevalence Individual Dimension Sex and age Male Female Women’s education None Primary Secondary Tertiary+ Wealth index quintiles Q1 (lowest) Q2 (second) Q3 (middle) Q4 (fourth) Q5 (highest) Geographic Dimension National Capital Region Cordillera Autonomous Region I-Ilocos II-Cagayan Valley III-Central Luzon IV-A-CALABARZON IV-B-MIMAROPA V-Bicol VI-Western Visayas VII-Central Visayas VIII-Eastern Visayas IX-Zamboanga Peninsula X-Northern Mindanao XI-Davao XII-SOCCSKSARGEN 10.8 24 23.6 62.9 9 7.3 38.2 49.4 70. 2003 Child Diarrhea Diarrhea in the two weeks preceding the survey % of children given ORT Child Fever % of children with symptoms of ARI % of children with symptoms of fever Among children with symptoms of ARI and/or fever.6 32.6 5.3 11.5 26.8 13.9 7.5 22.5 51. 10% of children below five years old had diarrhea and symptoms of acute respiratory infection (ARI) two weeks before the survey.3 43.0 11.5 27.3 55.8 47.6 9.4 21 33.1 74.1 38.6 5.5 20.1 9.9 14.2 13.7 7.5 10.3 60.9 41.1 43.5 68.6 11.7 26.2 29.4 18.2 57.8 47 50.1 46.6 11.4 61. Children’s Illnesses.1 11.7 23.7 44.2 54.3 10.6 8. Children’s Illnesses In the 2003 NDHS.4 12.8 59.2 6.0 8.8 46.
3 16. Children in rural areas (12. children who had diarrhea and belonging to the second richest quintile are most likely to receive ORS treatment (51%). which is the lowest.2 21. National Statistics Office. 10% children had ARI. only around 50% among those who had diarrhea received oral rehydration solution (ORS) or increased fluids and continued feeding. household.2 8. The NDHS in 2003 reports that 10. followed by the Cuyuno tribe of Palawan at 34. at least in the last two weeks prior to the survey.7%.9 Source: 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey Report.1 shows the prevalence of ARI by individual. In the last two weeks prior to the survey.8 50. and geographic dimensions in 2005. 126 . Diarrheal Disease Appendix Table III. household.2 38.5 42. the Manabo tribe of Abra has the highest rate at 49%.3%. However. However. However.2%) are also more likely to have ARI.6 67. followed by MIMAROPA (Region IV-B) at 19. compared to NCR’s rate of 4. The lower the quintile the household belongs to.8 25.7 10. ARI is prevalent among children 7–23 months old. and the more likely for a child with ARI to receive antibiotics.2%.3 12.5 23 39. the more likely for children to suffer from diarrhea. which varies little by gender of child.2% had ARI and 46% sought treatment at a health facility. compared to those in urban areas (8.7%. Diarrhea is most prevalent among children 7–12 months old (20%– 22%). belong to higher level of wealth index quintile. Acute Respiratory Infection (ARI) Appendix Table III.0 60. Based on ethnicity. XIII-Caraga Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao Residence Urban Rural 9.5 12. the less likely for a child to have ARI.2%). the higher the dependency ratio (4+ children per adult). The percentage varies little with a child’s sex. Children belonging to households in the poorest quintile are more likely to suffer from diarrhea (13.6 48.9 10. and geographic dimension in 2005. and least prevalent among children 0–3 months old. Children belonging to households with elder person (+70) are also more likely to have ARI. Western Visayas (Region VI) has the highest prevalence rate at 20. Children under-five who are most likely to have ARI belong to the poorest wealth index quintile.9 68. Children who are more likely to receive antibiotics for treatment are those whose caregivers have higher level of education. for treatment.3%).2 shows the prevalence of diarrhea by individual.1%. and only 55% received antibiotics. The Kapampangans have the lowest rate at 0. and those residing in urban areas.8 5.6 50. and have household heads with lower level of education.
health outcomes ( Yi ) are determined by a health production function which is composed of health endowment ( H i ) which is an exogenous variable not controlled by the individual. This choice depends on individual’s health endowment and preferences ( Pi ) and is subject to his own and his household’s economic resources ( Ei ) and environment ( X i ). an endogenous variable. all of which reside in the Cordillera Region.1 A child is considered fully immunized if he/she received three dosages of Antenatal timing takes the value of 1 when the check-up was held during the first three months of pregnancy. With lower dependency ratio. thus.9% for higher (4+ per adult) dependency ratio.2%). The percentage of children with diarrhea varies little by household size.9%. There is higher prevalence of the disease among the Igorots. and (e) delivery in a medical institution. (c) iron intake. Manabo. water and sanitation. There are five indicators considered for maternal health: (a) adequate number of antenatal care visits. Economic resources are composed of educational attainment and non-human assets such as wealth. (1) Demand for health inputs is chosen by individuals and households to attain the best possible health outcome.5%–4. Analysis on Causality and Correlation Following the framework of Schultz (1984) and Behrman and Deolalikar (1988). CAR has the highest (21. The health production function is represented as: Yi = c0 + c1 I i + c2 H i + u1i . and 0 otherwise. 127 . the higher the quintile the household belongs to. As regards ORT. while environmental variables include the household’s access to health facilities. Kankanaey. there is a higher prevalence rate for diarrhea at 10. however. compared with 4. (d) delivery with the aid of medical professional. Prevalence rate varies little with urban-rural residency. and availability of information in the community. (3) Logistic regressions were conducted to estimate the reduced form function for health outcome. The variable for 1 Antenatal visit takes the value of 1 when the woman had four or more check-ups. sex of household head.9%. NCR has the highest rate (53%) of children receiving ORS while Ilocos Region has the lowest (1. and Ibaloi at 20%–25%. Input demand function is. and 0 otherwise. and demanded health inputs ( I i ). (2) Following these two equations. and if household head is a single parent.1%) prevalence of diarrhea episodes while Zamboanga Peninsula has the lowest (4. among others. (b) timing of first antenatal care visits.9%). a reduced-form function for health outcome can be derived: Yi = b0 + b1 H i + b2 Pi + b3 Ei + b4 X i + u 3i . the more likely for children to receive ORS treatment. religion. The Pangasinenses and Boholanos have the lowest prevalence rate at 4. Iron supplementation takes a value of 1 when the respondent answered that she took iron or folate supplements during her pregnancy. a reduced form equation of all exogenous variables expressed as: I i = a0 + a1 H i + a 2 Pi + a3 Ei + a4 X i + u 2i .
and type of water source. The education variable used in this study pertains to the highest year completed by the woman. Utilities are composed of connection to power supply and telephone. poor. Since this study is concerned with Maternal and Child Care Programs. middle. and/or midwife. 14 if a college graduate. This variable takes a value of 0 if there is no year of education completed. In other words. personal computer. Approximately half of the sample is from the urban areas while half is from the rural areas. it is also important to consider if the woman really wanted to have a baby at the time she was pregnant. The conditional demand function are determined by the woman’s education. This variable is included to check whether such gender bias occurs in the Philippines. government hospital. refrigerator.2 The index is then ranked and divided into quintiles: poorest. visits to family or relatives. Decision-making power is measured by the number of positive responses to making own decisions regarding own healthcare. 10 if the woman is a high school graduate. The variable for delivery in a medical facility will be equal to 1 if the woman had her delivery in a health center. Among the woman’s characteristics that might influence her decision are age. Some characteristics of children may also influence the decision to seek healthcare. household wealth. In this sample. which is supplied in the dataset. richer. It will take a value of 0 if the respondent replied that she delivered her baby at home or in other places not classified as medical institutions. The wealth index used in this paper is calculated by ORC Macro. car/jeep/van. radio. a child’s gender has some effect on health decisions. tractor. making large purchases. individual and household characteristics. Determinants of Maternal Care Utilization Education. DPT and oral polio vaccines. The education variable used in this study pertains to deliveries that were assisted by a medical professional will take a value of 1 when the woman had delivery with a doctor. and bicycle. 1 if the woman finished grade 1. and decision-making power. and so on. and one dose each of measles and BCG vaccines. boat. the number of children she had. and what food to cook each day. occupational status. and private clinics and hospitals. motorcycle. Education enables people who are more educated to choose a better mix of health inputs and makes them more perceptive to modern methods and practices. 2 128 . 50% of women replied that they wanted to become pregnant at the time of their pregnancy and 50% replied otherwise. she planned her pregnancy to be at that time. washing machine. A mother’s education has long been established in the literature as one of the main factors affecting health outcomes. Literature showed that in some countries. Household characteristics included in the regression are the number of household members and level of urbanity. It takes a value of 5 when the woman makes all the decisions by herself. CD/VCD/DVD player. and 0 otherwise. nurse. and richest. and demographic characteristics. based on mother’s oral report. An average household is made up of six members. and she does not prefer her pregnancy to be later or not at all. On average. a woman in both sub-samples participates in at least three of the five specified areas of decision-making. the number of children who died. stereo component. The asset index is composed of television.
or birth parity. and household assets contributed to a higher likelihood of seeking early prenatal care. single parent status. Among a woman’s characteristics that may influence her decision are the number of children she has had. decision-making power. and after defecation are predicted by the availability of domestic electricity. and birth delivery with a skilled attendant. With the exception of iron supplementation. mothers working in a professional position tended not to bring their child ill with ARI for treatment. The mother’s type of employment has an impact on the use of prenatal care services. and possession of private lavatory and private well. parental education. and residence in Metro Manila had a negative association with current illness of either ARI or diarrhea. Hygiene practices such as hand washing before feeding children. As the number of household members increases. particularly during delivery. Children who had been unwanted at the time of conception were more likely to have had diarrhea or respiratory infections. ‘unwantedness’ had little effect on the likelihood of treatment once the child was ill. Household Characteristics. which may be due to the household’s wealth. Frequent hand washing with soap has significant impact on children’s health. Regression results show that when the child being conceived is wanted. the higher the probability of seeking care during her pregnancy. Also. the higher the education the mother has. Children suffer when they are born into a household where they are not wanted. A household’s hygiene behavior is also affected by socioeconomic status and household environment (Sakisaka et al. as suggested by Jensen and Westley in their study in 1996. a resident grandmother. mother’s educational level. However. The number of children the woman has reared. iron supplementation. and Jensen using the results of the 1993 National Demographic Survey. In a study in 1996 by Costello. indicate that couples with lower socioeconomic status practice ORT and accept community health stations more than wealthier and better-educated couples. using the Cebu Longitudinal Health and Nutrition Survey as data source. the highest year completed by the mother. all indicators are significantly affected by wealth. and ‘wantedness’ of child. Family 129 . and more likely to adopt a contraceptive method in the year following childbirth than those who are not employed. Lleno. but a positive association with the quality of healthcare provided. Household Wealth. Having an educated husband increases the probability of seeking care during pregnancy. These findings. Individual Characteristics. Work status of mother. This is expected since more experienced mothers may not perceive a strong need for antenatal care and counselling. wage workers and white collar workers were more likely to obtain prenatal care. and sex of child were minor determinants of disease or treatment. negatively affects the demand for maternal care. 2002). the probability of seeking healthcare decreases. In a study by Miles-Doan and Brewster in 1998. The study also suggests that factors such as husband’s education. the mother also has a higher probability to seek check-ups early and to give birth in a medical facility. according to the study. The poorest quintile is always less likely to seek healthcare than the richest quintile. father’s occupational status. As expected. Having higher decision-making power significantly increases the probability of having adequate number of check-ups.
Regressions were run using these variables as proxies. and facility-based delivery) but in terms of completeness of the utilized services. these regions. Replacing the variables— based on perceptions on distance and transportation problems with actual travel time—yielded insignificant results. her ‘wantedness’ of child and her decision-making power have no effect on utilization. This may imply that there are reasons other than money that prevent poor people from getting immunization. The uptake of maternal and child health programs in the country has been reasonably satisfactory. however the poor continues to have low utilization of maternal care services. but it has a significant influence on whether or not an ill child would receive treatment (Jensen and Brewster 1996). Data on travel time to nearest health facility is also available for 588 observations. Geographic Dimension. dissertation. Other characteristics such as working status. distance. Household wealth has no impact on increasing complete immunization uptake. 3 130 . exhibited consistently low probability of seeking healthcare: ARMM. Perceived difficulty due to distance lowers the probability of seeking immunization services. Only in birth delivery was price viewed as a big problem. children are more likely to be fully immunized if the mother’s education is higher. Determinants of Child Immunization Similar to maternal care utilization. compared to NCR.3 This reiterates that women residing in richer regions have higher and more complete utilization of maternal and child care services while the poorer regions are left out. iron supplementation. 2007. One of the deficiencies of these models is the non-inclusion of variables on prices and travel time. size did not have an effect on the likelihood that a child would become ill. Vast differences in patterns and extent of utilization across regions also exist. Such data were not available in the survey but questions on the perceived difficulty of the woman in accessing healthcare due to prices. R. Inequities in health outcomes and access to primary healthcare services among regions in the country were pronounced.D. As a woman gets older. In all five indicators. and Eastern Visayas. and transportation were asked. birth assisted by skilled attendant. Bicol. Lavado.” Unpublished Ph. not only in using each maternal service (prenatal check-up. “Essays in Health Economics. the higher the chances that she will take her child for immunization. This is also confirmed by the insignificant coefficient of a woman’s perception on the difficulty of accessing care because of lack of money. Hitotsubashi University. This is probably because she is more aware of government programs compared to younger mothers. This is different from the trend shown in the descriptive analysis earlier. Caraga.
053 (-0.1) -0.067 (-0.00 (0.42) -0.037 (-0.87) -0.17.83) -0.08) 0.39) 0.017 (0.37) -0.04 131 . Determinants of Child Immunization Immunization Woman's Education Education (years) Household Wealth (dropped=richest) Poorest (1=yes) Poor (1=yes) Middle (1=yes) Richer (1=yes) Individual Characteristics Woman's Age Woman currently working (1=yes) Wanted child (1=yes) Decision-making power Difficulty in accessing healthcare due to distance (1=yes) Difficulty in accessing healthcare due to transportation (1=yes) Difficulty in accessing healthcare due to price (1=yes) Child Characteristics Birth parity Child is male (1=yes) Household Characteristics Number of household members Residence in urban area (1=yes) Education Externalities Husband’s education (years) Demographic Characteristics (dropped=NCR) Cordillera Administrative Region Ilocos Cagayan Valley Central Luzon CALABARZON MIMAROPA Bicol Western Visayas Central Visayas 0.157 (-1.73) -0.12) -0.045 (0.92) 0.016* (1.105 (-0.241** (-2. Table III.38) -0.052 (-0.197*** (-2.28) 0.002 (0.47) -0.62) 0.86) 0.019 (-0.042 (0.004 (0.02) -0.37) 0.039 (-0.69) -0.023*** (4.02) 0.02) -0.042*** (4.71) 0.69) -0.025 (-0.231* (1.089*** (-4.6) -0.73) -0.34) 0.257** (-2.064 (-0.025 (-1.
Conflicting outcomes data from agency reports.24) -0. compared to NCR in terms of immunization coverage. This finding supports earlier studies that show there is higher health access for families with fewer children (Orbeta 2005). To ensure that data collected are accurate. many LGUs in this case study found it very difficult to show data from previous years because of poor archiving methods. First-born babies. 2003.38) -0.32) 0. have higher probabilities of having complete immunization than those born later in the birth order. Right now. The DOH.302** (-2.16 3343 Eastern Visayas Zamboanga Peninsula Northern Mindanao Davao SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao Constant Log-likelihood Observations Data source: National Demographic and Health Survey.97) 0.22) -1818.5) -0. (0. they should be given appropriate incentive.201 (-1. through the Provincial Health Office (PHO). ** significant at 5%.61) 0. Among the two child characteristics.27) -0. It is also important that data e archived properly. Note: Absolute value of t-statistics in parentheses * significant at 10%. Having a longer set of data enables tracking of progress. Barangay health workers (BHWs) are crucial in data collection because they are the ones who tabulate the first line of information.172 (-1. should set rules and sanctions that will ensure the compliance of private health service providers when it comes to data submission. health offices rely on the private sector to submit data on voluntary basis. This suggests that both boy and girl children have equal access to childcare in the Philippines.209 (-1. A major limitation of FHSIS is its failure to capture the delivery of health services by the private sector. The regions with significant disadvantage. birth parity matters more in the decision than the gender of the child. and *** significant at 1%. point out the deficiencies of FHSIS in capturing correct information. however. National Statistics Office. through the FHSIS and survey findings.068 (0.129 (0. Building Blocks and Partners for Strategy Improving Data Collection. and therefore. In 132 .194 (1. While data on the most recent year were available. This explains the relatively lower achievement for highly urbanized cities.5) -0. are Bicol and ARMM. this makes the figures under-reported.051 (-0. If the private sector does not submit its data. policymakers will not have an accurate picture of what is going on in the sector.
4 At present. laundry allowance equivalent to PhP150/month. only the subsistence and laundry allowances5 are provided by most LGUs. medical students subsidized by the government (e. with the help of its Centers for Health Development (CHDs). which could be passed on to the PHN.gov. An interim solution is to hire casual employees through job orders. Similar to other countries. With ceilings imposed by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) on personal services. Unfunded laws such as the Magna Carta for Health Workers (RA 7305) created some incentive problems. dated November 1999 (http://www. Subsistence allowance or meal stipend of at least PhP50/meal or PhP1. Under this category. FHSIS is collected by the DOH central office only at the level of provinces and highly urbanized cities. A problem with this. the government has not been able to provide fully in the budget for such benefits as prescribed in the law. it is not possible for LGUs to create plantilla positions to augment health staff. subsistence allowance. barangay health stations. The temporary nature of their job also makes it difficult to integrate them with the rest of the health staff. clinics. higher salary grade upon retirement. current practice. however.doh. Since its passage in 1992. utensils. Lack of medical doctors seems to point to the need for re-examining the roles of city/municipal health officers (CHO/MHO) and public health nurses (PHN). those studying in public universities) should have minimum years of service to the government. This would enable the CHO/MHO to allocate more time for clinic hours. Personnel covered are public health workers but not limited to medical and allied health personnel directly involved in the delivery of services to patients with highly contagious and communicable diseases. municipalities were placed in the frontline of health services delivery. among others.ph/ra/ra7305). longevity pay. is that casual employees cannot be sent to DOH trainings.7 Staggered implementation8 of the hazard pay ended in Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7305. With decentralization. Public health workers are eligible to receive hazard pay6 when the nature of their work exposes them to high risk/low risk hazards for at least 50% of their working hours. Workforce. all 133 .g. DOH central office. bed pan. Under this law. etc. and infirmaries. local chief executives (LCEs) should allow the grant of Magna Carta benefits to all local public health workers and should ensure that funds are set aside and made readily available. municipal health offices. and 5% for health worker’s salary for SG 20 and above. Shortage of health personnel is one of the main impediments in implementing maternal and childcare programs. needs to start collecting information at the municipal level. 7 “High-risk hazardous areas is defined by law as: work areas in hospitals. among others. The Implementing Rules and Regulations of this law states that.500/month. clinics. Some of the functions of the CHO/MHO are administrative. however. public health workers are entitled to. including those handling hospital paraphernalia used by patients such as linen. The persistent clamor for more health personnel points to the need to revisit DBM limitations on personal services to see whether such limitation is indeed appropriate for the health sector. health centers. sanitaria.. 6 Hazard pay of 25% of actual salary for SG 19 and below. barangay health centers. hazard pay. laundry allowance. rural 5 4 health units. Magna Carta for Public Health Workers. Data from municipalities should be assessed to be able to zero-in on areas in need of intervention.
Magna Carta for Public Health Workers. This way. (http://www. which are not currently part of the WHSMP project. dated November 1999 (http://www. “The implementation of Hazard Pay shall be made on staggered basis provided that at the fifth year (2003).” Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7305. the same arrangement can be made for other provinces. however.doh. There have been many cases where trained BHWs were replaced when new barangay officials are elected in office. Since this amount is bigger than what is charged by hilots in assisting deliveries. actual expenditure is not recorded. It is unfortunate however. that actual amount spent on maternal and child health is not being tracked by the DOH at the moment. A rational strategy should be outlined to fund the mandated Magna Carta benefits. Appropriate incentives must be given to ensure that they carry out their tasks. A current strategy espoused by the Women’s Health and Safe Motherhood Project (WHSMP) is including hilots in the Women’s Health Team (WHT). Proper incentives need to be given to persuade hilots to refer their clients to medical personnel. In many LGUs. Through the Facility-Based Childbirth Performance-Based Grant.000. Mobilizing Societies.gov.9 this may be enough incentive for them to refer their clients to facilities. budgets should be used as leverage to improve performance. Hopefully. Differences in LGUs’ capacity to pay have resulted to differences in benefits received by health workers of equal ranks. Civic organizations are supposed to be part of the local health system through their participation in the local health boards (LHB).ph/ra/ra7305). To push reforms forward. it can be assured that LCEs will be present in LHB meetings and civic organizations will be well represented. The current strategy of DOH in giving field health workers giving direct service delivery are already classified as high risk. strengthening the role of BHWs—the grassroots health workers—could not be overemphasized. Performance needs to be linked to the budget.gov. through reimbursements from PhilHealth.ph/ra/ra7305).” Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7305. making it difficult to link expenditure with outcomes. Some LCEs lament that too many boards in an LGU makes it difficult to attend all meetings. Magna Carta for Public Health Workers. As of 2008. the 25% and 5% differentiation shall have been fully complied with or fully satisfied. PIDS-UNICEF survey conducted in Agusan del Sur and Dumaguete found that the average price of birth deliveries with a hilot costs below P1. very few LGUs granted hazard pay to any of its public health workers.doh. 9 8 134 . This may lead to adverse effects that may result in more confusion rather than empowerment of health workers. 2003. WHTs are given a P1. the LHBs are not functional. their tenure should be protected from political interference. A possible solution would be to make the LHB a subcommittee of the Local Development Council (LDC) since LHB members are normally from the LDC as well. Sustainable Financing.000 incentive for every pregnant woman they refer to a BEmONC or CEmONC facility for childbirth services. While there are very detailed costing plans during budget preparation. dated November 1999. In mobilizing societies to strive for better health. Targets set at the budget preparation form should not be treated merely as compliance to budget preparation requirements. Given their important role in WHTs.
While it is very difficult to ensure that those enrolled in the Sponsored Program are indeed poor. Identifying the True Poor. The use of the card should also be adequately explained to these recipients. A one-size-fits-all strategy does not apply to the sector. Aside from problems with transportation. Investing in Infrastructure. Many beneficiaries of the Sponsored Program of PhilHealth lament that they do not feel the supposed benefits. The DOH may need to revisit its policy of letting the LGUs purchase their own syringes for EPI use and its administrative order on micronutrient supplementation. at least. indigents may avail of free hospitalization even without PhilHealth cards if they have been classified as indigents at the Medical Social Service department of the hospital. implementation needs to be tailored to the realities in the provinces. Facilities. 10 11 AO 2006-0022 “Guidelines for Establishment of Performance-Based Budget for Public Health. a more pragmatic approach is to guarantee that all those who will receive the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) are also given PhilHealth cards. DOH can use this tool to gauge its progress in meeting its targets. The number of recipients may be less than the actual number of indigents but. this is compounded by insufficient number of health personnel deployed in remote areas. Outpatient Benefit (OPB) packages seem to benefit only the RHUs with the release of capitation fund per enrolled indigent. This makes the sponsored indigent feel that enrolment in PhilHealth has no benefit. Cases of indigent cardholders availing of services at private hospitals and pay wards at public hospitals signal that there are leakages in the program. Iron and Iodine). such may not be the case in rural areas. and Management Capacity. Logistics. In some RHUs. supplies should be provided by the national government. which states that LGUs must augment DOH’s supply of micronutrients. sponsored members have lower claim rates. at all cost.” 135 . Identifying the true poor for the Sponsored Program of PhilHealth has always been murky. A key challenge that is evident in all indicators is reaching mothers and children that reside in remote rural areas. there is assurance that the poorest of the poor are indeed covered by PhilHealth. while the DOH policy of facility delivery through BEmONC/CEmONC may be easier to implement in urban areas. owing probably to the conflicting rules regarding charging of indigents. Thus. If budgets match actual accomplishments. While policies such as facility-based delivery are appropriate.” AO 2003-119 “Updated Guidelines on Micronutrient Supplementation (Vitamin A.11 Such practice adds impediment to the implementation of otherwise very important programs. For key programs such as EPI and Micronutrient Supplementation. It is also difficult to ascertain the strategy of LGUs in expanding coverage. In addition. sponsored beneficiaries are not even provided free preventive care and laboratory services as stipulated in the package. Some LGUs are not even willing to provide counterpart for their indigent population. At present. performance-based grants10 can be used as leverage with LGUs.
and projects for the survival. 13 12 136 . then President Ferdinand E. exploitation and abuse against children. This means that the Philippines committed to raise to 18 years old the minimum age for recruitment to the military service. protection. It grants all children and young people a comprehensive set of fundamental rights. It also defines categories of children in need of special protection (CNSP). and Development of Children. child prostitution. and abuse against children. and trafficking. National Laws.” More specifically. provisions. policies. Marcos promulgated the Presidential Decree (PD) 603 or “The Child and Youth Welfare Code. including the right to be protected from economic exploitation and harmful work. and actions that have positive impacts on children. 3. 14 By this. Child Prostitution. it encompasses all processes. Article 87 of PD 603 provides that “every barangay council shall encourage the organization of a Local Council for the Protection of Children and shall coordinate with the Council for the Welfare of Children and Youth in drawing and implementing plans for the promotion of child and youth welfare. implementation. The accession to the Declaration and the ratification of the CRC and its Optional Protocols affirmed the government’s commitment to promote the well-being of children. In doing so. the Philippines ratified the two Optional Protocols to the CRC on the (i) Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict. exploitation. programs. and enforcement of all policies. programs. and participation of children. concrete programs. the Philippines was the 31st State to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse. PD 603’s Article 205 created the Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC) to act as the lead agency in coordinating the formulation. and standards of these international agreements into national laws. Child Protection Based on UNICEF’s definition. and Programs The Philippine government’s conscious effort to protect the rights of families and children dates back as early as 1935.14 The government also acceded to the World Declaration on the Survival. Policies. protection. with the ultimate goal of ensuring the overall development of children to their fullest potential. which was adopted in support of the CRC during the World Summit for Children in September 1990. From UNICEF’s Child Protection Information Sheets. Also.” Almost 16 years later. which were identified in the Plan of Action for Implementing the Declaration. and Child Pornography. physical and mental violence. Such commitment entailed translating the principles. drug abuse. The CRC highlights the rights of children on survival. the country adopted specific child-related human development goals for 2000. In 1974. policies.12 child protection pertains to “preventing and responding to violence. as reflected in the Constitution at that time. interventions. development. development and participation. In 2002. and measures that aim to prevent and respond to violence. and pornography. Protection.13 and (b) Sale of Children.” PD 603 codifies laws on the rights of children and the corresponding sanctions in case these rights are violated. the Philippines committed to criminalize the sale of children.
. the PNFPDC is a roadmap for planning programs and interventions meant to promote and safeguard the rights of Filipino children. abuse. 2000– 2025. neglect.1. The CWC also came up with the Philippine National Strategic Framework for Plan Development for Children (PNSFPDC). which is considered a sequel of the PPAC. abuse. the National Plan of Action for Children (NPAC) for 2005–2010 was formulated to help realize Child 21’s vision of a “childsensitive and child-friendly society. 137 . Child protection is viewed as a prerequisite to attaining the MDGs. and exploitation. achieving the MDGs (e. and exploitation. Looking closely at Box III. and reducing child mortality) is essential in addressing children’s vulnerability and preventing all forms of violence. and (c) to be registered at birth.” The government recognizes the link between child protection and the MDGs.” This vision is based on child’s rights throughout the life cycle. promoting universal primary education.g. the CWC drafted the Philippine Plan of Action for Children (PPAC) of 1991–2000. Using the CRC as framework. Conversely. child protection rights include the right of a child: (a) to be safe from hazardous conditions. This framework was inspired by the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) document “A World Fit for Children. which was a holistic and integrated plan to uphold the right of the Filipino child. Dubbed as Child 21. (b) to be safe from any form of violence. and in consultation with multisectoral groups. the government responded to the alarming increase in the number of children in need of special protection (CNSP). Since it is not a comprehensive and detailed plan. empowering women. Through PPAC.
well.. Psycho-motor development occurs. including proper care and nutrition.To be carried to term with the proper nutrition and have normal fetal development in the womb of a healthy and properly nourished mother . Article 1 of PD 603 states that. and supportive parents is needed for survival and development of the child. Schools redirect behavioral patterns through the preferences of teachers and institution's culture. More and more time is spent outside the family.To participate in the development process Early childhood (3-5 years) Childhood (6-12 years) Adolescence (13-17 years) A period of transition and rapid physical changes.To have access to safe water and sanitation .To be exclusively breast-fed immediately after birth .To be registered at birth . A loving. Infancy (0-2 years) . Every effort should be exerted to promote his/[her] welfare and enhance his/[her] opportunities for a useful and happy life. Box III. health and well-being (physical. Change from home to school changes the child's perspective and contributes to their development.To receive free secondary education ..To be safe from hazardous conditions . The 1987 Constitution.To avail of free-micronutrient supplement ..To further participate in quality and relevant education appropriate to the child's development stage and evolving capacity . Child's Rights throughout the Life Cycle Life Cycle Throughout the life cycle Description Parental care/support. Civil Code. Labor Code. caring/nurturing family environment Child's Rights .To participate in quality and relevant education that is appropriate to the child's development stage and evolving capacity . nurturing. Overall. abuse and exploitation .To be safe from any form of violence. “The State shall defend the right of children to assistance. Increased peer influence Source: The Philippine National Strategic Framework for Plan Development for Children or Child 21 The implementation of the CRC in the country included efforts to harmonize it with national legislations and policies. the Philippines already had a strong legislative framework for upholding the rights of children. Brain development is affected by the mother's nutrition.To be provided with parental care and support . Prior to 1990. “The child is one of the most important assets of the nation. psychological). and wanted Pre-natal period (Unborn) The period of conception lasting approximately 9 months. Child explores the environment of the home and develops interpersonal and socialization skills.To further avail of open and flexible learning systems .To have adequate nourishment . and safety directly affect the unborn child.. Section 3 of the Constitution also states that.To avail of open and flexible learning systems .To experience early childhood care stimulation for development . From birth to about 24 months. Mother's nourishment.To be provided with parental care and support . and and stimulation. PD 603 and the Philippine Constitution provide a framework for the promotion of the welfare of the Filipino children. and Family Code all contain legal provisions that protect children.” Article 15.1. and special protection 138 . emotional. nutrition. The “Child and Youth Welfare Code” is regarded as the main legislative instrument for protecting Filipino children. The child is dependent on parents especially the mother for love. The pursuit of independence and identity are pre-eminent.To be born healthy. Parents and other care givers enrich the child's world.To receive complete and timely immunization from common childhood diseases .To have a clean and safe home and community environment .To receive free and compulsory elementary education . A single cell develops into a complex organism with a complete brain and behavioral capabilities.
domestic service. children in situations of armed conflict.” The provisions of Family Code of 1988 are intended to strengthen the role of family in ensuring the growth and development of children.” Box III. The first law enacted in compliance with the CRC is RA 7610. the Code provides for alternative family arrangements particularly on local adoption. deep-sea fishing. victims of commercial sexual exploitation. mining and quarrying. child-specific legislations were guided by the principles. and work on commercial sugarcane farms or plantations. 16 Enacted on June 17. children with disabilities. children affected by HIV/AIDS. exploitation and discrimination. neglect. 15 139 . exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to their development. and child victims of trafficking. provisions. victims of physical and sexual abuse. pyrotechnics. To address concerns on abandoned and neglected children. Philippines became more resolute to protect and promote the rights of children especially those in need of special protection. from all forms of neglect. Includes commercial sexual exploitation.2 presents a listing of select enacted laws that protect Filipino children against violence. children in conflict with the law.16 which is “an act providing for stronger deterrence and special protection against child abuse. Children in need of special protection (CNSP) include those: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) involved in exploitative and hazardous or worst forms of child labor. abuse. Since 1990. street children. and exploitation. children involved in illicit activities such as sale and trafficking of drugs. cruelty. abuse. and standards of the CRC. children of minorities and indigenous peoples. With CRC. 1992.15 neglected and abandoned children.
Box III. where the head of any public or private hospital or medical facility and attending physician must report to the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) within 48 hours regarding an examination and/or treatment of a child who appears to have suffered abuse Requires all government workers. abuse. marriages and foundlings Inter-country Adoption Act. including truancy. Exploitation and Discrimination. all identified CNSP will have been provided with appropriate interventions including rescue. I & II. Article VIII of RA 7610 Declares as national policy the free registration of births. and verbal or physical assaults that debase the dignity of a child An Act for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse. When necessary. which protects women and children from all kinds of abuses . Appropriating Funds Therefore and for Other Purposes Section 5 of Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7610 RA 7658 (1993) Proclamation No. emotional. 2006-2010 In the Philippines. reporting and referral of cases of maltreatment. Comprehensive Programme on Child Protection. psychological.2. An Act Prohibiting the Employment of Children Below 15 Years of Age in Public and Private Undertakings. and aims to develop a comprehensive package of social development and welfare services to solo parents and their children to be undertaken by the DSWD and other relevant government agencies and non-government organizations (NGOs) Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act/An Act to Institute Policies to Eliminate Trafficking in Persons Especiallly Women and Children. 266 of the Revised Penal Code (RA 3815) of 1930 RA 7610 (1992) Article 166 of PD 603 and Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7610 Description Define and specify the punishments for child battery.physical.e. and reintegration services. and for Other An Act Providing for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor and Affording Stronger Protection of Filipino Children Against Abuse and Neglect. which declares the policy of the State to provide every neglected and abandoned child a family that will provide such child with love and care as well as opportunities for growth and development The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act. Abuse. Children at risk shall also be prevented from becoming victims of various forms of abuse. Second Report on the Implementation of "The Convention on the Rights of the Child" (Popular Version). Creating the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council Under the Department of Justice. One concrete example is the formulation of the CPCP for 2006–2010. and legal and judicial protective measures. sexual abuse. Neglect and Exploitation Laws Articles 263. State of the Filipino Children Report (2005). Establishing the Necessary Institutional Mechanism for the Protection and Support of Trafficked Persons. 265. Enacted Laws to Protect Filipino Children against Violence. The social worker of the DSWD shall immediately proceed to the house. and nutrition (SCPC 2006). and violence by making available and improving basic social services such as education. to report to the DSWD incidence of abuse and neglect in schools. and for Other Purposes Prescribe the procedure for the identification. recovery.. within 48 hours of receipt of report. neglect. 326 (1994) RA 8043 (1995) RA 8371 (1997) RA 8552 (1998) RA 8972 (2000) RA 9208 (2003) RA 9231 (2003) RA 9255 (2003) RA 9262 (2004) RA 9344 (2006) Sources: Laws & Issuances on Children Vols. school. and violence against 140 . underlying. health. Providing Penalties for its Violation. The CPCP uses an integrated approach in dealing with the different levels of causes (i. healing. The child will be interviewed and a social case study shall be conducted by the social worker to determine whether the child had been abused. which prohibited illegitimate children from using their father's surname Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act. especially teachers. It amends Article 176 of the Family Code. Specifically. there have been efforts to enforce or put these laws and policies into action as they are viewed as powerful instruments for protecting children if translated into concrete programs and interventions. Providing Penalties for its Violations. and economic Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act/An Act Establishing a Comprehensive Juvenile Justice and Welfare System. deaths. sexual. and the case study will be brought to court. which amends RA 7610 and prohibits the employment of children in the worst forms of child labor An Act Allowing Illegitimate Children to Use the Surname of their Father. it is envisioned that by 2010. immediate. exploitation. protective custody of the child will be assumed. it addresses the emerging problem of child-recruitment in rebel-infested areas of the Philippines Domestic Adoption Act/An Act Establishing the Rules and Policies on the Domestic Adoption of Filipino Children and for Other Purposes Solo Parents Welfare Act. which recognizes the vital role of children of indigenous peoples in nation-building and supports mechanisms to protect their rights. and root) of exploitation. which aims to spare illegitimate children the shame and stigma normally attached to their status. or establishment where the alleged child victim is. which amends for the purpose Section 12. which provides for benefits and privileges to solo parents and their children. With CPCP.
RA 9231. including conduct of trainings on gender sensitivity in legal and judicial processes. and effective enforcement of child protection laws. Rescue. (ii) formulating and implementing a comprehensive juvenile intervention program. the CWC was established to: 141 . It focuses on cross-cutting strategies and interventions to address all CNSP categories. and social reintegration. (iii) equip children with knowledge and life skills to protect themselves. supervisors. review and reform. RA 9262. (ii) improve psychosocial recovery and healing services and social reintegration programs. healing. (v) support livelihood activities and facilitate access to credit and employment opportunities. and other service providers in helping children. particularly at barangay level. Legal and Judicial Protection Measures – This approach focuses on (i) wide dissemination of and orientation on various laws and policies . social workers. (iv) empower families and communities to facilitate psychosocial recovery. (iv) promote responsible and effective parenting education among families of CNSP. (iii) promote alternative family care for children without families or children deprived of a family environment. city. These cross-cutting strategies and interventions are categorized in CPCP as follows: Preventive Actions and Early Interventions – This approach includes actions and interventions that will (i) sensitize families. RA 7610. (iii) building models of community-based delinquency prevention program. RA 9208. children. and (vi) developing and executing research agenda for the enactment. RA 7858. and Social Reintegration Services – This approach requires services that will (i) strengthen and expand monitoring and rescue mechanisms such as Sagip-Bata Manggawa (SBM) and Bantay Banta. (iv) building models of community-based diversion programs for children in conflict with the law (CICL). (vi) establish effective built-in screening and monitoring mechanisms for children at risk within basic social services at barangay. and strengthen local councils for the protection of children (LCPC). (ii) facilitate effective access of children at risk to relevant early and basic education and vocational training. and municipal levels. (v) continuing training and capacity building for the five pillars of justice on the CRC and its Optional Protocol. and other child protection laws. communities and LGUs on the CRC. and (v) upgrade technical competencies of program managers. which include RA 9344. Psychological Recovery. and other UN standards on justice for children and national protection laws. among others. RA 8359. Building Blocks and Partners for a Strategy In 1974. and (vii) organize. activate. and link them with the LCPCs.
(c) formulate policies and devise. and to submit to the President an annual progress report. and social development of children and youth. At the regional level. (d) Department of Labor and Employment. (ii) formulation of all policies for children. agency. it is expected to promulgate policies and guidelines for the nationwide implementation of ECCD Program. bureau. emotional. intellectual. and (i) Other government and private agencies with programs on child and youth welfare. based on the implementing rules and regulations of RA 8980. With the passage of RA 8980 or the Early Childhood Care and Development (ECCD) Act of 2000. The Regional Sub-Committee/Committee for the Welfare of Children (RSCWC/RCWC) was designated as subnational extension of the national CWC. (c) Department of Education. Department of Social Welfare. moral. In addition. and evaluate programs and services for the general welfare of children and youth. (d) call upon and utilize any department. CWC was mandated to serve as the National Early Childhood Care and Development Coordinating Council (NECCDCC) as well. As such. 17 RSCWC/RCWC function as the focal institution and facilitate collaborative efforts in child protection. CWC coordinates the (i) implementation and monitoring of NPAC/Child 21. Department of Health. 142 . develop. Since then. introduce. public. or instrumentalities. Department of Agriculture. office. Department of Local Government and Community Development (now Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG). (a) coordinate the implementation and enforcement of all laws that promote child and youth welfare. (b) Department of Health. and Sports. (b) prepare. At present. (h) Local Councils for the Protection of Children. submit to the President. and (e) perform such other functions as provided by law. Department of Labor. CWC has been mandated to coordinate with various offices in the implementation of laws and programs on child and youth welfare. spiritual. Culture. they also link up collective efforts between the national government and the local government units (LGUs). and circulate copies of long-range programs and goals for physical. Department of Education and Culture. (e) Department of Agriculture. for such assistance as it may require in the performance of its functions. Article 208 of PD 603 enumerates the offices as: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) Department of Justice. and (iii) monitoring of CRC implementation. The RSCWC/RCWC is composed of directors and heads of agencies that include: (a) Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). private or voluntary.
Nevertheless. 90% of provinces. city and barangay levels with guidance from DILG.324 % to LCPC Organized 67. have an action plan and approved budget for children. not all organized LCPCs are functional.994 No. 2007 Governance level Provinces Cities Municipalities Barangays No. Department of Interior and Local Government (Available in CWC's Subaybay Bata Monitoring System) There are other interagency bodies including NGOs and faith-based organizations (FBOs) that advocate child protection. and sustain the already organized LCPC. Table III. and almost 98% of barangays have organized LCPCs. co-chaired by the DOJ and the DSWD. (f) Department of Justice (DOJ). strengthen. These include the: (a) Special Committee for the Protection of Children (SCPC). (j) at least three NGO representatives.31 Source: National Barangay Operations Office (NBOO). (k) a youth representative.994 % 90. (i) National Nutrition Council Secretariat. The field officers of DILG monitor the functionality of the LCPCs.18.15 20.12 95. created in 2006 to oversee the implementation of RA 9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006.62 LCPC Functional 49 71 548 8. Status of Local Councils for the Protection of Children. which actively advocated and lobbied for the passage of a comprehensive law on juvenile justice. They are expected to draw up and implement programs for child welfare and development. 17 143 . 91% of municipalities. At the municipal and barangay levels. on how to encourage them to activate.35 40. (c) Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC).45 91.17 Only 67% of the Provincial Councils for the Protection of Children (PCPCs) and 56% of the City Councils for the Protection of Children (CCPCs) are functional. only 40% and 20% are functional.24 97. respectively (Table III. Functional LCPCs are those LCPCs that meet regularly and have minutes of meetings. and to coordinate and monitor CRC implementation at the local level.12 56. which was created in 1995 under EO 275 to monitor the implementation of RA 7610 or the Child Protection Act of 1992. (l) the ABC regional president. and that submit annual report on children.18) Apparently. there is a serious challenge on how to convince all LGUs to organize their own LCPC and more importantly. of LCPC Organized 73 126 1. (b) Juvenile Justice Network (JJN). LCPCs were also established at the provincial.365 40. 95% of cities. and (m) the president of the Mayor’s League. municipal. of LGUs 81 132 1. (g) Department of Interior and Local Government. Based on the National Barangay Operations Office (NBOO) data as of 2007. (h) National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA).496 41.
” 19 http://www. capacity building.”19 Such a strategy involves localizing the National Plan of Action for Children (NPAC). institutions. (iii) Basic Education. and the Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP) work together to localize the NPAC. particularly in the committee on CNSP. including NGOs and FBOs. DILG drew up the manuals “Mainstreaming Child Rights in Local Development Planning: A Guide to Localizing Child 21” and “LGU Guide on MDG Localization. However. toward a child-friendly environment. According to the CWC. families and communities. and provinces. (d) Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking (IACAT). To facilitate all these. Other sectors of the society also contribute in this initiative. strategic movement and into development interventions such as child friendly policies.org 18 144 . the Philippines launched in 1999 the Child Friendly Movement (CFM)18 initiative to facilitate the realization of Child 21 by mainstreaming children’s rights into local development planning. led by the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP). LGUs play a critical role in localizing the NPAC by (a) translating it into local development plans and annual investment plans for children. an LGU is child-friendly “if it is able to assure that all children possess survival. development. national. with technical and financial assistance from UNICEF through its Country Programme for Children (CPC). and (e) Inter-Agency Committee on Children Involved in Armed Conflict (IACCIAC). Under CPC.childfriendlycities. (ii) Health and Nutrition. and (c) drafting the annual local state of children report. NGOs actively participate in the many sectoral committees of CWC such as (i) Family and Alternative Parental Care. the success of the CFM does not depend on government agencies and LGUs alone. National Economic and Development Authority Regional Social Development Committee (NEDA-SDC) and the DILG along with the leagues of municipalities. protection and participation rights and that their needs are realized. In particular. (b) enacting local codes for children. The active involvement of NGOs is remarkable. due to increasing issues and challenges on child protection. In cooperation with the UNICEF. which in turn foster stronger linkages among the different sectors of society. Government agencies such as the CWC and its regional subcommittees. research. and (v) Children in Need of Special Protection (CNSP). (iv) Civil Rights and Freedoms. and programmes. These issues and challenges have prompted NGOs to spearhead advocacy. program development. which is geared to the realization of Child 21. The focus of CFM is to transform the United Nations CRC from “a legal framework into a welldefined. and service provision. created to coordinate and monitor the enforcement of RA 9208 or the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003. Collaborative efforts are also pursued between the Philippine government and international organizations. cities.” These manuals serve as guide for LGUs in localizing Child 21 and NPAC. creating a synergy among the national and local government.
” In support of the national childfriendly movement.. school system. A system where disaggregated local level data on children. it literally means child surveillance and monitoring and has three components: (i) macro monitoring system. (b) participation in the working group organized by CWC to develop the micro monitoring subsystem21 of the Child 21/NPAC monitoring system (i. Some of these roles include: (a) membership in the National Steering Committee for the UNICEF-assisted 6th Country Programme for Children (CPC 6). media. Composed of 16 major international and national NGOs involved with child rights promotion and protection. and the Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches (PCEC). including CNSP. PHILINC is composed of bishops from the Catholic Bishops of the Philippines (CBCP). NGOs. and networking among the key players. will be collected. (c) the review of the Philippines’ periodic report on CRC implementation. Box III. national government agencies. health system. CPCP elaborates on the role of key players including the family. Subaybay Bata Monitoring System22). justice system. and other civil society organizations (CSO). (ii) micro monitoring system. the National Council of Churches in the Philippines (NCCP).3 attempts to summarize the mechanisms for action. 22 Initiated by CWC in 2003. violence. Its strategic thrusts and directions include the creation of “child-friendly faith communities. CWC and UNICEF worked together to create the Philippine Inter-Faith Network for Children (PHILINC). LGUs. The NGO coalition20 for CRC monitoring has important support roles in the childfriendly movement. PHILINC developed a manual to guide the different faith communities in transforming themselves into child-friendly faith communities.e. PHILINC is an active member of the Special Committee for the Protection of Children (SCPC). and (iii) project-based monitoring system. FBOs. and exploitation. legislative system and policymaking bodies. which is a mechanism for the different faith communities and FBOs to collaborate in promoting child rights and in protecting children. and (d) preparation and submission of an independent report on CRC implementation. and strategies that are addressed to key players. and even children in caring for and protecting children from abuse. as described in the CPCP. challenges. 21 20 145 . The importance of putting in place institutional mechanisms such as those mentioned above is underscored in the CPCP for 2006–2010. CPCP highlights the issues. coordination.
. outreach programs and services for young people in crisis. nutrition.DepEd must review its educational policies and procedures and see whether or not these are relevant and responsive to the unique needs and circumstances of children in need of special protection (CNSP). the social.Health facilities must have separate space or special time set aside for young people. drug abuse. the active participation of young people in their own health and development. trafficking.g.3. School System/Education . the psychosocial dynamics of children. exploitation and violence. . children's involvement in armed conflict. Box III. . .Family interventions require resources.Schools should continue to integrate child rights education and life skills education into the basic education curriculum as this will help equip the children and young people with the appropriate information.DepEd should aim to get all children to school and keep them in school until they complete at least high school education. violence and exploitation on children. children going to the streets. -Health workers should have basic respect for young people. are especially trained to work with young people. and political conditions affecting the lives of children. the effects of abuse. and skills so that they can guard themselves against forces of abuse. . health.Meet their children's needs and rights to food. smoking. education. economic. and the positive role of mass media in influencing young people's values and behavior that affect their health and development (e. development of youth-friendly health services.Promote responsible and effective parenting with emphasis on the role of men and fathers by educating the parents on the CRC. commercial sexual exploitation.Parents must seek ways and means to avail of support for livelihood and employment opportunities as this will address the economic context of child abuse. Coordination. and special protection as parental interventions on these areas can prevent the possibility of their children becoming victims of abuse. risky and unsafe sexual behavior. knowledge. have adequate time for interaction and counseling.Major preventive intervention against the various forms of abuse and exploitation such as child labor. among other things. FBOs and barangays should maximize the Alternative Learning System (ALS) modules to reach a greater number of CNSP and other children at risk. and Networking Among Key Players Key Players Family particularly the parents Role . and convenient location and consultation hours. and honor privacy and confidentiality. substance abuse and other risky behaviors . expoitation and violence Issues/Challenges .The national youth health policy should promote. and violence). Mechanisms for Action. alcohol use.For children who are out of school. DepEd together with NGOs. .Formulate an updated and clear national policy on early detection and intervention on childhood disabilities as well as youth health and development promotion oriented towards the provision of youth-friendly health services for young people including CNSP 146 . gender stereotypes. violence and exploitation. particularly among the poor and disadvantaged families Strategies . particularly at the barangay and district levels.Build and strengthen family stability. adequate space and sufficient privacy. Health System . and the different local ordinances and laws protecting children .
The local sanggunian must pass local ordinances to reinforce effective enforcement of already existing national laws on child protection. and Networking Among Key Players. . and children involved in armed conflict. .3. the LGUs must organize. child trafficking.Police officers. child pornography. Key Players Legislative System and Policy-Making Bodies Role .All legislators and policy makers at the national and local levels should recognize their strategic roles in effective advocacy against various forms of child abuse.Provide speedy legal and judicial protection measures to children who are victims of abuse.To provide strong mandate for the LCPCs to implement programmes and activities for CNSP. public attorneys. education and development. prosecutors.For child protection. and new technologies available to make the administration of the child and juvenile justice system more child-sensitive and child friendly. activate. and (c) and enact laws if necessary Issues/Challenges . Box III. among others. and participation. violence. . and court social workers must take it as part of their responsibility to have continuing education and professional upgrading on the CRC and other UN standards. which will be responsible for advocacy and programming efforts for and on behalf of CNSP. Coordination. They must have in place an operational monitoring system on all legal and judicial cases that involve children. and monitoring and reporting system. substance abuse. local code for children.Also at the local level. special protection. violence. nutrition. (b) identify the remaining gaps in child protection laws and their enforcement such as on substance abuse. . information dissemination among various audiences on existing child protection laws is crucial for the effective implementation of laws. Mechanisms for Action. LGUs must pass local ordinances on child protection specifically on child labor. Strategies Justice System .LGUs must have enough professional social workers or community organizers who will be responsible for training and organizing LCPCs. . child trafficking.In handling children. new child protection laws and their implementing rules and regulations. . . and juvenile justice.Each LGU must have updated and disaggregated database on children.Review and assess existing legislation in order to (a) determine whether these are congruent or in harmony with the CRC provisions and other UN standards on child protection. investment plan for children. cont. Annually. . 147 . . and exploitation as well as children in conflict with the law Local Government Units (LGUs) . commercial sexual exploitation. local development plan for children. judges. strengthen and sustain local councils for protection of children (LCPC). and exploitation. the LGU must render a report on the situation and progress of all children within its jurisdiction. all pillars of the justice system must strictly observe child-sensitive and childfriendly rules and procedures and must consider the psychosocial make-up and the best interests of children at all times. child pornography.All the pillars of the justice system must coordinate among each other in the disposition of cases involving children and young people.Ensure adequate provision for all children of basic social services in health.
leadership development. law review. Key Players National Government Agencies (NGAs) Role . violence and exploitation against children to generate broad public awareness on child protection issues. and programs. groups and institutions intended to protect and care for children . Mechanisms for Action. Birth registration refers to the official record of the birth of a child. these laws. . due to data constraints.Non-government organizations (NGOs). it can secure all the rights due to the child.3. which in turn will bring about prompt and appropriate actions from the relevant agencies. It certifies the existence and identity of a child through the given name as well as his/her nationality. the local faith communities. .Best advocates as they know best their own situation . and other relevant agencies.Forge cross-border and international alliances particularly against child trafficking. regional and national level must be facilitated and supported. internet cafes and other ICT outlets have unique roles to play in child protection particularly in terms of child pornography on the internet. as detailed in earlier subsection.Their efforts to organize themselves at the local. capacity building and technical assistance. FBOs. Children . relevant national bodies such as CWC. Issues/Challenges Strategies NGOs.Establish a national research agenda and a national databank on child protection .Children should be given opportunities for continuing child rights education. This is clearly stated in the CRC. Coordination. Birth Registration Every child has a right to be born and to have a name and a nationality. child labor.Set policies and standards of care and protection . and protective behavior training.Children can become part of the LCPC. For the purpose of this report. prostitution and pornography . life skills education. faith-based organizations (FBOs). policies and programs are intended to address a number of child protection issues including birth registration and issues surrounding each CNSP category. and Networking Among Key Players. and other civil society organizations (CSOs) are strategic partners in child protection.Monitor progress. street children. and victims of child abuse. and other CSOs Media . law reform and law enforcement monitoring . children in conflict with the law. 148 . and prepare relevant national reports . .Internet Service Providers (ISP). CNSP issues include only those related to children with disabilities.Responsible reporting and open discussion on issues of abuse. Box III.The media must be guided by the principles and provisions of the CRC and the guidelines issued by the Committee for the Special Protection of Children and the CWC. cont. policies.Responsible for advocacy and resource mobilization. NAPC. As a basic document. assess impact of interventions. Source: A Comprehensive Programme on Child Protection. values formation and clarification. More specifically. 2006-2010 Child Protection Issues Upholding the best interest of every child is the rationale behind all child-related laws.
achieve nationwide awareness-raising on the right of children to name and nationality. Western Mindanao. Institutionalize the Barangay Civil Registration System (BCRS) to make the civil registration system more accessible to the people. and committed to the goal of 100% birth registration. Since more and more Filipinos are leaving the country to work abroad. Central Mindanao.6 million unregistered children in the country and most of them are Muslim and IP children. thus. Birth registration can help protect children in many ways by providing reliable information on their age. it aims to: 1. and Southern Mindanao. 149 . and 4. many children are deprived of their rights to be registered because birth registration is not free and not all parents have access to it. The issue of unregistered children goes beyond the country’s borders with increasing number of children of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) born abroad and left unregistered. Singapore.000 Japanese-Filipino children who are most likely unregistered and. According to CWC (2007). United Arab Emirates. As a follow-through activity. In terms of geographical location. The UCP was implemented in 32 municipalities and 2 cities where many unregistered Muslim and IP children. documented OFWs increased from 1. The BRP had a wider coverage of local government units with a number of unregistered Muslim and IP children.221. there are 2. NSO and Plan Philippines jointly worked on the Birth Registration Project (BRP) in 2004– 2007. Qatar. and CNSP were found.862 in 2005 to 1. In the same manner. These OFWs are employed in 197 country destinations but majority of them are in Saudi Arabia. Italy. and CNSP. Eastern Visayas. NSO and Plan Philippines collaborated on the conduct of the Unregistered Children Project (UCP) to address the issue of unregistered children. 2. and procedures on birth registration. Japan is not among the top 10 country destinations but CWC (2007) noted that there are around 100. and access to basic services. United Kingdom. In particular. Train civil registrars and civil registration agents to make them more equipped. reflecting a 1. nationality. Unfortunately. child labor can be prevented by ensuring that the minimum age required for a worker is satisfied. Using IEC strategies and tools. More specifically. and South Korea. Taiwan.204. the BRP covered 127 municipalities across the 17 regions of the country with the end in view of attaining 100-percent birth registration. Advocate for relevant laws. responsive. early marriage and recruitment of children in armed conflict can be countered. policies. Hence. Programs.417 in 2006. 70% of these children are in ARMM. particularly those in remote areas and among minority groups and indigenous peoples (IPs). this issue must also be addressed. and Interventions In 2000–2004. Kuwait. deprived of their rights to a name.4% growth. Strategies. Hong Kong. Based on the country’s periodic reports on the implementation of CRC (CWC 2007). identity. 3.
(b) As of May 2006. of Training BCRS # of bgrys # of NSO # of LCR/s # of brgy # of brgy # of staff chairman sec BCRAs Training trained staff trained trained trained trained trained 27 6 22 4 10 5 4 11 52 13 80 234 20 10 19 5 9 5 32 12 14 102 101 181 49 36 44 249 158 144 124 551 248 1. Birth Registration Project Beneficiaries of Training in the Mobile/Out‐of‐Town Civil Registration Programs (As of May 2006) Mobile/Out of Town Civil Registration Programs Beneficiaries of the Training BCRS No. Region IV B 4 44 8. Region VI 10 312 10. CAR 12 132 3. 150 . a total of 1. Region VIII 11 144 12.405 453 350 878 82 62 134 84 132 454 126 49 1141 919 195 449 5. Table III.508 Region 1. as follows: (a) Some 127 municipalities now have computerized birth registration systems. Region I 12 101 4. Region IV A 46 7. (d) February 23.19. (c) As of 2006.863. NCR 2. there were 1.405 barangay secretaries. Region IX 776 30 444 13. through its 6th Country Programme for Children (CPC6).19). Region V 6 72 9. Region II 18 238 49 5. 2. 2005 and every year thereafter was proclaimed by the President as National Birth Registration Day. CWC (2007) provided a rundown of the gains from the UCP and the BRP.232 unregistered children have been registered broken down as follows: 970.987 barangay chairmen.987 132 101 213 49 46 44 47 158 144 766 530 175 2.508 barangay civil registration agents trained in civil registration law and procedures of mobile birth registration (Table III. and 5. Region III 6. Region XII 3 87 16. augmented the efforts of NSO and Plan Philippines by giving support for LGU training programs for frontline health workers integrating modules on birth registration. Region X 14. Region XI 394 15. ARMM 90 TOTAL 889 2. Region VII 7 158 11.928 girls.715 Legend: without training with training Acronyms: BCRS Barangay Civil Registration System BCRA Barangay Civil Registration Agent NSO National Statistics Office LCR Local Civil Registry 140 35 301 Source: National Statistics Office (Available in CWC's Subaybay Bata Monitoring System) UNICEF.304 boys and 892. Caraga 404 17.
(g) Issuance of Memorandum Circular 2004-01 concerning birth registration for children in need of special protection. Despite the gains mentioned above. on the rules and regulations governing registration of acts and events concerning civil status of indigenous peoples. (c) remaining gaps in civil registration law and procedures. through the Philippine embassy or consulate in the country where they work. Qatar. and nationality. Overseas parents were advised. hence. Italy. particularly among Muslims and IPs. which means that more than a million children need to be registered each year. fees are imposed). Taiwan. 23 151 . although the latter obstacle has been remedied by forming mobile civil registration teams in selected areas. and that population increases yearly at the rate of 2.11%. (b) economic costs. There should be continued training on the BCRS to reach more There are more than 20 MWOFRCs in countries with large concentration of Filipino overseas workers including Saudi Arabia. among others. The gaps are attributed to the facts that there are still unregistered children in the country. The DSWD has strengthened its social welfare services in countries cited earlier by assigning professional social workers oriented and trained in various issues and challenges in the protection of children’s and women’s rights. to register their children born abroad. which include: (a) lack of awareness among parents. (f) Issuance of Administrative Order No. United Kingdom. 2. Hongkong. There is a need for BRP to clear the barriers to birth registration. Singapore. on the relevance of birth registration. lawyers and social workers assigned to the different Migrant Workers and Other Overseas Filipinos Resource Centers (MWOFRCs)23 conducted awareness-raising sessions with parents on the need and value of birth registration. Among the actions taken were as follows: 1. some local ordinances on civil registration seek to generate revenues for LGUs. (e) Passage of RA 9048. identity. and (h) Establishment of Barangay Civil Registration System (BCRS) as a grassroots mechanism to facilitate and sustain 100% registration at all times. including the right of a child to a name. UAE. Issues on unregistered and undocumented children born abroad were also addressed through RA 8042 or the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipino Act. and (d) physical and geographical barriers affecting families living in remote and hard-to-reach barangays. As part of their functions. and 3. which discourage poor parents from registering their children (while the civil registry law states that birth registration is free. CWC (2007) identified the gaps that should be addressed to further improve birth registration. and South Korea. 3 Series 2004. Kuwait. a law that authorizes the city and/or municipal civil registrar or consul general to correct a clerical or typographical error in an entry and/or change of first name or nickname in the civil register without the need for judicial order.
Caraga 17. o The CNSP shall refer to all persons below 18 years of age.727 64 44 0 63. Region I 4. NCR 2.244 0 6. 2004 [IP] Foundling o ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. barangays. Birth Registration Project Registration Program & Corresponding Number of Children Registered by Region Birth Registration Project (As of May 2006) No. exploitation.638 53 175 6. 9255 (An Act of Acts and Events concerning Civil Status Allowing Illegitimate Children to Use the of Muslim Filipinos Surname of their Father. Region IV B 8. domestic violence) and other analogous conditions prejudicial to their development. discrimination and violence (armed conflict. ARMM TOTAL Acronyms: ABR Actual Birth Registration. Source: National Statistics Office (Available in CWC's Subaybay Bata Monitoring System) 152 .691 1. 209. of Filipino Indigenous Peoples RA 9255 o ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. Region V 9.595 30 0 16. Region IV A 7.668 14. Region XII 16. who are vulnerable to or victims of abuse.189 2.322 4. 3 Series of 2004 o Foundling is a deserted or abandoned infant or child Rules and Regulations Governing Registration found or a child committed to DSWD or duly licensed of Acts and Events concerning Civil Status institution with unknown facts of birth and parentage.569 0 287 0 0 0 0 4. neglect.167 Number of Registered Births Birth Registration Statistics of Special Sector Pursuant to Pursuant to Pursuant to AO3s.763 13.071 17.202 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 11 0 33 63 38 0 0 0 148 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 10 10 1 21 0 2 0 56 Region RA 9255 0 3. Region IX 13. CNSP Children in Need of Special Protection N.2005 [Muslim]/Pursuant to Section 2 of Act No. Region VI 10. Region II 5.2005 MC 2004‐01 Foundling 2004 [IP] [Muslim] [CNSP] 0 123 0 0 0 421 0 0 1. Otherwise Known as the "Family Code of the or those 18 years old and over but are unable to take care of Philippines") themselves because of physical or mental disability or condition.692 22. of registered children through mobile registration [ABR] 59. particularly where Muslim and indigenous families live and where it is inaccessible and affected by armed conflict. Region X 14.B. Article 176 of Executive Order No. 3753 o ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO.050 1. Region III 6. cruelty. Region VII 11. IP Indigenous People. 1 Series of 2004 Pursuant to AO1s. 1 Series of 2005 Rules and Regulations Governing the imple‐ Rules and Regulations Governing Registration mentation of Republic Act No. CAR 3. Region XI 15.340 0 387 0 69.458 3. AO1s. Table III.569 1. Pursuant to AO3s.20. Region VIII 12.138 1. Amending for the Pursuant to MC 2004‐01 [CNSP] Purpose.125 0 7 0 0 0 126 0 16 12 2 120 8.233 2.
345 10 ‐ 14 2. there were 948.680 or about 20% of PWDs.077 5. mental retardation) that could still be prevented.716 3.089 3. is for expectant mothers to go for prenatal check-ups to ensure baby’s proper development.517 2.079 331 3. some mothers do not avail of this health service due to lack of knowledge of its benefits or.21 shows that the greatest number of children falls in the age group 10 to14 for 7 out of 13 forms of impairment.646 5. Unfortunately.798 4.3 million population in the same year. and other concerned agencies must include the birth registration of Filipino children born abroad as part of their priority concerns and institute the processes and procedures to ensure implementation.680 1. By Age Group and Type of Disability As of 2000 Census Type of Disability Total blindness Partial blindness Low vision Total deafness Partial deafness Hard of hearing Oral defect Loss of one or both arms/hands Loss of one or both legs/feet Quadriplegic Mentally retarded Mentally ill Multiple impaired Total Under 1 428 716 817 260 193 46 797 674 150 206 199 1. Philippines. due to the distance of their houses from health facilities.515 2.21. The most appropriate preventive measure.001 5. 2007 Table III.952 5.793 4.071 3.041 3. To ensure that children of OFWs born abroad are registered.232 59.387 2.229 53.987 52. the DSWD.322 992 7.021 2.195 225 5. Children with Disabilities Based on NSO’s 2000 Population Census.575 2.359 30.864 4. the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA).638 2.572 15 ‐ 19 2..644 2. Newborn screening or other tests may help detect possible impairment (e.272 6.884 5.258 2. however.019 2. Based on DOH report.g.230 1.449 4.498 10. Of the PWDs. highly preventable.260 3. which accounts for 1. The children’s group comprised 54% males and 46% females.098 persons with disabilities (PWDs).589 2. According to SCPC (2006).895 3.482 3.826 Source: 3rd & 4th Periodic Reports on the Implementation of the CRC.743 5.524 7. Children with Disabilities.921 4. the Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO).526 1. thus. In contrast.906 1 ‐ 4 2.822 1. about 70% were found in rural and remote areas (CWC 2007).455 4. in some cases. The reported number of children with disabilities was 191.776 1.516 1.707 1.312 7.785 4.439 4. Table III. more than 50% of disabilities among children are acquired. malnutrition and unsanitary living conditions as a result of extreme poverty are considered the most significant 153 .260 5 ‐ 9 3.23% of the 75.402 9.683 2. the least number of children with impairment falls under the age group under-1 and this is possibly because some forms of impairment do not manifest at early stage of infancy.
To rationalize all disability-related efforts. This social laboratory is intended for building capacities and upgrading competencies of day care workers. which is 75% of school-age children with disabilities should complete at least elementary schooling. This Project aims to mainstream 3–5 year old children with disabilities in the regular daycare services. About 500 deaf and blind children are mainstreamed in regular schools yearly but only 3%–5% of children with disabilities have completed elementary education. To address this need. and 851 barangays. Barrier-Free and Rights-Based Society for Persons with Disabilities in Asia and the Pacific 154 . in cooperation with national and local government agencies. use of iodized salt promotion. 23 municipalities. DSWD also issued AO No. Other causes of disability include vehicular accidents and the continuing armed conflict although there are no reliable data on these (CWC 2007). DepEd has been training public school teachers. more must be done to really reach children in poor. The prevalence of disability among children 0–14 years old is highest in urban slum and rural areas where health services are limited or worse. which literally means continuing education without barriers). This is way below the target under the Biwako Millennium Framework. DOH supports DepEd by establishing a health sector alliance for children with learning disabilities. DSWD also issued Administrative Order No. not accessible at all for poor families living in rural areas as health clinics and hospitals are generally concentrated in urban areas. provisions of Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 or the Accessibility Law. an Act amending RA 7277. Despite DOH’s efforts to expand and sustain these programs. Vitamin A supplementation. and other preventive programs. causes of disability especially among children. they do not have access to appropriate basic education unlike their rich counterparts who can afford to avail of special education. DOH has a significant role in helping prevent some disabilities like blindness. NGOs. nutrition education. the National Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons (NCWDP). remote. Since children with disability are mostly from poor families and from rural areas. 85. and the commitments of the Philippine government under the Biwako Millennium Framework for Action Towards an Inclusive. and densely populated areas. This alliance centers on inclusive education and on the specific roles of health professionals in terms of screening and diagnosis. formulated a Comprehensive National Plan of Action which translates into action the (a) (b) (c) (d) objectives of RA 7277 or the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons. and grassroots organizations of persons with disabilities. To really address the special needs of children with disabilities. The major challenge lies in expanding and sustaining coverage of its expanded program for immunization (EPI). This has been ongoing since 2004 in 21 provinces. provisions of RA 9442. DepEd has been promoting inclusive education by mainstreaming children with disabilities in regular classes. 19 cities. prenatal and postnatal care. 61. which guides the implementation of community-based social laboratory for children and youth with disabilities. which guides the implementation of the “Tuloy Aral Walang Sagabal” Project (TAWAG. parents and siblings in mainstreaming children and youth with disabilities into normal community life.
(1993–2002), which was extended for another decade covering 2003– 2012. However, some factors hampered the implementation of said plan. CWC (2007) enumerated these factors as: 1. Lack of resources actually allocated for priority programs and projects despite Presidential Proclamation 240, which requires all relevant government agencies to allocate at least 1% of their annual budget for PWDs; 2. Continuing difficulties in collecting disaggregated data on PWDs, particularly children, despite NCWDP’s efforts to set up its monitoring and profiling system; 3. Existing gaps in technical competencies and skills of professionals working with and for children with disabilities such as medical personnel, teacher, and social workers; and 4. Migration of professionals such as speech pathologists, development pediatricians, and special education teachers. To ensure sustainability, CWC (2007) recommended that programs and projects on prevention and rehabilitation of children with disabilities be linked with broader development initiatives such as poverty reduction and social equity promotion. To mainstream disability issues and concerns in the total development process, four major aspects must be emphasized. These are as follows: i. Inclusion – children and PWDs become visible in policy and decisionmaking, strategy formulation, and program development, ii. Participation – children and PWDs will have their voices and opinions heard, iii. Access – barriers are removed and opportunities are created so that children and PWDs will enjoy their right to basic social services, and iv. Quality – children and PWDs deserve a quality life through knowledge and capacity building. To monitor children with disabilities, the existing database and monitoring system on children with disabilities must be further improved. The current data have to be disaggregated further (i.e., by gender, rural or urban, ethnic group, and others) for more focused advocacy and programming. Also, the NCWDP has to strengthen its focus on children with disabilities and improve its data collection system in collaboration with DSWD, DepEd, DOH, NSO and LGUs. Street Children The Lamberte (2000) study, “Ours to Protect and Nurture: The Case of Children Needing Special Protection,” distinguished between “street children” in general and the “highly visible children on the streets.” The latter refers to children who stay on the streets and in public places at least four hours daily to engage in varied activities such as playing with friends and peers, sleeping, and earning a living. In the study, this category of street children is also referred to as the “targeted priority group,” which needs utmost attention due to the risks and hazards involved in staying most of the time on the streets without adult supervision. The “highly visible children on the
streets” also include those staying in temporary shelters, drop-in centers, and processing centers. The distinction between the two is based on the (i) frequency of the child’s contact with family and whether or not the child lives with family/relatives or with other people, (ii) number of hours a child is staying on the streets, (iii) location, and (iv) activities a child is engaged in. The study estimates the population of street children in the Philippines to be 3% (246,011) of the population 0–17 years old. Street children comprise 5% of the country’s urban poor children, which is estimated to be 4,832,000. Of the 246,011 street children, 20% are identified to be “highly visible on the streets.” This cohort of street children comprises 1.61% of the urban young population between 0–17 years old. Using the criteria set in Lamberte (2000), the estimated number of highly visible street children for the 22 major cities covered in the study is 22,556. Metro Manila had the highest number at 11,346 children. The disaggregation is as follows: • • • • • Manila City – 3,266 Quezon City – 2,867 Kalookan City – 1,530 Pasay City – 1,420 Rest of Metro Manila – 2,263
Highlights of the Lamberte study are: 1. Majority of the children covered in the study were located in barangays and/or areas outside their place of residence. Thus, it is important to use a Metropolitan approach to address the problem on street children. 2. Most of the street children are engaged in income-generating activities such as vending; scavenging; washing or watching over cars, buses, and market stalls; shoe-shining; and making deliveries. 3. Children covered in the survey were much older than those in previous studies, with an average age of 14.6 or approximately 15 years old. Most are in their middle (6–12 years old) and adolescent years (13–15 years old). 4. Children belong to large family size having an average of 5 children, three of whom are males. 5. Some 34.4% of the children were found not having gone to school within the past school year. Educational assistance may have helped lessen dropout rates among street children since present figure is much lower than what was recorded in the previous study. 6. Of the fathers, 87% have gainful work and are generally in the service sector. Of the mothers, 63% are engaged in gainful work and are mostly in sales and/or vending. 7. Almost all of the children (96.42%) have living parents or at least a living mother or a father. Of this group, only 76.83% live with their parents or any parent. The rest live with other relatives and non-relatives. Others stay in temporary shelters. Marital status of parents contributes to the living arrangement of the children. A higher percentage of children living with non-relatives have separated parents. Having a single parent also seems to explain why children live with other relatives rather than with own parents. 8. About 86% (8 of 10) of the children established contacts with their families and this occurs for children who live with their families and/or
relatives. Contrary to previous studies, children refused to go home not because of poverty and influence of peers but more of unfavorable family conditions. Across areas, children did not go home to their families either because of physical abuse experienced at home or mere dislike of their own home arrangement. Those living with family and/or relatives go home daily while those residing with non-relatives rarely or infrequently go home. 9. Quite a number of the street children indulged in high risk behaviors such as substance abuse (ever use of prohibited drugs (15.4%); recent use (56.6%)); and unprotected sex practice (ever engaged in sex (8.4%); recent engagement in sex (89.7%)). About 17.9% have been apprehended by police due to vagrancy, substance abuse, and illegal acts. The relatively low incidence of substance abuse and sex practice among the children, as compared to the figures in previous studies, may plausibly be explained by the program interventions and services, which could have produced positive outcomes. In contrast, incidence of police arrests is much higher because of strict enforcement of the laws or ordinances among local governments. 10. Those in substance abuse are likely to be males, in their adolescent years, middle child among the siblings, were dropouts not only in recent year but also for a longer period of time, and have parents who are separated. Those who were apprehended by the police are likely to be males, in their adolescent years, middle child among the siblings, were school dropouts, have separated parents, and their mothers were engaged in gainful work. 11. About 21.7% were considered “hardcore.” These are likely the ones who grew up and stayed for much longer hours on the streets. Typically, they are males, in their adolescent years, the middle child among the siblings, they do not live with parents or any of the parents, parents were separated, and mothers were economically productive. Most of the “hardcore” do not go home to their families. Quite a number of these children indulged in high risk behaviors - 43.3% in substance abuse and 20.3% in sex. About 43.1% got apprehended by police mainly because of involvement in illegal acts. 12. About 15.4% of the children were ever admitted to the centers; the incidence of institutionalization is higher in NCR possibly because it has the most number of shelters or centers; the majority (59.7%) stayed for more than one month, and one year but less than 3 years. Reasons for leaving the center were due to problems related to the management of the centers, and the type of child–service provider interaction taking place in the center. Others left the centers due to family reintegration intervention. 13. On visibility, children stay on the streets for an average of 9 hours in a day. The range is from 4 hours to 24 hours. About 8% stay on the streets the whole day and the greatest number of these children is in Metro Manila. Factors that determine the visibility of children on the streets are as follows: i. Age – the older the child is, the more likely he stays longer in the streets; ii. Gender – males tend to be highly visible compared to females;
iii. School participation – being away from school, children tend to stay on the streets for a longer period of time; iv. Living arrangement – growing up on the streets and becoming one of the “hardcore” children also make them stay longer in the streets; living with other people instead of being with one’s family and relatives pushes children to stay longer in the streets; v. Frequency of going home – establishing frequent contacts with family prevents children from staying long in the streets; vi. Assistance extended by street educators and workers – presence of individuals assisting children while on the streets serves as a magnetic or pull factor attracting children to stay longer on the streets; and vii. Child’s knowledge of organizations and agencies providing assistance – knowledge of the existence of NGOs serving the needs of street children serves as deterrent to the prolonged stay of children on the streets. With these findings, Lamberte (2000) emphasized the importance of guiding policies, programs, and interventions to make all efforts child-focused and rights-based. The study points to the need to respect the dignity of children. Children should be viewed as human resource, thus, efforts must be aimed at developing their capacities and selfesteem. Efforts should also be concerned about their own interests and thus, should be child- and culturally sensitive. It is helpful not to view these children as defenseless or dependent but rather people must nurture images and views that they are creative, resilient, imaginative, and surviving individuals in the streets. Moreover, efforts must be child-focused, particularly in addressing high risk acts indulged by children. The study argues that the problem on street children is structural and organizational, thus, program interventions must be systematic, institutional, and organized. In this sense, programs and activities must be systematically organized such that assistance to children is readily available and sustainable. Sporadic and seasonal forms of assistance should be discouraged to avoid attracting children to stay in the streets. Assistance and donations should be channelled to organizations and agencies working with and for the street children. Preventive approaches must be employed as well. These include continuous counselling and nurturing skills on the part of parents. Frequency of family contacts needs to be enhanced as well. There is a need to review, examine and rethink the strategies adopted by “streetbased” programs and interventions given the findings that individual assistance encourages visibility and stay of children on the streets. Likewise, there is a need to study closely the community-based strategies and program outcomes to strengthen and appropriately design programs. On monitoring, a systematic and well-organized information system should be in place to generate solid data on children. Lamberte (2000) recommended the creation of a Children Information Network to be led by an independent entity. The Network is meant to coordinate the information system not only on street children but on children, in general. The proposed Network may be composed of organizations and agencies with track record on their services. For instance, De La Salle University (DLSU) for data and information on street children, Ateneo de Manila University
(ADMU) for data and information on children in conflict with the law, and University of the Philippines (UP) for data and information on victims of sexual abuse and commercial exploitation. It is envisioned that the Network will greatly facilitate the feedback mechanism among interested parties particularly those organizations, agencies and institutions working with and for the children and stakeholders as well. Child Labor The International Labour Organization (ILO) has three categories of child labor based on Conventions 138 and 182. They are as follows:24 1. labor that is performed by a child who is under the minimum age specified for that kind of work (as defined by national legislation in accordance with accepted international standards) and is likely to impede the child’s education and full development; 2. labor that jeopardizes the physical, mental, or moral well-being of a child either because of its nature or because the conditions in which it is carried out is known as hazardous work; and 3. the unconditional worst forms of child labor, which are internationally defined as slavery, trafficking, debt bondage, and other forms of forced labor, forced recruitment of children for use in armed conflict, prostitution and pornography, and other illicit activities. In the Philippines, RA 7658 defines child labor as the “illegal employment of children below the age of fifteen, where they are not directly under the sole responsibility of their parents or legal guardian, or the latter employs other workers apart from their children who are not members of their families, or their work endangers their life, safety, health and morals or impairs their normal development including school.” DOLE expanded this definition by including the situation of children below 18 years old who are employed in hazardous occupations, which include (a) work that causes exposure to physical, psychological, or sexual abuse; (b) work underground, under water, or at dangerous heights; (c) work with dangerous machinery, equipment and tools, or that involves manual handling or transport of heavy loads; (d) work in an unhealthy environment; and (e) work under particularly difficult conditions. Protecting children from child labor, particularly the worst forms of child labor, is well-emphasized in Article 32 of the CRC. The article states that... “State Parties recognize the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development.”
Aldaba, Lanzona, and Tamangan. 2003. “A National Policy Study on Child Labour and Development in the Philippines.”
924 children-at-risk.922 children in the worst forms of child labor. c. This was done through provision of various services such as education (through formal education and the ALS). Strengthening and sustaining the Sagip-Batang Manggagawa or SBM (which literally means rescue the child laborer) mechanism to rescue children from the worst forms of child labor. and 21. Sagip Batang Manggagawa (SBM) or Rescue the Child Workers Program. 2) To establish a 24-hour Quick Action Team Network Centers to respond to immediate and/or serious child labor cases. The main government program that deals with child labor is the Philippine TimeBound Programme (PTBP) on the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor from 2002 to 2007.2). h. b. This program has financial assistance from the US Department of Labor through ILO-IPEC and World Vision. both through the formal system and through ALS. Institutionalization of child monitoring systems. 6. Expansion of the labor force survey to include data on working children and inclusion of child labor concerns in DOLE’s labor standards enforcement framework.000 children had been prevented and withdrawn from the six25 worst forms of child labor. At the national level. e. It started in 1994 with DOLE as the implementing agency. monitoring. Development of advocacy and IEC materials such as video series on child labor (in DVD format). and vocational skills training. and reporting the most hazardous forms of child labor to proper authorities who can either refer cases to appropriate institutions or provide direct assistance. rehabilitation assistance. legal assistance. psychosocial counselling. Capacity building and training on child labor monitoring. pyrotechnics. and the NCR. and TV and radio plugs that heighten awareness on the six worst forms of child labor. and livelihood alternatives for their families. Livelihood generation using appropriate technology and microenterprise development for families of child laborers. children in domestic work. 25 Includes mining and quarrying. and i. 3. and commercial sexual exploitation. CWC (2007) says more than 40. d. Provision of opportunities for education. The PTBP covers Regions 3. Training on basic life skills for children and promoting occupational health and safety. g. 11. This program has the following eight objectives: 1) To establish a community-based mechanism for detecting. SBM is an inter-agency quick action mechanism that responds to cases of worst and hazardous forms of child labor. 5. 160 . basic healthcare. f. Fundamental activities implemented under the PTBP on the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor include a. deep sea fishing. children in commercial agriculture particularly sugarcane plantations. Master-listing of 23. As of April 2007. 7. RA 7610 and RA 7658) are considered as landmark child protection laws (Box III.243 siblings of child laborers.
A Consolidated Report of the Sagip Batang Manggagawa Assessment Workshops.723 Number of Workers Rescued Minors Total Female ND Male 134 160 191 162 110 150 83 990 18 162 0 0 0 0 0 180 110 236 125 53 36 137 23 720 15 53 30 0 5 70 11 184 Adults Female 89 157 95 53 31 67 12 504 Male 49 41 215 78 41 68 61 553 ND 6 26 0 0 0 0 0 32 ND ‐ no disaggregation *Sex disaggregation data started in 1998 only Source: Department of Labor and Employment DOLE RO's Statistical and Performance Reporting System (SPRS) (Available in CWC's Subaybay Bata Monitoring System) 26 Famador. a total of 507 rescue operations were conducted with 1. psychosocial. To date. In 2008. 3) To undertake immediate relief for child laborers in hazardous and/or exploitative conditions through conduct of search-and-rescue operations or other appropriate interventions. guardians. In 2001–2007.723 child laborers rescued (Table III. Eva.22). or appropriate child-caring institutions. and other needed services for the child labor victims. of Rescue Operations 70 106 87 74 63 50 57 507 Overall Total Total 311 599 531 293 187 355 167 2. Summary of the Number of Child Workers Rescued Sagip Batang Manggagawa Statistical Report on Rescue Operation.22. and 8) To upgrade the capabilities of implementers in coming up with childfriendly procedures in protecting children.26 SBM is operational across 16 regions of the country. 7) To facilitate the return or commitment of child laborers to parents.443 201 363 406 240 151 218 144 1. 2001. 6) To provide technical assistance in the prosecution of civil or criminal cases filed against employers and employment agencies violating laws and policies on child labor. 2001‐2007 Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total No. DOLE closed down nine establishments for employing minors in prostitution or in lewd shows pursuant to RA 9231. 5) To impose sanctions on violators of child labor laws. Table III. 161 . there are 33 SBM Quick Action Teams (QATs) in 7 provinces and 8 cities. 4) To provide appropriate medical.
27 Or child laborers depending on three considerations such as hazards faced by the child. security and peace-and-order issues. 21. and that 7 of 10 children worked in rural areas. These children came from different age groups where 9. based on NSO figures. most of them were unskilled and unpaid laborers in family farms.42% in Cagayan Valley.31% in Caraga. and construction industries were the most hazardous while mining.2% are 10–14 years old. 22.6% are 5–9 years old. transport. This proportion is almost the same as the survey done for 1994–1995. government and private sector interventions. (2003) attributed such disparities to factors such as regional growth trends. Nevertheless. In 2001. 2001. child work incidence in some regions was more than 20%. and agriculture were considered as the worst biological hazards. Aldaba et al. (2003) presented a taxonomy of responses to child labor (Box III. the number of “economically active” children was estimated at 4 million (16%) of the 25 million Filipino children 5–17 years old.81% in Eastern Visayas. Aldaba et al. communication.25 million children were out of school. Situation of Child Workers27 in the Philippines Aldaba et al. age. and 21. 24. 2000 to September 30. Using the National Survey on Children (NSC) covering October 1. Aldaba et al. about 30% or 1. NGOs. and tardiness. 18. absenteeism.75% in Central Visayas. About 60% of the “economically active” children were involved in hazardous work (Sardaña 2000). the less likely they were attending school. there is a need to strengthen their implementation. Survey data revealed regional disparities in child work incidence. In terms of chemical exposure. and parental supervision. coupled with high cost of schooling. Unfortunately. (2003) found out that the majority of working children were male. and 48% are 15–17 years old. 25. 10–17 years old. 162 . It shows the possible linkages that can be established among different sectors to address child labor concerns and issues.7% in Northern Mindanao. and civil society organizations. The most physically hazardous industry was mining and quarrying.4). Children’s lack of interest in school. Child work affected the performance of children in school. There is also a need to further strengthen the linkages among government agencies. Among the 4 million “economically active” children in 2001. Aldaba et al. and the creation of Caraga as another region in Mindanao. quarrying. (2003) noted that the older the working children were. (2003) noted that 1 of 6 Filipino children has to work to support his/her family. Building Blocks and Partners for a Strategy Key policies and programs are already in place to address child labor. led children to drop out from school. It resulted in low grades. as follows: 29.34% in Central Mindanao.
Policy Research and Statistical Analysis Academe. Research.org.28 It aims to eliminate exploitative and worst forms of child labor. the private sector (trade unions. Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)) Civil Society Groups International Institutions Examples Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan 2001-2004 R. NGOs. and DILG.ph http://www. Advocacy 8. 5. Sagip-Bata Manggagawa PRRM ERDA Foundation. 2. Its Technical Working Group is composed of five subgroups as follows: 1. NSO surveys 9. DepEd. Law. Employers Confederation of the Philippines) and labor groups (e. and NGOs. UNICEF studies.. Kamalayan Development Foundation. Ratification of ILO Convention 182 3. The subgroups are envisioned to be a forum for the different program partners to share their inputs to the National Program Against Child Labor (NPACL). remove children less than 18 years old from hazardous work.e. DSWD.ph 163 . Government and International Institutions Source: Aldaba et al (2003) "A National Policy Study on Child Labour and Development in the Philippines These linkages are best exemplified by the groups and committees that were formed to respond to child labor.childprotection. Local Ordinances Main Sectors Involved National Government and Private Sector National and Local Government (i. Trade Union Congress of the Philippines).29 28 29 http://www.g. 7658. Awareness Raising and Social Mobilization and Fund Raising PRRM Radio Program. Children's Hour DOLE. Enforcement. The NPACL is a joint undertaking of the Philippine government. various employers (e. Legislation and National Policy. Bantay Bata. ILO-IPEC Programs. international welfare and social development institutions. Box III. Taxonomy of Responses to Child Labor Forms of Responses 1. Coordination and Networking Local Government and Civil Society Civil Society and Private Sector Civil Society and Private Sector Government and Civil Society All stakeholders Visayan Forum National Child Labor Committee DPNet ILO-IPEC studies. and labor groups). and Monitoring 5. 3..4. Community Organization and Livelihood Programs 6. Provision of Educational Assistance and Scholarships 7. and LGUs.dole. 4. Macroeconomic Stability and Sustained Economic Growth 2.A.g.. and Policy Social Protection Education Capacity Economic Opportunities DOLE heads the committee with the members from government agencies such as DOH.gov. World Vision Development Foundation 4. employers. Surveilance. and protect and rehabilitate the abused and exploited working children. An example is the National Child Labor Committee (NCLC).
and have stopped schooling. Summary of the Number of Juvenile Delinquents/CICL By Type of Cases CASES Rape Attempted rape Acts of lasciviousness Physical injuries Murder Attempted rape Theft Robbery RA 6425 (Prohibited drug) PD 1619 (Illegal use of rugby) Seduction Grave threats Abduction Homicide Malicious mischief Estafa Vagrancy PD 1866 (Illegal possession of firearms) PD 1602 (Illegal gambling) Others related crimes TOTAL 2001 410 28 81 386 34 14 2. charged with property-related crimes.430 2006 194 14 45 122 22 6 846 136 36 216 1 8 6 17 17 4 21 23 16 205 1.23 shows the number of CICL to be declining since 2001 and the rate of decline is highest in 2005 (38%) in relation to 2004. belong to large.027 8 8 24 47 68 3 153 31 61 440 5. The 2009 Situationer on Filipino Children prepared by the CWC provides a profile of CICL as usually male.297 (Table III. between 14–17 years old.895 2002 258 27 68 289 38 59 2. there were 1.955 Source: WCCD (Available in CWC's Subaybay Bata Monitoring System) Based on data obtained from Subaybay Bata Monitoring System. No comparison can be made as the 2007 data is still very preliminary. use drugs and alcohols.629 289 154 1.656 2003 211 15 95 299 43 205 2.23.938 2005 200 12 33 140 20 11 937 259 68 352 2 4 4 23 20 2 46 8 19 270 2.263 2004 246 17 49 258 29 11 1. begging. data from Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC) shows that the number of CICL nationwide in 2006 was 5. low-earning family of six members. truancy.559 494 199 912 85 8 9 45 64 6 81 34 44 377 5.24). The two most common crimes committed by CICL are theft and illegal use of rugby. In contrast.952 324 88 577 5 4 15 37 30 2 33 31 17 213 3. A close look at Table III. Table III. vagrancy. 164 . have low educational attainment.274 323 113 553 16 5 7 13 20 5 30 8 13 15 4. or alcohol use. Children in Conflict with the Law Children in conflict with the law (CICL) are those under 18 years old who are suspected or accused of committing offences such as petty crimes.955 CICL in 2006 but this does not include other CICL recorded by other institutions.
Data from the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) of the DILG show that crimes committed by CICL are mostly property-related. In contrast. of CICL as of June 2007 70 6 6 60 9 30 8 83 8 58 63 11 11 33 24 6 80 428 171 91 113 23 1. 165 .24. rape.297 No. The number of such crimes varies across regions. It is believed that the advantages of urbanization also brings about a number of disadvantages including spawning marginalized and 30 Index crimes are those that occur with regularity. non-index crimes are violations of special laws such as RA 6425. of CICL as of Dec 2006 276 123 257 418 251 89 416 456 174 412 158 478 518 102 102 23 155 355 179 103 80 10 162 5. Crimes against property account for 69% of the total number of index crimes30. In sum.28). NCR is again highest in number. On crimes against person committed by CICL. These are violations of the revised penal code such as murder. which can be attributed to children’s deprivation and poverty. Other regions that include Region IV-A and Region VII have a considerably high incidence of crimes of this type. followed by Region IV-A and VII. 2006 & 2007 Region/ Institution Region I Region II Region III Region IV‐A Region IV‐B Region V Region VI Region VII Region VIII Region IX Region X Region XI Region XII Caraga CAR ARMM NCR BuCor CRADLE MOLAVE MYRC Pasay Youth Home BJMP National Total Philippines. Table III.392 Source: 3rd & 4th Periodic Reports on the Implementation of the CRC. NCR. NCR is highly urbanized while the other two regions are urbanizing fast. homicide. Regions IV-A and VII are the three regions with high incidence of crimes committed by CICL against person and property (Table III. What is distinct about these three areas is their level of economic development. NCR has the highest while ARMM has the lowest incidence of crimes against property. and the like. theft. 2007 No. Inventory of CICL by Region as Per Records of JJWC.
and center-based programs in 2007 of which 2. More specifically. which may be linked with the incidence of crimes in urbanized areas like NCR. Region IV-A and Region VII. These are classified into community-based and center-based programs. through DSWD.23 and Table III.759 CICL were served in community. while jails are generally wellknown for their very poor conditions.25 show that crimes committed by CICL are a mixture of serious and non-serious crimes but regardless of the gravity of the crime.26). however.565 are male. more work is needed given the current state of jails in the country. CICL. community-based programs served 62% of the male CICL. Community-based programs catered to a greater number of CICL (1. are detained with adult offenders under very poor conditions (e. and educational programs). and human rights violations. DILG (Available in CWC's Subaybay Bata Monitoring System) Table III. Common Crimes Commited by Children in Conflict with the Law Average for 2007 Index Crimes Crime vs Person Homecide Rape PHY INJ Sub‐total 10 1 1 0 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 3 0 1 2 2 0 27 15 2 1 0 4 0 5 1 12 0 4 4 0 1 1 4 0 54 2 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 13 36 6 2 0 17 2 7 3 20 0 14 9 1 3 6 10 2 138 Crime vs Property Robbery Theft Sub‐Total 62 4 1 1 21 2 7 2 20 1 7 19 1 4 1 9 0 162 43 6 2 1 21 4 6 3 21 2 4 10 4 3 6 6 1 143 105 10 3 2 42 6 13 5 41 3 11 29 5 7 7 15 1 305 Non‐Index Crimes Viol of RA Other Sub‐ 6425/9165 Crimes Total 9 4 1 1 7 0 1 2 19 0 16 6 2 2 0 3 0 73 36 2 1 0 10 1 4 4 15 3 15 8 1 2 4 5 3 114 45 6 2 1 17 1 5 6 34 3 31 14 3 4 4 8 3 187 Grand Total 186 22 7 3 76 9 25 14 95 6 56 52 9 14 17 33 6 630 Murder NCR I II III IV‐A IV‐B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII XIII CAR ARMM Total 9 3 0 0 3 1 1 2 5 0 9 2 1 1 3 2 2 44 Source: Bureau of Jail Management and Penology. overcrowded detention cells with poor sanitation. For instance. The Philippine government. The majority of jails in the country still do not have separate cells for minors (Table III. more often than not. the number of CICL detained with adults has decreased.27). disadvantaged families.25. However. in many cases.g. 166 . the two programs served an almost equal number of female CICL (Table III. CICL. Some 2. and inadequate food.686) compared with center-based programs (1. has put in place programs that protect CICL as they are vulnerable to abuse. health care. violence. Efforts are being done to provide separate detention cells for children.. are subjected to judicial measures. Table III. This translates into 93% of the total number of CICL served.073). With the passage of RA 9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act (JJWA).
759 80 50 217 87 308 227 15 74 76 280 173 213 326 363 247 23 2.686 0 0 0 1.565 58 54 715 1.686 1.588 0 0 0 1. by Sex. of CICL Served in Center‐ Based Program Both Male Female 1. CY 2007 Region Total No. Table III.855 2. of CICL Served in Community‐ and Center‐Based Progams Both Male Female 2.073 68 8 111 5 115 208 0 20 60 113 77 75 35 157 0 21 1.738 194 67 10 4 6 8 4 0 1 0 25 7 20 12 26 4 0 194 0 3 74 117 Total No.588 10 40 102 77 189 18 15 53 16 149 91 118 279 186 243 2 1.686 12 42 106 82 193 19 15 54 16 167 96 138 291 206 247 2 1. Number of Children in Conflict with the Law Served By Program/Project/Service.27.588 98 2 2 4 5 4 1 0 1 0 18 5 20 12 20 4 0 98 0 0 0 98 Total No. by Region.759 58 57 789 1.565 13 40 213 81 300 223 15 73 76 255 166 193 314 337 243 23 2. of CICL Served in Community‐ Based Programs Both Male Female 1.073 58 57 789 169 977 3 0 111 4 111 205 0 20 60 106 75 75 35 151 0 21 977 58 54 715 150 96 65 8 0 1 4 3 0 0 0 7 2 0 0 6 0 0 96 0 3 74 19 Total NCR CAR I II III IV‐A IV‐B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Caraga Age Group 9 to below 10 10 to below 14 14 to below 18 No age bracket Source: Department of Social Welfare and Development (CWC's Subaybay Bata Monitoring System) 167 .26 Number of BJMP and PNP Jails With and Without Separate Cells for Minors As of May 2008 Region NCR CAR Region I Region II Region III Region IV‐A Region IV‐B Region V Region VI Region VII Region VIII Region IX Region X Region XI Region XII Caraga ARMM Total With separate Without separate cells for minors cells for minors 1 12 8 14 22 12 8 24 21 14 7 8 19 6 10 17 5 208 22 40 78 4 74 112 49 11 82 62 99 48 41 7 13 49 78 869 Source: Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) Table III.
Based on NSCB’s report.981 1.197 2005 936 2. and 42. Thus. child labor.084 351 348 43 294 11 1. child trafficking.009 268 24 102 371 8. JJWC developed a national juvenile intervention program. cases of physical abuse or maltreatment served by DSWD decreased during 2003–2006 but increased by 8% in 2007.445 412 21 29 42 9. This is due to the significant increase in cases of most types of child abuse particularly neglect. there are 81 provinces. 136 cities.267 2.018 287 267 242 19 6 1.395 1. the most common form of abuse is sexual abuse. Cases of sexual abuse served by DSWD in 2001 is 3.332 538 284 245 32 7 1.377 692 208 165 121 17 27 863 285 77 204 184 7.134 2.039 1. NGOs. Table III. This will take much time. which increased by 4% in 2002.420 2. This argument is more valid if one is to consider 168 . and on his/her dignity. cases of child abuse served by DSWD have been declining during 2003– 2006 but notably they increased from 6.008 barangays. illegal recruitment. and acts of lasciviousness.and center-based programs. there should be caveat in analyzing available data as there may be cases which remained unreported. Child Abuse Child abuse encompasses all forms of physical and/or emotional maltreatment.495 municipalities. and youth organizations. The issue on child abuse is disturbing as it has harmful effects on the child’s health. particularly in remote and far-flung areas.from the provinces down to the cities.189 513 311 247 51 13 1.182 Source: Department of Social Welfare and Development (Available in CWC's Subaybay Bata Monitoring System) In general.440 358 21 95 90 10.259 1. Table III.336 2006 1.129 2.370 268 30 66 208 10.980 2.28.634 1. with the highest rate occurring in 2007 at 32%.549 4. It continued to decline. given the number of LGUs in the country.245 543 249 224 21 4 1.28 presents the number of reported cases of child abuse served by DSWD through its community.606 2007 878 2. 1.045 2003 1.939 1. It may be noted that this has been decreasing since 2003 with the highest rate of decline in 2007 at 19%. Number of Child Abuse Cases Served.249 2. This program needed to be localized and instituted at the LGU level .980. in consultation with relevant government agencies. By Type of Abuse Types of Abuse Abandoned Neglected Sexually Abused Rape Incest Acts of Lasciviousness Sexually Exploited Victims of Prostitution Victims of Pedophilia Victims of Pornography Physically Abused/Maltreated Victims of Child Labor Victims of Illegal Recruitment Victims of Trafficking Victims of Armed Conflict Total 2001 985 2.214 333 54 135 44 9.026 2.606 in 2006 to 7.079 2. however.182 in 2007.192 1. which includes rape.285 3.526 921 356 244 236 7 1 796 231 14 146 66 6. and armed conflict.044 2004 1. incest.560 4. Cases of sexual exploitation served by DSWD declined in 2005.803 1.097 2. survival. Across the years covered by the study.416 1. municipalities. A number of Filipino children suffer from child abuse or maltreatment. and sexual abuse and exploitation.627 3. In contrast. the actual number of child abuse cases could be higher.277 1. and barangays (CWC 2007).448 2002 1. However. development.
disparities and gender inequality as well as analysis on causality and correlation if there were available data particularly on birth registration. is highlighted in the various sections of this report. and NGOs aside from DSWD that maintain database on child abuse. The government and other sectors of society should be more vigilant and more aggressive in combating child abuse. Policies. National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). and in communities is a cause of serious concern. orphanhood and child vulnerability. and Programs Basic education is mandated in the Constitution. Current efforts such as tri-media campaign and information dissemination at the barangay level should be continued. 4. the other organizations. institutions. Concluding Remarks The importance of having solid data on children. and the NSCB. maltreatment. The national longer-term development program. child labor. there should also be intervention of this sort to deal with other forms of child abuse. DepEd. PNP. There is a need for the CWC) to consolidate all data through its macro monitoring system to capture a complete picture of child abuse in the country. This is translated into specific laws governing the operations of the education sector. there could have been discussion and analysis on child outcomes. DOJ. particularly those relating to child protection. Education National Laws. or other forms of violence continue to afflict children at home. International development objectives such as the Education For All and the MDGs. While CWC already collaborates with government agencies such as DSWD. There should also be a more systematic effort to help victims deal with the psychological trauma of child abuse such as psychological counselling programs for the abused child. DOH. there is a need to forge stronger linkage with data-generating agencies such as the NSO particularly in obtaining data on birth registration and orphanhood. BJMP. in schools. among others. These efforts raise awareness on the actual and potential harm of child abuse and maltreatment and hopefully. NSCB also generates statistics on violence against women and children. DSWD has organized an interagency and interdisciplinary intervention nationwide to respond to the needs of the victims of sexual abuse. and NNC. such as the MTPDP. This report recognizes the great help of the SBMS in its completion. Specific programs are implemented to achieve these objectives. since the latter has formulated the statistical framework and glossary on the protection of women and children. help prevent child abuse. The fact that child abuse. 169 . and early marriage. also help shape national goals and programs for the sector. In fact. as well as his/her family (CWC 2007). contains the periodic objectives and strategies for the sector. DOLE. However. However. The CWC’s initiative to establish the Subaybay Bata Monitoring System (SBMS) is commendable.
170 . It also provides for the establishment of an incentive system including “scholarship grants. as well as selflearning. Apart from affirming the constitutional provision for “free and compulsory education in the elementary level and free education in the high school level.” RA 9155 or the Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001 provides the framework for governing basic education and reconstitutes the then Department of Education. informal. the MTPDP aims to (a) address classroom gap with the construction of classrooms. (d) strengthen values formation. it aims to provide civic. promoting equity in. adoption of double.” (iv) assessing children’s readiness for school and addressing delays in their development. are anchored on the Education for All program and in the MDGs. The Constitution also commits the State to “assign the highest budgetary priority to education.” It provides for “free public education” in elementary and high school. and compulsory elementary education. and (v) expanding nutrition and health programs. To enhance basic education. (ii) tapping the barangay daycare centers to provide ECE services. strategies. accountability. and other training for adults and the disabled. and indigenous learning systems. The 1987 Constitution mandates the State to “. Finally. science and English. (f) pursue the optional high school bridge program. (and) subsidies” especially for the disadvantaged in both public and private schools.. and responsibility for ensuring access to. (g) strengthen Madrasah and indigenous peoples’ education.to make such education accessible to all. (c) improve teaching and learning of mathematics. (h) promote school-based management. student loan programs. and improving the quality of basic education.” It proposes to give greater attention to schools and alternative learning centers. and plans on early childhood and basic education embodied in the MTPDP.” it also provides the department “authority. The MTPDP hopes to promote early childhood education (ECE) by (i) making preschool a prerequisite to Grade 1.protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels” and “. The 2004–2010 MTPDP aims to deliver quality basic education and to provide “more resources to schools to widen coverage and improve the management of operations of the public school system. independent and out-of-school study programs.. expanding subcontracting programs or providing scholarships and financial aid to high school students. (b) install a distance learning system especially in conflict areas. (iii) expanding the coverage of ECCD programs “to reach all five-year old children with priority to children of poorest households. and (j) rationalize the budget for basic education. particularly those that respond to community needs.or multiple-shift classes.. Culture and Sports (DECS) into the DepEd. (i) enhance pre-service teacher education and link this with in-service training. It also encourages “nonformal. and advises DepEd to give greater supervision on teaching content and methodology. (e) provide computers to all public high schools. vocational.” The periodic education goals..
DepEd is implementing “more responsive quality Alternative Learning System (ALS) Programs. 4. To achieve the third EFA goal. and monitor progress of efforts to attain EFA goals. create a network of community-based groups to attain EFA’s local goals. expand the ECCD coverage. get all schools to continuously improve. 1. The overall goal is to achieve functional literacy for all. enable teachers to enhance their contribution to learning outcomes. Functional literacy for out-of-school youth and adults. The plan focuses on six key production and three enabling tasks. respectively. 3. The three enabling tasks are to provide adequate public funding for countrywide attainment of EFA goals. improve impact on outcomes from complementary early childhood education.” These include the (i) Basic Literacy Program. and (g) continue to enrich the curriculum development in the context of pillars of new functional literacy. (ii) the ALS program for dropouts of formal education including an 171 . 2. DepEd is undertaking a package of reforms called Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA). and to enhance their well-being. and private sector participation. The program has the following objectives: 1. yield more EFA benefits. It allows the youth to participate in the country’s development. increase social support to attain desired learning outcomes. and Obtain the commitment of communities to supporting these objectives. The MTPDP states that poverty weakens access to education. and change institutional culture of DepEd to better support these key reform thrusts. alternative learning systems. Knowledge is important for national prosperity and competitiveness. to become productive. 5. To achieve the EFA goals. The production tasks intend to (a) (b) (c) (d) make every school continuously perform better. Satisfactory completion of elementary and secondary cycles by all children 6–11 and 12–15 years old. 3. Education allows individuals and families to break out of poverty and gain greater opportunities. Universal school participation and elimination of dropouts and repetition in the first three grades. (e) get all teachers to continuously improve their teaching practices. 4. (f) adopt a 12-year cycle for formal basic education. The reforms focus on five Key Reform Thrusts namely. transform nonformal and informal interventions into an alternative learning system (ALS) yielding more EFA benefits. 2. The Philippine Education for All (EFA) 2015 Plan is the country’s long-term plan aimed at improving basic education outcomes.
Accreditation and Equivalency (A&E) Program and a back-to-school program for outof-school adults.3% in 2001. The share of basic education. Among households with children in public schools. Data in Chapter 1 show that the share of social services to GDP has generally risen between 1985 and 2000 from 2. it gradually decreased to 8.e.5% to 17%.8: Basic Education Budget as Percentage of GDP.. After 1998. it picked up again in recent years and reached a high of 9. Budget Allocation for Education The share of social services in central government spending (i. The figures recently rebounded. reaching 71% in 1998. reaching a high of 19% in 2007.4%. which is unfortunate as this is an important resource for the analysis of education at the national level. current analysis of education spending across sectors rely more on location-specific data as the following illustrates. (v) Informal Education.1% in 1999. social allocation ratio) decreased from 27% in 1998 to 18% in 2005 before increasing to 19% in 2006 and 2007 (Manasan 2009). it decreased to 8. The accounts show that households spent the largest share on education (47%). 1999–2008 From 1991 to 1998. it rose back thereafter. After a brief rise to 9. they contributed the bulk of spending on education. Figure III. Nonfinancial corporations contributed 4% to education spending while financial corporations shared 2%.6% in 2008. NSCB compiled the National Education Expenditures Accounts (NEXA). decreased from 16% in 2006 to 12% in 2005 although it increased to 13% in 2007. Although this share declined to 64% in 1996. Together. followed closely by government (46%). (iii) ALS for differently-abled persons. Spending on basic education comprises the bulk of education spending. increasing from 54% in 1991 to 72% in 1995. However. 16% of spending on basic education in 1997 went to school fees with the bulk going to other private costs 172 .1%. From 9.4% in 2002.6% in 2005. However. Manasan and Maglen (1998) analyzed the distribution of household spending on education. it decreased since 2000 to 14% in 2005. Nonprofit institutions contributed the least to education spending with only 0.8). Therefore. the NSCB no longer compiled the NEXA. and (vi) Arabic Language and Islamic Values Education (ALIVE) for Muslim Migrants. and (iv) ALS program for Indigenous Peoples. The Rest of the World (ROW) contributed 0. in particular. The budget for basic education as a percentage of GDP fluctuated in the past 10 years (Figure III.
board. mostly from the general fund. Transportation takes up between a quarter to four-tenths of education spending. and PTCA. uniform. In private schools. The Special Education Fund (SEF) accounted for a very small share of the school’s resources at only 0. Between 2000 and 2008. DepEd’s budget grew nominally by 6% annually (Figure III. households spend much more on other school-related expenses as shown by a household survey in Dumaguete City and in three municipalities of Agusan del Sur.000 were collected as miscellaneous and other fees. About 2. over 90% of the school’s finances came from DepEd’s allocation. However.4% from monthly donations.39%) on average.9% from fund drives. (excluding uniforms. and lodging).9). 1. allowances make up from one-third to one-half of household spending on education. After decreasing in 2000 to 2001. In real terms.2%. In public schools.8% from PTCA fees. Households. Projects constitute 7% of spending. however. 31 173 .000. it has grown by less than 1% annually (0. It recovered in 2006 and grew by over 10% in 2007. and 0. less than 2% in public schools and less than 1% in private. In Dumaguete City and the three municipalities of Agusan del Sur. The LGU provided 3. Books constitute around 4%–7% while projects make up 3%–6%. projects. the average amount of fees collected by DepEd’s partnersecondary schools31 was about PhP11. through the Parents Teachers Community Association (PTCA) provided 6% of the school’s funds.000 were collected as tuition fees while almost PhP4. A picture of the current distribution of education spending can be seen in the case of a secondary school in Agusan del Sur. Books make up close to one-fifth of expenses. A very small proportion went to voluntary contribution. Uniforms comprise 5%–8% of education spending. The rest are spent on books. Apart from school fees and contributions to school maintenance and operations.4% of the school resources. it grew by almost 14% in 2002 but declined again in 2003 to 2005. 0. For households sending their children to private schools.000 and makes up between one-fifth and over one-half of education spending. These are the 2. it decreased again in 2008. Allowances take up one-fifth of spending while transportation comprise one-sixth. In SY 2007–2008. Tuition fees in private elementary schools average PhP12. A little over PhP7. school fees comprised around 48% of household education spending. tuition fee constitutes a significant portion of household spending. which is more than that contributed by the local government. In SY 2007–2008.5% came in the form of school fees. The greater half went to other private costs. Another one-fourth to onethird goes to allowances while another eighth goes to transportation. tuition fees in private secondary schools make up one-fourth to one-third of household spending on education while school fees constitute about one-eighth.565 secondary schools involved in the Educational Service Contracting (ESC) Scheme and Educational Voucher System (EVS) for SY 2007-2008. School fees also comprise onesixth of spending on education.
5%.2% in early 2000.10: Distribution of the Department of Education Budget. From 0. 2000–2008 Elementary education comprises the bulk of the budget for education. Figure III. Preschool education has a very small budget. rising steadily from one-fourth in 1999. down only from a peak of 71% in 2000 to 2001 (Figure III. 1999–2008 174 .1% in 2005. It steadily accounted for only 0. its share doubled. The share of nonformal education is equally small.4% in 2000. However.9: Department of Education’s Budget. it has since increased.10). It even decreased to 0. In 2007 and 2008. however. Secondary education constitutes three-tenths of the department’s budget.1% in 2000–2006. by Level. it stagnated at 0. taking up twothirds of the department’s budget in 2008. Figure III. and in 2008 it reached 1.
Between 1999 and 2007. this increased to PhP719. real allocation per student in elementary and secondary levels averaged PhP5. The share of capital outlay also increased from a low of 2% in 2001 to 9% in 2008. the share of personal services also decreased from a high of 86% in 2003 to 71% in 2008. however. it stood at 13%. except for a small amount for MOOE. Per student allocation in preschool is far below those in elementary and secondary. it generally decreased. MOOE rose from 11% to 19% over the same period. Department of Education. By 2005. The real per student budget for the Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Schools (GASTPE) increased from PhP2. as real allocation for elementary continued to increase.11). This decreased in 2000– 2001 but picked up in 2002.11: Per Student Education Budget. After reaching a trough in 2005. this has changed in recent years as the share of personal services decreased to 27% in 2006 and 17% in 2007. Capital outlay also rose from 4% in 2006 to 6% in 2008. In preschool. In 2007. personal services constituted practically the entire budget. Although it reached 5% 175 . However. At the secondary level. reaching a low of PhP135 in 2005.300 in 2001 to PhP3. In 2003. that for secondary again decreased. the share of maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE) finally rose starting in 2006 and in 2008. the same level as in 1999. as the latter picked up in 2004. real per student allotments for elementary and secondary education increased in 2006 and 2007. the former decreased.500 in 2007.000 (in 2000 prices) (Figure III. personal services increasingly made up most of the budget in the early 2000s. 1999–2007 Source of basic data: Fund Assistance to Private Education. although this has significantly decreased from a peak of 92% in 2003 to 81% in 2008. However. Budget for MOOE The bulk of the budget for elementary goes to personal services. Figure III. After levelling off at 5% in the early 2000s. Since 1999.
but this was offset by a separate nationwide allocation for repair and maintenance. the share of which rose from 54% in 2006 to 89% in 2008. the bulk of the budget goes to operations. Although its share decreased in 2006 due to the rise in the share of locally funded projects. its level has nevertheless risen.1% in 2008. down from 7. an item absent for preschool in earlier years. The share of textbooks and/or instructional materials generally rose from 10% in 2000 to 16% in 2007. In 2008. For elementary.1%. this decreased to 13% in 2008. in 2008. The share of foreign-assisted projects (FAPS) decreased from 10% in 2005 to only 0. The share of lump sum expenditures also generally fell between 2005 and 2008.12). it has risen thereafter and in 2008 returned to its share in 2005. For operations (Figure III. an average of 10% of the MOOE budget was allotted for the rationalization of schools’ MOOE. 35% of the MOOE went to schools. Budget for locally funded projects stood at 4. Figure III. the budget for the divisions constitutes the largest share at 42%.4% in 2007.7% in 2008. The share of cash allowances also decreased from 3% in 2005 to 1% in 2007 although it increased somewhat in 2008. The share of nationwide operations decreased from 28% in 2006 to 14% in 2009. 176 . The share of general administration and support is a far second. 1999–2008 The bulk of MOOE goes to operations. with its share generally rising from 66% in 2000 to 89% in 2008. the budget for repair and maintenance stood only at 7. especially in 2006. In 2008. decreasing from a high of 36% in 2007 when a school feeding program was implemented. rising from 12% in 2006. only 5.4%. this decrease is primarily due to a large allocation for capital outlay. Although this share decreased in 2006. MOOE for the division proper made up 5% while 2% (5% of division MOOE) was allotted for teachers’ in-service training. From 2004 to 2006. However. Local repair and maintenance of school buildings has risen from 9% to 12% in the early 2000s and has since declined.12: Distribution of Elementary MOOE.
In the 2008 National Expenditure Program. However. 4% was allotted for the rationalization of schools’ MOOE. The share of cash allowances also decreased from 1. tables.49 % in 2007 but increased to 0.4% in 2000 to 1. chairs. The second largest share went to the GASTPE. reaching close to four-tenths in 2008. a separate budget was added for Early Childhood Care and Development. the share of textbooks and/or instructional materials was 8%. In 2004. the entire budget for preschool was practically allotted to the locally funded project Preschool Education for All. 1999–2008 The MOOE for preschool was mostly for the nationwide Preschool Education Program (Figure III.4 % in 2008. In 2004–2006. This share has since fluctuated and stood at 1. it rose to 46% as the share of secondary schools decreased. Recently.13: Distribution of Secondary MOOE. Schools have the largest share of MOOE in secondary level (Figure III. The share of repair and maintenance gradually decreased from 5. this item has been classified under capital outlay. This increased from 40% in 1999 to almost half in 2003. In 2000.2% in 2005. the share of secondary schools increased. In 1999. this proportion was about 26%. In 2008. However.88 % in 2008.32% in 2001 to 0.13). In 2005. In early 2000. there was no funding for preschool except for cash allowances. though. The share of textbooks and/or instructional materials fluctuated with a peak of 14% in 2000 and a low of 4% in 2004. 13% of the budget was funded by the World Bank and ADB through the Early Childhood Development Project. Figure III. Since 2004. it has since decreased and stood at 36% in 2008. and armchairs in the early 2000s was 4%–5%. this decreased to twothirds in 2004 and to as low as one-fourth in 2006. The share of desks.14). 177 .
Real MOOE per student in secondary fell by an average of 3. at the school level.14: Distribution of Preschool MOOE. and budget for secondary is at the school level. budget for elementary is at the division level. Similarly. Figure III. and by 77% in secondary. real MOOE per student in preschool fell by an average of one-third yearly between 1999 and 2005.15: Real MOOE per Pupil/Student. it was only PhP142. In 2007. elementary. 1999–2008 From 1999 to 2006.5% annually (Figure III. by 104% in elementary. however. MOOE per elementary student at the division level was PhP180. real MOOE per pupil in preschool. However. In 2006. and secondary rose significantly by 84% in preschool. 2000–2007 (2000 prices) Note: Budget for preschool is at the national level. a Program Implementation Plan (PIP 2006) was developed to guide the implementation of BESRA. real MOOE per pupil in elementary (division level) rose by an average of 5.6% annually.15). In 2008. The PIP activities were financed from five sources: (i) 178 . Figure III.
Stage 2 . and/or replacement of classrooms and school buildings.7. and ARMM and to implement strategies that will provide opportunities for all children in these three Regions to access quality education and develop key life skills. (ii) proceeds from a World Bank loan under the National Programme Support for Basic Education Project (NPSBE). With US$32 million budget for 2008– 2011. 11. Budget for FAPs The NPSBE project aims “to improve quality and equity in learning outcomes for all Filipinos in basic education. and 4. This amount is shared among the following: (a) Support for Philippine Basic Education Sector Reforms (SPHERE) 43.18. (iii) proceeds from an AusAid grant. 33. Another 28% was for the construction. It aims to (i) strengthen SBM. from an Australian government grant administered as a Trust Fund by the World Bank. DepED’s annual budget under the General Appropriations Act (GAA). XII.4% was for the installation of the school-based management (SBM) system. Meanwhile. There are five other FAPs with a total budget of PhP3.” The project is funded by a World Bank loan of US$200 million.21.3% was for the purchase of textbooks/instruction materials.00% The SPHERE project complements NPSBE by assuming activities that are not covered and/or areas with additional needs.11. planning and standard development.” With a P696 million budget from 2008 onward.4% of this GAA budget was allotted for the construction of school buildings in areas experiencing acute classroom shortage.4% was for training. The BESRA budget under the 2008 GAA (RA 9498) was almost PhP11. and (iv) effectively mobilize resources. SPHERE is the largest project in the entire budget for FAPs. BEAM 2 is the second largest FAP on education. (iii) enhance quality and equity of education through the use of standards that address disparities in basic education inputs and outcomes. 179 .Stage 2 . (ii) improve teaching effectiveness.0% (c) Strengthening the Implementation of Basic Education in Selected Provinces in the Visayas (STRIVE) .3 billion.” The project will specifically work “to improve the quality of teaching and learning in basic education in Regions XI. and policy formulation. a four-year project (2004– 2008) aimed “to improve the quality of and access to basic education in Mindanao thereby contributing to the attainment of peace and development in the Southern Philippines. The remainder is shared by ICT equipment. 18. program.00% (e) Improvement of the Quality of Primary Education in Bicol and Caraga Regions (GOS-GOP) .00% (d) Education Performance Incentive Partnership (EPIP) . and (v) funds from the private sector and NGOs such as under the Adopt-ASchool program. (iv) Special Education Funds of LGUs.35 billion for 2008 onward. National English Proficiency Program. repair. The Government of Australia is also financing BEAM 2. hardship allowance.4% (b) Basic Education Assistance of Mindanao (BEAM) . rehabilitation.
with the latter providing a grant to establish a school-based financial management system and a human resource management system. Education Outcomes. DepEd is also implementing the STRIVE – Stage 2 project. STRIVE has the third largest FAPs budget (18%) at over PhP600 million. To achieve a net enrolment of 100% by 2015.” Its purpose is “to develop and strengthen selected education management and learning support systems.” The project covers Regions VI. and Northern Samar. Albay. Surigao del Norte.16). and Gender Inequality In 2002. To improve the quality of primary education particularly in areas of greatest need. Bohol. In fact. the low likelihood of meeting the target (NEDA-UNDP 2007). performance improved. the Philippines had a medium probability of meeting the MDG target in elementary participation (NEDA-UNDP 2005). There was only a modest improvement in 2007. hence. While enrolment rates among males were higher in 1990. The grant of Aus$10 million financed activities in 2007–2008. Its performance worsened even more in the following years. and VIII particularly Negros Occidental. For 2008 onward. Secondary participation remained relatively unchanged between 2003 and 2007: only 3 in 5 youth 12–15 years old attended high school (Figure III. The project will provide school facilities. To speed up the establishment of BESRA. requiring the achievement of a 25-year target in just eight years. However. and access to. basic education in the Visayas. DepEd forged an Education Performance Incentive Partnership (EPIP) with the Government of Australia. the budget is over PhP229 million or 7% of the FAPs budget. and Siargao). and Sorsogon) and Caraga (Agusan del Norte. cohort survival and completion rates even decreased in 2005 but returned to their previous levels in 2006. the 2007 level is the same as the 1990 level. implementation. these should increase by at least 1% annually until 2015. and to provide support to planning. Tagbilaran. in part by applying and modifying available responses for improved access to quality basic education appropriate to geographic isolated and disadvantaged populations.9% annually. elementary participation rate decreased (Figure III. between 2002 and 2006. this should increase by an average of 1. and strengthen institutional support in Bicol (Camarines Sur. In 2002. In 2006 and 2007. DepEd is implementing the Government of Spain and Government of the Philippines’ Elementary Education Project for Bicol and Caraga Regions.17). monitoring. and program management. train teachers. the Philippines had a low probability of meeting its targets on elementary cohort survival rate and completion rates. Gender equality in enrolment is also an MDG target. Disparities. the budget is PhP370 million or 11% of the total FAPs budget. The goal of the threeyear project (July 2007–June 2010) is “to contribute to the improvement in the quality of. However. For 2008 onward. Gender disparity in 180 . however. this was reversed in recent years with more females attending primary school. For 2008 onward. Latest data show an increase in elementary participation rate. To achieve its targets in cohort survival and completion rates. VII.
17: Secondary Participation. 2003–2007 Source: Department of Education Fact Sheet: Basic Education Statistics (2008) Gross enrolment in early childhood development programs (ECD) among 4–5 year olds gradually increased from 10% in SY 2003–2004 to 13% in SY 2007–2008 (Figure III. However.16: Performance on MDG Indicators.18). Gender disparity in ECD 181 . 2002–2007 Source: Department of Education Fact Sheet: Basic Education Statistics. Figure III. While gross enrolment targets are disaggregated for 3–4 year olds and 5-year olds. assessment of this performance relative to the EFA target is rather difficult. Figure III. data on gross enrolment are lumped together. Participation rate among females is 20% higher than among males. Cohort Survival. secondary participation remains high and somewhat increased. 2008. and Completion Rates.
Figure III. Cohort survival rates. Department of Education. and community factors. dropout rates are also lower for girls compared to boys. Household factors can result from the confluence of individual factors while community factors can result from the confluence of household factors. The same is true for graduation rate. also show higher rates for females compared to males. particularly for the secondary level (Table III. Common indicators at the individual level are age and sex.29). household. By Sex. and location at the community level. Transition rate.18: Key Indicators in Early Childhood Education. Disparities can emanate from individual. attaining the EFA target of universal ECE experience among Grade 1 by 2010 seems unlikely. which is the opposite of what is commonly observed in other countries in South Asia. 2003–2008 Source: Basic Education Indicators System. which measures the proportion of students who went into the next level (e. Gender disparity remained relatively unchanged. Despite this achievement. which measures the proportion of those who were able to complete their respective cycles. Note: GER – Gross Enrolment. income at the household level. Remarkable increase was noted in Grade 1 with ECD experience from 54% in SY 2003–2004 to 64% in SY 2007–2008. the performance rating of girls surpassed that of boys. both for elementary (Grade VI) and secondary (Fourth Year) levels.. enrolment decreased. 182 .g. from Grade IV to V in the elementary and from elementary to high school for secondary) also show a higher rate for females compared to males. which is the proportion of students enrolled in the initial year of the cycle who were able to reach the final year of the cycle. Finally. Data from the Basic Education Information System (BEIS) of DepEd for SY 2005–2006 show higher enrolment ratios among females (except for gross). In the Philippines. Gender equality in education outcomes is one of the millennium development goals. GPI – Gender Parity Index Disparities in education outcomes are observed across different socioeconomic dimensions.
Department of Education.96 6.51 72.35 94. Performance Indicators in Elementary and Secondary Levels.40 102. 2005–2006.29.76 Ave. they also leave school earlier than girls.87 74. Dropout Rate 1.20). Thus.73 0. SY 2005–2006 Elementary Secondary Total Male Female Total Male Female 64. 2006 Source: Labor Force Survey.28 4.64 Completion Rate 61. one observes a widening disparity in attendance rates starting at about age 12. It is important to note that male attendance rates are always below that of females. Figure III.99 47.37 50.02 Source: Basic Education Information System.80 Net Enrolment Ratio 73.44 97. Progress in attendance rates across ages provides clarification on what is observed on the average. Table III.65 9.58 58.84 98. 2006. Using data from the 2006 Labor Force Survey (LFS).42 58. one finds an inverted-U shaped curve relating attendance rates to age (for children 6–16 years old) (Figure III.06 56.21 42.19: School Attendance.61 95.56 48. By Age. 183 .19).41 Gross Enrolment Ratio 88.20 67.65 58.94 87.51 54.50 40.17 44.36 1.National Statistics Office.26 Transition Rate 96.64 62. by Age and by Sex.85 89.81 61.45 Cohort Survival Rate (Grade VI/Year IV) 62. Attendance rates across ages for rural and urban areas clearly reflect higher attendance in urban areas for all school-age groups (Figure III.35 66. School attendance rises for ages 6 to about 10 or 11 then starts to decline. A lesser proportion of school-age boys attend school.
2006 Sources: Merged Labor Force Survey. only attendance rates can be computed from available data. Figure III. Figure III. Merging the two data sets will enable the tabulation of school attendance by income class. 2006. Figure III. 2006. There is also greater disparity for males compared to females across income classes. by Income Decile. Unfortunately. The Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) is a rider to the LFS. by Age and by Location. Family Income and Expenditure Survey.21: School Attendance of Elementary and Secondary School-Age Children. 184 . National Statistics Office. By Income. It is clear that disparity is bigger in secondary compared to primary level. 2006 Source: Labor Force Survey.National Statistics Office.21 shows the disparity of attendance rates by income class. 2006.20: School Attendance. Income class is another source of disparity in income. The LFS provides data on school attendance for all members 5–24 years old of the survey households.
04 1.10 Sources: Basic Education Information System.07 1.30. and Urbanity (SY 2005–2006. Participation among females in ARMM is 10% more than males.01 2007–2008 1. rural–urban location. Gender.DAVAO REGION XII SOCCSKSARGEN ARMM Caraga 84.53 71.39 85.87 84.30 shows that net enrolment in elementary between 2005 and 2007 decreased across all regions.02 1.43 78.05 1.99 69. except ARMM.20 79.51 74.E.01 1. by Region.61 1. Most other regions have net enrolment rates of between 70% and 80%.02 1.43 87.87 79.10 1.65 75. Location also provides an important dimension of disparity. Apart from ARMM.03 1.02 1. By Location.08 80.77 92.01 1.02 1.43 77.03 1. This is followed by Eastern Visayas and SOCCSKSARGEN where over 4% more females than males are enrolled.26 74.01 1.92 90.13 0. Table III.02 1.98 1.17 1.01 1.99 1.87 71. It 185 .57 69.80 2007–2008 75.CAGAYAN VALLEY III . having decreased since 2005.03 1.17 1.01 1.02 1. Census of Population CY 2000.20 74. ethnicity.78 72.01 0.02 1. and language.02 1.61 82. VISAYAS VIII .02 1. National Statistics Office.02 1.96 72.52 72.01 1.06 1. respectively.CENTRAL LUZON IV-A CALABARZON IV-B MIMAROPA V .44 92.04 1.01 77. VISAYAS IX .03 Urban-Rural Ratio 2005–2006 1.96 73.58 84.80 Gender Parity Index 2005–2006 1. Location is usually discussed in terms of geographic groupings such as administrative regions. MINDANAO XI .14 80.99 91. Western Visayas and CAR have the second and third lowest net enrolment rates.01 1. only Bicol has an enrolment rate above 80%.04 1. Gender parity is highest in Ilocos and Caraga where participation rates between males and females are roughly the same.C. Gender disparity in elementary enrolment decreased in all regions except ARMM where enrolment rate is also highest.W.90 80.02 1. Department of Education.05 1.02 1. Latest data reveal that Davao region has the lowest net enrolment rate in elementary. Attendance Rates Table III.02 1.69 78.N.02 1.03 1. SY 2007–2008) Net Enrolment Ratio (%) 2005–2006 PHILIPPINES NCR CAR I . at 70% and 71%. This contrasts with ARMM where 92% of children are enrolled.05 1.94 74.02 1.ZAMBOANGA X . Less than 7 of 10 children 6–11 years old are enrolled in grade school. The following data and figures illustrate the disparities in various education indicators across locations.14 80.ILOCOS REGION II . up from 87% in 2005.00 1.00 1.10 1. Primary Net Enrolment Rates. VISAYAS VII .20 1.03 79.01 1.BICOL REGION VI .12 1.01 1.06 78.22 1.
26 1. Although net enrolment decreased in NCR. Caraga. In Central Visayas.83 52.37 CAR 57. However. Secondary net enrolment rates across all regions decreased from 2005 to 2007.17 40. Secondary Net Enrolment Rates. VISAYAS 54.03 ARMM 35.11 0.52 40. and SOCCSKSARGEN also remains among the highest and have risen further. VISAYAS 50.31. Western Visayas. CALABARZON. and Central Luzon have enrolment rates above 50%.25 1.24 1.94 C. on average.38 1.23 0.23 1.19 PHILIPPINES NCR 74.20 1. Gender parity is also high in Central Luzon and Cagayan.32 1. Net enrolment among females is still 18% higher than among males.22 1.27 1.18 1.76 39.09 MIMAROPA 56.28 1.55 Sources: Basic Education Information System.08 1. as shown in Table III.14 ZAMBOANGA 47.24 1.27 DAVAO REGION 49. by Region.46 W. however.24 1.09 43.91 44.12 2007– 2008 1.30 1.20 1.20 1. Apart from NCR.63 1.18 1. As of 2005.23 CAGAYAN VALLEY 59. net elementary enrolment in urban areas is.81 38. In Western and Eastern Visayas. most now have rates below this figure.26 E. even improved in favor of males.48 Caraga 48. On average.37 1.99 55.53 1. except in Caraga.27 36. enrolment rates are similar between urban and rural areas. National Statistics Office.28 1. enrolment in urban areas is 13% more than in rural areas. SY 2007–2008) Net Enrolment Ratio (%) 2005–2006 2007–2008 Gender Parity Index 2005– 2006 1. 186 .24 1.35 1.53 SOCCSKSARGEN 51.25 1. Department of Education.22 1.27 1.53 ILOCOS 65.27 1.86 1.12 Urban-Rural Ratio 2005–2006 58.02 38.33 39.19 1. the urban lead is 20% in Cordillera.30 1. Census of Population CY 2000.82 1. Gender disparity in ARMM.14 1. The advantage of urban areas is most evident in Mindanao where enrolment in urban areas in all regions is 12%–18% more than in rural areas.25 1. and Urbanity (SY 2005–2006. decreasing from 36% in 2005 to 29% in 2007.25 1. MINDANAO 51.27 1. VISAYAS 54. While most regions had enrolment rates above 50% in 2005.54 45.48 1. respectively. enrolment in urban areas is only 2%–10% higher than in rural areas. it is still the highest at 55%. Central Visayas.25 BICOL 53.14 1. 10% higher than in rural areas. Disparity decreased in Bicol.02 45.03 1. gender parity in secondary participation has not changed between 2005 and 2007.81 1.72 1.24 1.33 CENTRAL LUZON 68.06 1. For most regions in Luzon. Table III. with female participation higher than male participation by 30% and 27%.66 1.01 1.61 28.08 47. participation rate among females is only 1% more than that among males.31.96 CALABARZON 69.24 46.24 1.25 1.13 1.10 51.54 N. only Ilocos. Gender.93 50. Secondary participation remains lowest in ARMM. Gender disparity remains highest in Eastern Visayas and Cordillera.73 1.
Gender disparity remains lowest in NCR. Figure III. by Ethnicity Source: National Demographic and Health Survey 2003. National Statistics Office. secondary enrolment in urban areas is 25% higher than in rural areas.22.23 shows school attendance rates by language. Figure III. Disparity is highest in Mindanao where high school participation in cities is 45%–55% more than in towns for two-thirds of the regions. with those speaking English. Zamboanga. The Maguindanaons have the lowest school attendance rate at only 2 of 3 children attending school. and Ifugao—have full (100%) attendance rates. The Maguindanaons have a slightly higher attendance rate (68%) but this is still much lower than most ethnic groups. Central Luzon. The Manobos have the lowest school attendance rate with only 2 of 3 children attending school. Disparity between urban and rural areas is higher in secondary than in elementary participation. and Kankanaey having complete attendance rates. The Maranaos posted the second lowest at 76% while the Aklanon and Tausog ranked third and fourth at 82% and 83%. Cuyono. Disparity is lower in the Visayas with Central Visayas as the highest at 26%. Figure III.22 shows school attendance rates by ethnicity. respectively. The Maranaos have the third lowest attendance rate with only a little over 3 of 4 children attending school. Ibaloi. Three ethnic groups—the Cuyuno. In Luzon. 187 . Ilocos. and SOCCSKSARGEN. namely ARMM. Central Luzon (4%) and Western Visayas (6%) with rural areas in the latter two even having higher enrolment rates than urban areas. The rest of the ethnic groups have attendance rates above 80% with six groups posting between 80% and 89% while 13 others posting rates between 90% and 98%. The rest of the language groups have attendance rates 89% and over. Davao. Disparity between urban and rural areas is lowest in Caraga (3%). On average. urban areas fared better than rural areas by 53% in the Cordillera and by 46% in Bicol. School Attendance. and CALABARZON. and Cagayan Valley.
For instance. Across regions. ECD experience among girls and boys in ARMM are roughly the same. In ARMM. Cagayan Valley. or preparatory school. Figure III. Western Visayas. Among 6-year old children attending school. The Annual Poverty Indicators Survey (APIS) 2004 also includes data on educational poverty. Zamboanga. Apart from the generally low gross enrolment in ECD programs. School Attendance. it was only about 6%. in Cagayan Valley and ARMM. Among 6-year old children in the country. almost one-third attends nursery. there is also a notable disparity across regions (Table III. Gender disparity in ECD experience among Grade 1 is highest in NCR. National Statistics Office. with ECD experience among girls 6% higher than among boys. far above the rest of the regions. by Language Source: National Demographic and Health Survey 2003.32). 18% are not attending school. Gender disparity in enrolment is highest in Northern Mindanao where enrolment among girls is 8% more than among boys. kinder. and CAR have the least proportion of 6-year olds attending levels lower than Grade 1.23. Cordillera has the smallest rate at only 8%. ARMM. It is lowest in MIMAROPA. CALABARZON. Even the capital region has a lower than average enrolment rate. 188 . the rates are highest in Western Visayas (43%). 9 of 10 Grade 1 pupils have ECD experience. SOCCSKSARGEN and Caraga (42%). while enrolment in Ilocos region in SY 2007–2008 was 25%. this is lower than the ideal Grade 1 level. In Western Visayas. Disparity in ECD experience across regions is very wide. ARMM has the largest proportion at 72%. only 1 of 10 has such experience. and SOCCSKSARGEN at 1%–2%. Meanwhile.
Ilocos Region II .4 9.4 61.02 1.1 12. completion rates are lower than 55%.7 1. two-thirds or more high school students completed their year levels. 2004/2007* Region Gross Enrolment Ratio in ECD Programs (SY 2007–2008) % Gender Parity Index 12.4 48.06 1.0 30.05 1.05 1. however.8 24.1 14.3 13.5 30.03 1.3 63. The advantage of girls is also high in Visayas at 25%.6 28.7 71.3 13. in MIMAROPA and Bicol.9 32.3 20.08 1. Disparity in completion rates is lower in Luzon. with less than half of students completing their year levels.0 9.2 7.03 1.5 41.0 8.Central Luzon IV-A (CALABARZON) IV-B (MIMAROPA) V . including all regions in Mindanao and Western and Eastern Visayas.4 60.7 34.8 11.5 33. It is lowest in NCR where completion rate among girls is only 6% more than among boys.Northern Mindanao XI . Elementary completion rate for girls is 16% more than that for boys. For most regions. Completion Rates Table III.05 1.03 1.05 1.3 1. Department of Education.0 5.4 61.99 1.01 1.03 1.1 20.03 0.6 9. Completion rate is lowest in ARMM where only over one-third of elementary students completed their grade level.Cagayan Valley III .8 8.5 25.32. Annual Poverty Indicators Survey.4 1.02 1.04 1.9 33.04 1.5 11. Completion rate is especially low in Zamboanga and SOCCSKSARGEN.03 25.5 16.4 62.8 25.05 1.3 64.8 41.8 37. 189 .04 1. The average primary school completion rate is 68%. Half of the regions have lower than average completion rates. Early Childhood Education Indicators.5 1.0 87.1 12.03 1.4 21.6 31.Zamboanga X .0 10.2 72.03 1. particularly those in Mindanao and Visayas.8 71.7 15.04 1.5 13.07 1.Central Visayas VIII .Eastern Visayas IX .7 18.8 15.5 77.9 20.8 28.03 1.3 16.02 1.1 31.6 42.9 14.1 77. the rate is lower than the average. The average secondary completion rate is 62%.05 1.0 26. Table III.04 1.5 6 yearsold in Kinder/ Prep/ Nursery (2004) 31.01 1. with the advantage of girls below 20%.02 1.33 shows completion rates in elementary and high school across regions for SY 2005–2006. National Statistics Office.05 1.SOCCSKSARGEN Caraga ARMM CAR NCR *Sources: Basic Education Information System 2007. Disparity in completion is highest in Mindanao with the lead of girls ranging from 23% in Caraga to 27% in Zamboanga.5 60.03 1.03 75.0 12.6 19.06 6 years-old not attending school (2004) 18. 2004.7 64.2 68.6 10.0 11.9 6. In most regions in Luzon. However.2 9.06 Grade 1 w/ ECD Experience (SY 2007–2008) % Gender Parity Index 63.7 Philippines I . except in ARMM where boys have a slight advantage.Davao Region XII .Bicol Region VI .05 1.Western Visayas VII .
08 Dropout rate (SY 2004–2005) Elementary Secondary Dropout Gender Dropou Gender Rate Parity t Parity Index Rate Index (in %) (in %) 1.36 1.47 0.24 1.50 1.88 0.63 7.49 0. Department of Education.56 6. Disparity is highest in Cordillera with dropout rate among girls at 52% less than among boys.52 0.79 0.29%).52 0.23 0.53 1.43 0.48 0.06 no data 1.44 1.66 0.77 0. The rest of the regions have lower than average rates.53 0.82 0.27 1.24 0.52 6. Western Visayas at 48%. Zamboanga. Table III.33 shows the dropout rates in elementary and high school across regions for SY 2004–2005. Gender disparity in secondary completion is lowest in ARMM (8%) and NCR (13%).24 1. Dropout rates are highest in SOCCSKSARGEN (8. Gender Rate Parity Rate Parity Index Index (in %) (in %) 68 82 no data 85 76 80 77 67 72 66 69 58 54 60 57 58 67 35 1.22 0.59 7.51 2.32 0. CALABARZON. NCR (7.25 1.11 1.94%).65 0.52 0.33 0.23 1.43 0.62 5.71 0. Dropout Rates Table III.76 0.16 1.94 0.67 0. and Western Visayas (2.59 0.26 1.29 0.20 1.48%).78 0. followed by SOCCSKSARGEN (2. followed by Davao (36%).57 5.57 5.15 0.27 0.55 6. Davao.60 6.64 0.66 0. One in 15 students (6.85 0. Five other regions—MIMAROPA.57 0.5%) at the secondary level drops out of school. Dropout rate among girls in elementary is 44% less than that for boys.38 0.58 6. and Eastern Visayas at 190 . Central Visayas follows at 50%.40 3. Bicol. Davao has the lowest rate (0.88 0.51 0.45%) followed by NCR (0.96 0.53%).20 1.47 0.19 0.99 62 66 no data 72 69 70 68 53 54 61 53 54 47 57 51 49 58 53 1.28 1.33.61 8.13 no data 1.24 1. Secondary completion rate among females is 24% more than among males.24%). Central Visayas. and SOCCSKSARGEN— have higher than average levels of disparity. 1. Gender Comp. Eastern Visayas and MIMAROPA also have rates above the national average.22 1. by Region and by Gender Completion Rate (SY 2005–2006) Elementary Secondary Comp. Central Visayas has the highest rate (3.55 2.62 5.19 1.24 1.21 1.88 0.59 6.25 1.22%).48 5.12 1.50 6. On average.19 1. Disparity is highest in Central Visayas where completion rate for females is 41% more than that for males. Western Visayas.59 5.45 0.31 1.31 1.49 no data no data no data Region Philippines NCR CAR I II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Caraga ARMM Source: Basic Education Information System.45 1.19 1.25 1.17 1. and Western Visayas also have rates above the national average.13 0.41 1.79%) and Northern Mindanao (7.82 0.24 1.48 0.14 1.33% of students drop out from elementary school.60 4.27 1. Completion and Dropout Rates.
These include the ability to read. only 3 in 4 can in ARMM. and Northern Mindanao (48%). SOCCSKSARGEN had the second lowest literacy rate with less than 9 in 10 found to be literate. Gender disparity also varies across regions: highest in Zamboanga. CALABARZON (56%) and Central Visayas (55%). and do basic computations. Functional literacy among females is 10% higher than that of males.e. the government’s Food-for-School program also aims to improve retention rates in school. This suggests an acknowledgement of the relationship of education with poverty reduction.25). Manasan and Cuenca (2007) noted a 62% leakage rate in the transfers distributed by DepEd and 59% in those distributed by DSWD. dropout rate among females is 52% less than that among males.” Literacy Analyzing enrolment. For the rest of the regions. Although basic literacy is generally high. Figure III. functional literacy among the youth 10–14 years old is not as high (Figure III. Literacy rates among females are generally higher than among males. While almost all youth 10–14 years old in NCR can read and write. Eastern Visayas (both at 10%).24 shows the basic literacy rates for youth 10–14 years old across regions in 2003. The inclusion of all cities and municipalities in NCR accounts for most of the leakages. Actual impact of the program on retention and dropout rates has yet to be studied. However. 191 . and completion rates is not sufficient to assess educational performance. including Sulu and Tawi-Tawi in ARMM. write. followed by NCR and CAR (57%). Overall. Davao. Disparity in dropout rates is lowest in Davao (45%). It shows that almost 95% of the youth can read and write. In high school. Caraga (47%). Disparity is wide. only a little over 3 of 4 are functionally literate (i. Gender disparity is higher than in basic literacy. and Northern Mindanao (6%). with functional literacy rates ranging from 90% in the capital region to less than 60% in the ARMM. Disparity in dropout rates is highest in Western Visayas where dropout rate for females is 60% less than that for males. less than that for boys. Zamboanga (7%). transition. dropout rates for girls are below 44%. The program was implemented in public elementary schools in 49 provinces with severe food insecurity and vulnerability to hunger. NCR. the lowest among regions. Aside from addressing hunger and malnutrition.. by 4%. and SOCCSKSARGEN and lowest in Cordillera and NCR. What has been studied is the benefit incidence of the program. literacy rates vary across regions. overall. It is important that children learn skills essential for living productive social and economic lives. 45%. NCR “accounts for 71% of the total number of non-poor households who benefit from the program. Gender disparity in literacy is highest in SOCCSKSARGEN. have numeracy skills).
and Region. Education. 2003 Source: 2003 Functional Literacy. and Mass Media Survey. 2003 Source: 2003 Functional Literacy. Basic Literacy Rate of Population 10–14 Years Old. by Sex. Figure III. National Statistics Office. Functional Literacy Rate of Population 10–14 Years Old. Education and Mass Media Survey. Age Group. by Sex.24. 192 . Figure III. National Statistics Office.25. and Region. Age Group.
followed by Bicol (57%). subject area knowledge and teaching skills for teachers. Net enrolment rates improved better in TEEP areas than for the entire country. Education projects such as the Third Elementary Education Program (TEEP) aimed at poor divisions have made improvements in education outcomes (World Bank 2007). 193 . Most other regions have scores between 42% and 52%. ARMM has the lowest average score at 37%. Department of Education. rural areas have a higher average achievement score (65. Eastern Visayas and Caraga have the highest scores at 60% and 59%. Cagayan Valley (59%). Interestingly.69%).49%) is higher than in urban areas (43. Above all. followed by SOCCSKSARGEN (39%). Caraga and Eastern Visayas have the highest scores at 76% and 75%. The average achievement score in rural areas (45.12%) is higher than that for males (63. Southern Leyte. and alternative learning programs for students. The Secondary Education Development and Improvement Program (SEDIP) is also said to have improved achievement rates in high school (ADB 2008). Figure III. and Bicol (41%). Most of the other regions have scores between 61% and 70%.26 shows the latest available data on performance in the National Achievement Test for Grade 6 and 4th Year students. Again. Achievement scores in Grade 6 for SY 2007–2008 are lowest in ARMM at only 47%. achievement rates in TEEP schools improved significantly compared to non-TEEP schools. National Achievement Test: Mean Percentage Scores Source: National Educational Testing and Research Center. Males have a lower average score (43.52%) compared to urban areas (64. respectively.26. and Western Visayas (60%). one of the beneficiaries of SEDIP.43%). SEDIP provided training in planning and management for school heads. Average scores in the national achievement test in 4th year for SY 2005–2006 are lowest in ARMM at only 34%.98%). recently topped the National Achievement Test. textbooks.15%) relative to females (45. The average score for females (66. Completion rates in TEEP areas also improved while rates for the whole country remained the same. respectively. Achievement Test Scores Figure III.51%).
27).27: ALS Accreditation and Equivalency Test Registrants (Number) and Passing Rate. 85 percent of them were in school. Of this. the reach of the ALS program has increased. Figure III.28 provides a framework for analysing the relationships. 2009. the key outcome is school attendance. The quality of the program may have also improved with the increase in the proportion of passers from 6% in 1999 to 29% in 2008. It must be recognized that there are many measures of education outcomes. the majority (54 percent) was outof-school. increased by an average of 26% between 1999 and 2008 (Figure III. Alternative Learning In school year 2003-2004.949 adult learners. Education outcomes are always the result of individual. Registration for the Accreditation and Equivalency test.32 Through the years. In 2007. Figure III. The population of children 12-15 years old was 7.200 out-of-school youth learners. 28. household. the ALS had 18. for instance. The subsequent discussion will deal with each. Pasig City: Department of Education. The DepEd’s Alternative Learning System (ALS) is targeting out-of-school youth in addition to another 10. For this particular study. 32 194 .280. Accreditation and Equivalency (A&E) Program. and 11.388. the population of children 6-11 years old was 12. Figure III. The ALS is composed of the Basic Literacy Program. 1999–2008 Source of data: Bureau of Alternative Learning System. and community characteristics.28. and Informal Education.824. Analysis on Causality and Correlation Causality and correlation analysis reveals important factors that affect education outcomes. Determinants of Education Outcomes Bureau of Alternative Learning System. This is the focus of this brief analysis of causality and correlation relationships. ALS (presentation) for Secretary Jesli A. Department of Education. Lapuz (3‐11‐ 2009).800 learners under the Basic Literacy Program.296.5 million youth and adults 16-77 years old. only 46 percent were in school.
community dummy variables are often 195 . repetition. Berhman and Knowles (1999) provide a summary of the literature that attest to the positive impact of household income on education. A non-linear behavior is observed: school attendance rises in early ages. in particular. The pattern of school attendance across age groups was earlier presented. Household Characteristics. This is opposite to those found in other developing countries such as South Asia. age and sex are the most common. and education of parents (particularly the mother).. unfortunately. Using Philippine data. then starts to come down (Figure III. show that an additional child will cause an average decline of 19% in the probability of school attendance of children 6–24 years old.employment opportunities matching Socio . Berhman (1997) shows that while mother’s education was found to be a consistent positive determinant of schooling. 1994. i. income. Community norms and preferences are important (demand) determinants of education outcomes. In addition. For lack of better indicators. Alba and Orbeta (1999) confirm the enrolment-enhancing effect of the education of the household head.. reaches its peak at about 10–11 years old. ever attending school. it is not clearly established that this is big enough to warrant the conclusion that there can be efficiency gain by subsidizing female education. These tabulations are also borne out in econometric estimates of school attendance functions (e. and progression possibilities.moral values Source: Orbeta.19). completed years. Among the personal characteristics that determine school outcomes. that includes not only attendance but other indicators as well such as grade attainment. dropping out. Underly Individual Household Community Proximate Determinants School characteristics ing Factors Outcomes Literacy/Numeracy Education attainment of population Retention / dropout / completion Student characteristics Labor market charac teristics Enrollment / Participation Scores in standardized tests Skills . Alba and Orbeta 1999). Community Characteristics. achievement test scores. Attendance rates are higher for females compared to males. the impact is higher among poorer households and bigger as one goes up the education ladder.g. Ability is known to be an important personal determinant of school outcomes. these are difficult to quantify. Personal Characteristics. Estimation results of the study. Three of the most common household determinants of education outcomes are family size. larger family size leads to lower school attendance.e. unfortunately. this is an unobserved characteristic. Alba and Orbeta (1999) shows positive impact of income per capita on school attendance of children 7–14 years old. A review on the impact of family size on school outcomes in Orbeta (2005) shows conflicting results but considering the endogeneity of family size consistently shows a negative impact.
as indicated. 0. 1. National Statistics Office. lack of personal interest is the most oft-cited reason (36%).73 Employment/Lo oking for work. were shown to have positive impact on school attendance. Reasons for not Attending School. Both quantity and quality measures are used.09 Finished schooling. high cost of education (12%). the 196 . and housekeeping (13%) (Table III. The most popular reasons are economic (such as high cost—22% for elementary and 29% for secondary) and employment or looking for work (21% for elementary and 32% for secondary).76 Employment/Lo oking for work. by urbanity.05 High cost education/p nts can't aff expenses.34 schooling. 2004 Elementary Finished Others.28 Illness/Disa . looking for work (14%). 0. For the children of the top 20% looking for work is the most popular reason (38%) followed by lack of personal interest (27%). facilities.g. 0.. far/no schoo 0. Housekeeping is the reason given by 10% of elementary school-age children and 13% of secondary students.0 Illness/Disabilit y. Real inputs include teachers. 1. For children in the secondary grades. For children of the bottom 20% in the elementary grades. General economic conditions of the community. For instance. employed. School characteristics can range from mere availability of schools to measures of real inputs available in school.44 High cost of education/par nts can't afford expenses. 2. and school organization. 5. Also instructive are the reasons given by school-age children when asked why they are not attending school.75 Secondary Cannot cope with school work. 32.4% for secondary).34 No regular Schools are ve transportation. 35% of elementary dropouts say they are not attending school because of lack of personal interest while less than half (16%) mentioned this same reason for those with secondary education.18 Source: Annual Poverty Indicators Survey 2004. Interestingly. 2.15 Lack of personal interest.29.19 within the bgy. The APIS asks school-age children who are not currently attending school the main reasons for this decision. presence of electricity or road density. textbooks. followed by high cost of education (24%). 16. 5. School availability was found to be a positive determinant of school enrolment (Handa 1999). Notable also is the finding that lack of school in the barangay is not a very important reason (2% for elementary and 0. Comparing children’s reasons for not attending school in the poorest and richest quintile also highlight the differences. 29. 20. Expenditure per student is a positive determinant of enrolment (e.29 shows the distribution of the main reasons for not being school for both elementary and secondary school-age children. 13. instructional materials.73 Others. Alba and Orbeta 1999). Figure III. 35. as shown earlier.34).17 Cannot cope with school work. 2 Lack of personal interest.78 Schools are No regu very far/no transporta school 0. Figure III. school attendance in urban areas are always higher than in rural areas for all age groups (Figure III. and housekeeping (8%). for instance.56 Housekeepin 9.20). The basic community characteristic that determine education outcome is school characteristics.2 within the bg 1.12 Housekeeping. Pupil-teacher ratio has mixed results but the quality of teachers is consistent in giving positive impact.
The above analyses show that among the demand determinants. This is more pronounced in secondary education.1 100.7 11. among others. the most common reason for not attending school is early marriage as child rearing hinders school attendance.1 100. High population growth has made schools spread their meager resources thinly while large family sizes reduce the probability of school-age children attending schools. Males.7 16. This.2 1. the cost of education is a very consistent reason for not attending school. This is due to low wages among laborers. the most popular reason is looking for work (45%). which is attributed to bad weather.1 0. lack of personal interest (16%). Focus group discussions conducted in Agusan del Sur and Dumaguete City also highlight the causes of non-attendance in schools. whether one uses bivariate or multivariate analyses.34.9 1. Large family size is attributed to the non-utilization of family planning services for fear of side effects. Participants with children not attending school identify lack of income among the principal barriers to school participation. most popular reason for the bottom 20% is high cost of education (34%) followed by looking for work (18%). Among young adults especially females. National Statistics Office.8 5.1 0. For the top 20%.9 1. and oftentimes falling into using drugs. followed by high cost of education (19%). Preferences also play an important role in school participation.7 2. highlighting the role of scholarships and subsidies for the poor.0 3.1 100.4 38.0 Source: Annual Poverty Indicators Survey 2004.9 0.5 8.0 Secondary Bottom 20% Top 20% 0.5 0.0 0.9 16. Even the poor in public schools may need subsidies to cover their spending on food and transportation.3 11. the support value is very much lower than the cost of education so that the student-grantees are necessarily those who can complement the subsidy with additional funds to cover the rest of the tuition fee above the value of the subsidy.8 35. 197 .4 17. has shown up in focus group discussions.3 18. on the other hand. 2004 Reasons Schools are very far/no school within village No regular transportation High cost of education Illness/Disability Housekeeping Employment/Looking for work Lack of personal interest Cannot cope with school work Finished schooling Others Total Elementary Bottom 20% Top 20% 2.0 7.2 24. Table III.8 13.6 9.1 34.0 0.3 0.5 18. Reasons for not Attending School by Bottom and Top Quintile.0 4.3 12. and housekeeping (11%). lack of personal interests (18%) and housekeeping (16%).1 27. while farmers say it is due to cheap prices for their produce. prefer to be idle.1 1. This is aggravated by a large family size such that some children give way to other siblings when it comes to attending school.2 100. The higher proportion among the top 20% (even higher than for the bottom 20%).0 1. However. Still preferences were another important 33 The government subsidizes some (almost half a million students in SY 2007-2008) students in private schools who cannot be accommodated in public schools through the Education Service Contracting (ESC) program. too.5 0.7 0.33 Another important demand determinant is high population growth at the aggregate and large family size at the household level. looking for work as the children’s reason for not attending school is certainly surprising. hanging out with peers.1 44.3 0.8 5. This was shown to be particularly true among the poor.
too. if the students perceive schools. Over and above economic reason. Scholarships for the poor can also be expanded. This gives the division a distinct role in dealing with disparities in education outcomes. teachers. However. While for public secondary schools. Basic education is primarily provided by the public sector. Department of Education and the Division Office. the MOOE is allocated at the school level. there are reasons. demand determinant as expressed in “lack of personal interest” starting right at the elementary school levels. While this can be interpreted as primarily a preference indicator. From the perspective of the school. besides their important role of determining and allocating teaching positions.. This can only be addressed by a concerted effort to improve not only the efficiency of the school system but also its relevance. because of lack of resources. A brief discussion of the roles of each is provided in this section. This highlights the role of resources allocated for schools. that point to the role of supply factors. particularly the Division Office. school heads. For one. But even closer to the school level is the local Division Office. school characteristics such as expenditure per pupil and teacher quality. However. This highlights the role of the primary instrument of public policy in basic education – the DepEd. Building Blocks and Partners for Strategy The foregoing analysis shows deep-seated sources of disparities in education outcomes. e. the allocation of available education resources can have built-in equalization factors based on poverty. there are at least five key partners in any basic education strategy. Since most of the budget in basic education are in personnel.g. local school board. and communities. Supply factors also play important roles but not in the usual forms. within a growth scenario and the corresponding resources that will be made available to the education sector. coupled with improving personal appreciation of the value of education. If schools that cater to the poor get lower resources.” This can be due to several reasons including lack of appreciation of the value of education or that the educational system is not producing relevant results for them. there are opportunities for addressing disparities. then supply factors contribute to the known demand factors that lower the probabilities of school-age children attending school. the ones for elementary are lumped into the budget of the Division Office. the meager resources left for MOOE defines what comes with the teachers as they go to the classroom. absence of a school in the village is not a popular reason for not attending school even among the poor. do not to provide the skills needed to improve their chances of a productive life in the future. 198 . are shown to be significant determinants of school attendance. These are the (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Department of Education. Economic status is one of the primary reasons. there are substantial proportions of school-age children who are not in school because of “lack of personal interest. For instance. This would require involvement of key education partners. which can only be addressed by more sustained and inclusive economic growth.
4. sickness. and policymaking in the education sector at the local level. Although tangible resources (buildings. sudden death of a breadwinner. 5. and old age. teachers. Labor market policies and programs designed to promote employment. and programs to manage natural disasters. significant determinant of education outcomes (Orbeta 2008). 2. Experience under the Third Elementary Education Program (TEEP) shows the importance of empowering school heads in improving education outcomes (WB 2004a). These risks may take various forms such as economic recession. and Key Programs Social protection consists of policies and programs that aim to prevent. Micro.34 social protection is meant to reduce poverty and vulnerability through effective and efficient implementation of policies and programs categorized into five main areas. and 5. old age. work-related injury. the homeless. Education qualification of teachers is a consistent. research indicates that teachers have the largest impact on student learning (WB 2004b). Mayor Jesse Robredo (n. and overcome the risks that confront poor and vulnerable people. disability. agricultural insurance.d.and area-based schemes to address vulnerability at the community level. accountability.) expressed the opinion that the LSB can go beyond being the reactive manager of the SEF and become a proactive partner by leading the building of stakeholdership. RA 9155 provides the framework for their empowerment. Policies. The role of school heads in the education process is slowly being recognized. and responsibility of school heads. social funds. including single mothers. 34 http://www. efficient operation of labor markets. political instability. Given the limited resource available for public schools.asp 199 . Community Support. manage. and NGOs have proven to be effective in improving education outcomes.adb.org/SocialProtection/default. including microinsurance. plays a key role. textbooks. Based on the Asian Development Bank (ADB) definition. Child protection to ensure the healthy and productive development of children. resource mobilization. unemployment. Studies by the Synergeia Foundation have shown that community support are important in improving school outcomes (OPAE 2008). 1. Support of the immediate community consisting of parents. By specifying the authority. and protection of workers. School Heads. ill health. and drought. or physically or mentally challenged people. the Local School Board (LSB). Teachers. The role of teachers in learning cannot be overemphasized. 3. disability. Social assistance and welfare service programs for the most vulnerable groups with no other means of adequate support. Social Protection National Laws. and others) are important for school outcomes. among others. Local School Board. namely. which authorizes the disbursements of the SEF. Social insurance programs to cushion the risks associated with unemployment.
g. (c) waiving of fees for mothers and children in health services. The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) contains provisions on social protection for children particularly Articles 4. 36 http://www.org/socialprotection/child. centers on programs that prevent and respond to violence.5). (b) school feeding programs. A rundown of these programs is given below.. which may involve some risks but which can yield higher returns.adb. and other related issues. clothing) -to assist families with young children to meet part of their basic needs.asp 35 200 . survival. abuse. the Philippine government must provide the necessary services and infrastructure to uphold the rights of children to life. child labor. Section 3 of the Constitution states that. 27 and 28 (Box III. In contrast. cruelty. and educational programs. and special protection from all forms of neglect. Social protection for children includes but is not limited to:36 (a) early child development—to ensure the balanced psychomotor development of the child through basic nutrition. In this sense. social protection for children holds a promise for breaking the intergenerational transmission of poverty. and nutrition services is expected to enhance their potential to earn income in the future. food. Discussion on social protection is focused on the two social safety net programs35 that the country is currently implementing. Investing in children by ensuring their access to basic education. or bad harvests. (d) initiatives for street children. preventive health. early pregnancies. For the purpose of this report. Likewise. They are also viewed as effective programs in reaching those (especially children) who are not covered by traditional social insurance programs.. criminality. exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to their development. “The State shall defend the right of children to assistance. or school fee waivers. Article 15. and development. child protection.either means-tested cash transfers or coupons/stamps for basic goods and services (e.. sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV/AIDS. including proper care and nutrition. and (g) family allowances . survival. Non-contributory transfer programs aim to protect individuals or households against either a chronic incapacity to work and earn (chronic poverty) or a decline in this capacity due to adverse events like sudden death of a breadwinner. health. and development. (e) child rights advocacy and awareness programs against child abuse.” Thus. and abuse against children. economic recession/transition. and drug addiction. which are often linked with formal sector employment. as discussed earlier. the discussion on social protection is limited to the fifth area only as it has the most direct impact on children. They are meant to redistribute income and resources to vulnerable groups and help the poor to proactively manage risks so that they are better able to engage in activities. scholarships. 26. (f) youth programs to avoid marginalization in teenagers. It should be noted that child protection in the context of social protection is more focused on programs envisaged to reduce poverty and vulnerability. 24. CRC emphasizes the right of every child to life. exploitation. 6.
These are 1) address hunger among poor families. Under the FSP. the FSP may be viewed as a conditional in-kind transfer program. Beneficiaries of the program are households in selected geographic areas with children enrolled in eligible grade levels in public elementary schools or children who attend DCCs. States Parties shall undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources. 1. Hence. it has dual objectives. social and cultural rights.38 In this sense. Box III. eligible households are assured of having rice on their tables every day as long as their children attend school or day care centers. States Parties recognize the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for the child's physical. CRC Articles on Social Protection Article No. In recent years. 2. DepEd mobilizes the Parents-TeachersCommunity Associations (PTCAs) to assist selected schools in implementing the program. When two or more siblings are enrolled in the eligible grade levels in public elementary schools or in identified daycare centers. 1. 1. the FSP combines geographic targeting with institutional targeting at the level of the public school or day care center. In like manner. the FSP uses public elementary schools and day care centers (DCCs) as distribution point of the program. Thus. With regard to economic. These are Food-for-School Program (FSP) and Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps). FSP provides (1) kilo of rice to eligible families for every day that their children continue to attend school. 1. and shall take the necessary measures to achieve the full realization of this right in accordance with their national law. States Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child. and where needed. The FSP was originally launched in November 2005 while the 4Ps was pilot-tested in 2007. the DSWD organizes the parents of DCC children into Day Care Parents Group to encourage their participation and sustain their support and commitment to the program. the Philippine government launched two social assistance programs with direct positive impact on children. States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life. States Parties recognize the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health and to facilities for the treatment of illness and rehabilitation of health.5. only one child will receive the rice ration. Thus. mental. and 2) improve school attendance by reducing the dropout rate. In particular. 38 201 . and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity. including social insurance. spiritual. Article 4 Description States Parties shall undertake all appropriate legislative. within the framework of international co-operation. administrative and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the present Convention. the rice ration is provided to each eligible pupil after class. States Parties recognize the right of the child to education. States Parties shall recognize for every child the right to benefit from social security. DepEd implements the preschool/Grade1 component of the FSP while DSWD manages the DCC component of the FSP. 37 Draws heavily from Manasan and Cuenca (2007) and Manasan (2009). Eligible households may only receive the program benefit if they actually send their children to school. moral and social development. 1. In practical terms. Article 6 Article 24 Article 26 Article 27 Article 28 Food-for-School Program37 The FSP is a conditional in-kind transfer program and as such. States Parties shall strive to ensure that no child is deprived of his or her right of access to such health care services.
and community food production is encouraged by • • • having schools allot an area for selective production of nutrient-rich fruits and vegetables for the feeding of underweight children. In November 2005 – March 2006. 5th. the FSP was targeted to include all pre-school/Grade 1 pupils in all public schools. First. and improve nutritional status of children in the long term. complementary activities are also put in place to improve the nutrition status of children. Day care workers also prepare a permanent growth monitoring record for each child enrolled in the day care program. and all children enrolled in all DSWD-supervised day care centers in the following areas: (a) all municipalities and 17 cities in the NCR. (c) all the 283 5th and 6th class municipalities of provinces classified as very vulnerable (VV) and vulnerable (V) in the FIVIMS. and having the LGU agriculture office provide initial planting materials to selected schools and communities. 202 . health and nutrition practices. the adoption of desirable food. having the barangay councils designate an area in the community where parents of children beneficiaries could establish a communal vegetable garden. The first cycle of implementation was in SY 2005–2006 and SY 2006– 2007 while the second cycle was in SY 2007–2008. Third. very vulnerable (VV) or vulnerable (V).553 households with children in the preschool and Grade 1 in public elementary schools. and 74. To date. The targeting mechanism employed for the first cycle was the Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information Mapping System (FIVIMS).More specifically. and 6th class municipalities. very vulnerable (VVV) in the FIVIMS. school.6% of its target during this period (Table III. (d) all the 27 4th class municipalities in the very vulnerable and vulnerable provinces where there are no 5th and 6th class municipalities. 17 cities and municipalities of NCR and 49 provinces were identified as either very. This is done in collaboration with NGOs and other government agencies to sustain family food security. Second. Another assessment is done in November to determine progress from the baseline. Fourth. the FSP is in its third cycle of implementation (at current school year (SY) 2008–2009). Aside from rice distribution to eligible children in selected schools.261 households with children attending DSWD-supervised day-care centers or a total of 454.814 households. home. The program actually reached 97. very vulnerable (VVV). the target number of FSP beneficiaries was 380. deworming of children beneficiaries is undertaken at the start of the program. increase school retention. Through FIVIMS. sustainable food production and gardening technologies and livelihood and self-sufficiency projects by the LGUs.35). parents and caregivers are trained in effective parenting and home care. (b) all the 49 municipalities of provinces classified as very. and (e) all the 3 3rd class municipalities in the very vulnerable and vulnerable municipalities where there are no 4th. the height and weight of children are measured by the school nurse or teacher-in-charge at the start of the school year.
000 239. Target Beneficiaries and Outreach of Food for School Program SY 2005-2006 and SY 2006-2007 Actual No.423 2.078 9.816 77.513 9.269 9. n.459 9.840 97.35.274 16.051 26.206 31.294 6.752 5. of beneficiaries a/ 902.279 9.313 9.722 7.877 121.214 8.500 1. . This point is discussed in some detail below relative to the consistency of the program size as per the plan with the targeting rules that are being followed. Table III.a 7.820 n.077 18.748 3.311 1.771 10.900 40.295 444.483 households with children in DSWD-supervised DCCs.483 1.195 11.720 596.248 13.989 16.884 741 1.640 7. of Beneficiaries Region NCR I II IV-A and B V VI VII VIII IX X Caraga XI XII ARMM CAR Total % to target Memo item: Target no.312 36.0 Total 303.333 369.060 52.340 29.136 25.483 380.595 9.962 74. the DepEdimplemented component of the FSP failed to reach the target number of beneficiaries for SY 2006-2007 while the DSWD exceeded the program target.997 2.864 18.413 11.461 30.135 289.446 n. Source: National Food Authority and Department of Social Welfare and Development. Notably.a 4.a.947 3.261 100.000 households with children in pre-school and Grade 1 in public elementary schools and some 239.569 60.100 6.939 66.745 27.592 17. of Beneficiaries Grade 1 & PS 272.335 460 n.750 2.772 19.929 23.850 10.2 DCC 30.881 97.939 households in SY 2006-2007 while that of the DSWDmanaged DCC component reached 289.855 886. 203 .35). 11.337 6.136 14.433 13.335 2.850 7.760 8.752 10.0 Total 418.011 20.877 (Table III.101 97.200 n.7 Actual No.081 14.240 70.308 3.a.760 7.233 49.349 9.433 6.6 includes additional target family-beneficiaries resulting from President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's provincial visits.814 Grad 1 & PS 294.2 DCC 123.387 6.856 14.831 62.581 2.756 8.322 4.783 11.010 5.not targeted in the bringing year program of DSWD.768 8.553 74.141.a 2.848 8. The target number of beneficiaries for SY 2006-2007 was programmed to increase to a total of 902.777 10.447 2.208 3. The actual number of beneficiaries in the DepED-managed pre-school/Grade 1 component reached 596.153 10.261 454.364 12.
Changes in the targeting rule for the current cycle of FSP implementation were introduced to reduce the leakage rate in the DepEd component from 62% in SY 2006– 2007 and 54% in SY 2007–2008 to just 22% in SY 2008–2009. and all pupils in preschools/Grade 1 in all public elementary schools in the target LGUs in Priority 2 and Priority 3 provinces. Meanwhile. and all cities and municipalities of the NCR for the DSWD component. The FSP in SY 2007–2008 targeted all eligible pupils in all public schools and day care centers in the following LGUs: (a) all municipalities and cities in the NCR.. 2006 an initial monitoring of FSP implementation. (b) all municipalities in Priority 1 provinces (i. (c) all 5th and 6th class municipalities in Priority 2 provinces (i.. a thorough assessment of FSP has yet to be done. and • the poorest 100 municipalities based on SAE. the 20 poorest provinces based on the 2003 poverty incidence but excluding those classified as Priority 1 provinces) and Priority 3 provinces (i. • all municipalities in the 20 food-poorest provinces based on the 2006 FIES. For the third cycle of FSP implementation. 24 provinces with existing hunger mitigation programs). Results of initial monitoring validated experiences in other countries that social transfers can act as effective incentives to increase poor’s demand for services and improve their education outcomes. the 10 poorest provinces based on the 2003 subsistence incidence). a similar reduction in the leakage rate in the DSWD component cannot be expected because of the continued inclusion of all NCR day care centers in the program. On the actual benefits of the program. the target LGUs were selected based on poverty incidence estimates derived from the 2006 FIES and the small area estimates (SAE) of poverty incidence for municipalities.36). Such assessment depends largely on the availability of data and information on FSP implementation.e. Indeed. In the second cycle of FSP implementation. The FSP for SY 2008-2009 targeted all preschool/Grades 1–3 pupils in all public elementary schools and all children attending DSWD-supervised day care centers in the following LGUs: • 21 barangays of NCR identified as “hotspots” by the DILG for the DepEd component. However. In particular. Priority 2..e. and (d) all 4th class municipalities in Priority 2 and Priority 3 provinces where there are no 5th and 6th class municipalities. Target beneficiaries under the DepEd component refer to all pupils in preschool/Grades 1–6 in all public elementary schools in all the municipalities and cities in Priority 1 provinces and the NCR. target beneficiaries under the DSWD component refer to all DCC children in all the target LGUs in NCR and Priority 1.e. DepEd conducted in February 27–March 11. the program had positive impact on both school attendance and nutrition status of the pupils who benefited from the FSP (Table III. and Priority 3 provinces. target LGUs were selected based on poverty incidence estimates derived from the 2003 FIES following its official release in October 2006. Nevertheless. 62% of the 204 . excluding municipalities already covered in the 20 food-poorest provinces.
Additional food for the family 5. Table III.36. This is possible as long as the conditionalities attached to the education and health grant are met.000 per year for a household with one child or PhP9. where 4Ps provide cash assistance to the poor to alleviate poverty in the short-term. Percent* 33. also draws heavily from Manasan (2009). 205 .e. Increased weight of child 4. 39 “Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program” (4Ps). particularly • • • MDG2: Achieve universal primary education.. MDG4: Reduce child mortality. Perceived Gains from FSP Gains 1. 40 4Ps was fully implemented in 2008.000 a year for a household with three children assuming that they comply with the education conditionalities. health. respondents said that the number of school days missed declined while 44% of the children gained weight. This program also aims to achieve the millennium development goals (MDGs).4 89.1 44. and (ii) social development. for 10 months a year. In sum. Decreased number of schooldays missed 3. and (b) Children 3–5 years old are enrolled in a DCC/preschool and they attend school at least 85% of the time. and MDG5: Improve maternal health. Enhanced knowledge on basic nutrition * Total is not equal to 100% due to multiple answers. the education grant amounts to PhP3. The 4Ps provides an education grant equal to PhP300 per child per month during the school year (i.7 62. a DSWD presentation. Also. where 4Ps aims to break the inter-generational transmission of poverty through investment on education. Source: National Nutrition Council. No missed meals in the past 3 months 2.1 Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program39 The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps)40 is designed to promote investment in human capital among poor families with children 0–14 years old. It is a conditional cash transfer program with dual objectives: (i) social assistance. up to a maximum of 3 children) provided the beneficiaries comply with the following conditions: (a) Children 6–14 years old are enrolled in school and attend school at least 85% of the time. 20. and nutrition in the long term.6 20.1% of the respondents reported they gained enhanced knowledge on basic nutrition because of the program.
Children 0–2 years old have monthly weight monitoring and nutrition counselling. and parent effectiveness seminars. (n) a significant increase and/or interest of mothers in transacting with banking institutions (e. 2. provided they comply with the following conditions: 1. and family planning counselling sessions.g. (d) a significant increase in school attendance. (f) a significant increase in average years of education completed. The 4Ps is envisaged to bring about the following outcomes: (a) a significant decrease in the prevalence of stunting (b) a significant increase in the number of pregnant women getting ante. Children 0–5 years old get regular preventive check-ups and immunization and micro-nutrient supplementation. (e) a significant increase in enrolment in elementary and high school. In addition. and family planning seminars.000 per year while a household with three children stands to receive a total of PhP15. (l) a significant increase in participation of mother leaders in monitoring activities. LandBank). and (o) a significant increase in the knowledge and ability of parents and/or mothers in appropriately using and mobilizing government and other community services and facilities. 3. Childbirth must be done in a health facility and must be assisted by a health professional. (j) a significant increase in expenditure on nutrient-dense foods. a household with one child under 4Ps stands to receive a total of PhP9. Payment of the cash grants is made to the most responsible adult (usually the mother) in the household through automated teller machines (ATM) of the Land Bank of the Philippines. 206 . (m) a significant increase in the attendance of parents and/or mothers in responsible parenthood. (h) a significant increase in per capita household expenditure. 4Ps provides a health grant equal to PhP500 per month per eligible household. attend breastfeeding counselling. Thus. and 5. In all. parent effectiveness sessions. 4. (g) a significant increase in elementary and high school gross enrolment rate. (k) a significant increase in involvement of parents and/or mothers in the grievance committee. Parents and/or guardians attend family planning sessions. (i) a significant increase in food expenditure as percent of household budget.and postnatal care and in the number of childbirths assisted by skilled health professional (c) a significant increase in the number of children 0–5 years old availing of health preventive services and immunization.000 in government assistance. the health grant amounts to PhP6.000 per year for a household that complies with the health conditionalities.. Pregnant women get prenatal and post-natal care. mother’s classes.
policy reforms. (1997) provide a useful starting point. et al. Where poverty is rural and infrastructure is inadequate. Households are then selected based on a proxy means test (PMT). important for planners and policymakers to have a good understanding of the nature and extent of poverty to be able to define clearly program objectives.: World Bank. Cash grants made to the most responsible adult in the household are withdrawn through LandBank’s ATMs. Choice of Program and its Design The extent and nature of poverty and the country-specific conditions. this report suggests critical areas that should be considered in assessing social safety net (SSN) programs such as the FSP and 4Ps. (1997) emphasized that previous experiences in social assistance can either help or hinder political acceptability of new programs. The 4Ps is expected to benefit the poorest 300. K. It will only be possible if there is more solid data and information on its actual implementation. Subbarao. therefore. Subsequently. The use of the PMT enforces the credibility of the program and reduces the risks associated with political interference in the selection of beneficiaries. Washington. noncompliance. Meanwhile.42 Subbarao et al. public works program during slack season may be used.C. if poverty incidence is high and the poor are difficult to identify. a comprehensive assessment of the 4Ps has yet to be done. To monitor compliance of beneficiaries with the conditionalities. cash transfer program may not be fiscally sustainable but public work programs may be appropriate. The following stylized facts from Subbarao et al.000 households in the 20 poorest provinces (with the exception of three ARMM provinces) and the poorest province in each of the five regions not represented by the 20 poorest provinces. They are as follows: 1. Where poverty is concentrated in urban areas. a verification system has been put in place. targeted food transfers and urban employment programs may be useful. It is. and other matters are appropriately acted upon. 207 . A good understanding of the following issues is important in this regard. the poorest municipalities are selected based on SAE of poverty incidence and on peace and order situation. A grievance system was also established to ensure that complaints and grievances on program implementation. Assessing Social Safety Net Programs Just like the FSP. including growth prospects. 1997. • • To what extent is poverty a permanent or a temporary problem? What is the depth and severity of poverty? For instance. D. Safety Net Programs and Poverty Reduction: Lessons from Cross-Country Experience. Beneficiaries are registered and issued identification cards and bank cards. 41 42 Poverty incidence is based on the 2006 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES).41 In each of the poorest provinces. and infrastructure constraints are central to the choice of SSN programs. Cash transfers may be more appropriate in situations where poverty incidence is not that high and the poor are easily identified. a household survey is administered in selected municipalities.
there is evidence that women are often more disadvantaged than men and therefore should benefit more assistance programs. administrative constraints. (1997) stressed that programs be designed with a clear appreciation of the country situation — not crowding out private safety nets and growth. Gender issues should also be factored in the program design as vulnerabilities to such risks vary significantly by gender. Subbarao et al. long-term assistance may be needed.promoting investments while cognizant of political economy constraints. and this approach might help to increase the impact of safety nets programs on poverty and human development outcomes. programs that take into account the gender dimension of transfer programs may be desirable because of added benefits to other members in the household. and (b) enhancing the direct or indirect (i.. short-term assistance.men and women may be vulnerable or exposed to different types of risks. Country-specific conditions include macroeconomic conditions.e. but cannot do so because of temporary shocks. public works. as follows: (a) “designing specific projects for women. like micro-credit programs and promotion of crèches and day care centers..” The World Bank enumerated some ways on how to integrate gender considerations in safety nets strategies.worldbank. or incomegeneration programs may be indicated... For those capable of earning adequate incomes. socio-economic profile or demographics. According to the World Bank. infrastructure constraints. income and/or consumption smoothing during slack seasons and/or more regular livelihood creation may be in order.e. The appropriate benefit level should be consistent with the depth of poverty (i. distributing resources in kind) targeting of existing programs toward women. • What are the characteristics of the poor? Which types of households are likely to be chronically poor? Transient poor? For those who are able to work but whose incomes are low and irregular. For those who are unable to provide themselves through work.asp 208 .43 it is important to incorporate gender considerations in the design of social safety nets due to these reasons: “. and (c) ensuring that projects accommodate the needs of participating women. and political constraints. The kind of benefit to be provided (whether in cash or in-kind) is dependent on the type of need being addressed. What is needed depends on the nature of poverty as discussed above. Adverse events can affect differently men and women as well as boys and girls. the distance between income of households and poverty threshold).” 43 http://www1.org/sp/safetynets/Gender.
2. Cost, Operational Efficiency, and Cost Effectiveness The direct cost of a program is determined by the size or level of the benefit, the number of beneficiaries reached, and the administrative cost of implementing it. The operational efficiency of a program, on the other hand, depends on whether inputs of a given quality are procured at the lowest possible price, whether there is no wastage in the delivery of the transfers, and whether administrative cost is not excessive, among other considerations. Programs are said to be effective if they actually achieve their goals. It should be emphasized that the cost-effectiveness of a program is different from cost. As the cost of the program increases with the size of the benefit, so does its effectiveness. Indirect or opportunity cost is measured in terms of (i) reduced labor supply as income transfers may result in disincentive to work, (ii) increased government size in case public works programs are undertaken; and (iii) poor investment decisions when SSN programs crowd out long-term investments for growth. There should be a balance between the need to protect the poor and the desire to maintain economic efficiency in the long run. As to benefit of the program, the kind of benefit provided (whether in cash or in-kind) is dependent on the type of need being addressed. What is needed depends on the nature of poverty, as discussed earlier. The benefit level is appropriate if it is consistent with the depth of poverty (i.e., the distance between income of households and the poverty threshold). Some countries apply differential payments based on gender to reduce or at best, reverse educational discrimination against girls by providing higher level of benefit for girls enrolling in school. 3. Targeting Targeting is a tool meant to concentrate the benefits of transfer program to the poorest segments of the population. It is a key to the cost-effectiveness of any program. All targeting mechanisms have the same objective: to identify correctly which households or individuals are poor and which are not. Targeting involves costs: administrative costs, private costs, social costs, and incentive costs. These costs mean that less of the program budget will be available and be distributed as benefits to beneficiaries. Thus, in evaluating which targeting method is appropriate, one has to weigh the benefits from reduced leakage against the cost of implementing finer targeting methods. Moreover, it is worthwhile to consider the gender of the household head in targeting the beneficiaries, as female-headed households are generally poorer than male-headed households. Evidences suggest the importance of targeting programs to women as they manage resources better than men do and so, programs are most likely to have a positive impact on household and child welfare. 4. Registration of Beneficiaries
Creating unified electronic registries of beneficiaries is critical to minimize overlap and duplication of benefits. A unique social identification number is assigned to beneficiaries to monitor records over time and across programs. It would be good to have a systematic list of beneficiaries according to sex to facilitate gender analysis of SSN programs. The registries are updated based on other databases on formal employment, death registry, and pensions. Although the quality of the registries tends to improve with the program operations, the privacy of beneficiaries, the overall reliability and potential manipulation of databases, and the inevitability of errors of inclusion and exclusion remain to be a cause of concern.44 5. Compliance with ‘Conditionalities’ (in the case of conditional cash or inkind transfer) Compliance of program recipients with ‘conditionalities’ ensures their continued enrolment in the program. High level of effort on the part of program implementers is required to monitor accurately the behavior of beneficiaries. Basic monitoring approach involves random check of school and health records. 6. Modes of Delivery of Benefits, Payment, Distribution Point The effectiveness of social safety net programs highly depends on the delivery mechanism used. It should be emphasized that the modality of payment or distribution of benefits depends on the program being implemented and on the country’s own characteristics such as openness and coverage of its financial sector, which is one conduit of payment or benefits. In the case of conditional cash transfers, adopting new payment technologies (e.g., use of debit cards or ATM cards) will help ensure that benefits reach program recipients in exact amount and on time. However, this is impossible in the absence of banks and remittance centers. Alternative mode of delivery of benefits such as direct payment can be done instead. In case of direct payment, it is important to “accommodate the needs of participating women by ensuring that transactions for eligibility and receipt of benefit in transfer programs takes place at convenient hours and in culturally acceptable conditions.45” 7. Financial Management For cash transfers, a strategic negotiation with a public or private banking sector must be explored to lower the transaction cost of making payments to beneficiaries. 8. Participation of Institutions, Line Ministries or Agencies, and Local Stakeholders
de la Briere, Benedicte and Laura Rawlings. 2006. Examining Conditional Cash Transfer Programs: A Role for Increased Social Inclusion? SP Discussion Paper No. 0603. World Bank. Washington, D.C. 45 http://www1.worldbank.org/sp/safetynets/Gender.asp
The national and local governments can forge new accountability relationship when implementing SSN programs. Such relationship can vary depending on the program design particularly on the degree of program decentralization. In this sense, the success of the program becomes a shared goal between national and local authorities. It should be emphasized, however, that SSN programs must be free of political influence, especially when it comes to targeting and selection of beneficiaries. This calls for transparency in the eligibility criteria and selection of program recipients. Inter-institutional coordination is critical to avoid duplication of programs and wastage of limited government resources. It will also strengthen synergies in protecting the poor and vulnerable. In addition, encouraging community participation and engaging civil society in consultative councils foster transparency in program implementation and can be viewed as one way of establishing a good feedback mechanism. 9. Monitoring and Evaluation There is a need to ensure that resources indeed reach the target beneficiaries. It is important to evaluate SSN programs in terms of targeting mechanism used; appropriateness of the benefit and its level; cost, operational efficiency, and cost-effectiveness; administrative feasibility; and gender considerations. A good monitoring and evaluation mechanism should be in place. Such mechanism provides useful information that can be used as basis for program expansion (e.g. geographic expansion and scaling up of effective programs) and modification. 10. Exit and/or Graduation from the Program A culture of dependency among recipients of SSN programs must be avoided. This can be done by limiting the size and duration of benefits. It should be noted, however, that those who graduate from the program may need other forms of assistance to ensure that they continue to improve their economic well-being. Chapter Conclusion This chapter clearly showed that frameworks for ensuring the rights of children are well established. Aside from being a signatory to the CRC, the Philippines has a constitution that firmly entrenches the role of the State in ensuring that children are well cared for. Beyond these legal frameworks, the state has also the capability to design programs that would put these frameworks and statements into action. The review of national programs in the preceding chapter clearly indicated that for each pillar of child well-being, there are action plans with financial, institutional, and human resources in place to implement them. In addition to government resources, there are international and development institutions that are committed to promote child well-being by providing grants and soft loans for these programs. The launching of innovative programs considered as “best practices” in other countries
indicates that the government is continuously seeking responsive mechanisms to optimize resources and respond to needs. Despite these efforts, however, disparities remain among children in different conditions and circumstances. Given the data presented in this chapter, there is a significant number of children being left behind by these programs due to factors such as individual, household, and community characteristics. It is also possible that such a situation is due to the programs’ design. The question then is what must be done to address the wide disparities and ease up the lamentable state of child poverty? The next chapter provides possible strategies for achieving positive results.
Appendix Table III.1. Young Children’s Health Outcomes, Related Care, and Correlates for Acute Respiratory Infection, 2005
Children with ARI Children with ARI who received antibiotics Number (3) 4 9 35 39 40 56 6 11 25 40 31 71 89 129 149 10 161 193 344 22 131 82 67 50 38 74 109 23 54 19 25 1 1 3 7 3 5 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 0 6 4 19 115 % who received antibiotics
Age group by sex
Education level of head of household
Male, 0–3 months Male, 4–6 months Male, 7–12 months Male, 13–23 months Male, 24–35 months Male, 36 months+ Female, 0–3 months Female, 4–6 months Female, 7–12 months Female, 13–23 months Female, 24–35 months Female, 36 months+ < 3 members 3–4 members 5–6 members 7+ None Primary Secondary + Male Female Poorest Second Third Fourth Richest Tagalog Cebuano Ilocano Ilonggo Bicolano Waray Kapampangan Maranao Panggalatok/Pangasinense Surigaonon Tausog Akeanon/Aklanon Karay-a Bisaya Boholano Chavakano Cuyuno Ibaloi Ifugao Igorot Kankanaey Manabo Maguindanaon Others Tagalog
Number (1) 9 15 51 82 68 101 12 17 44 74 69 128 162 240 268 23 317 328 627 44 260 166 115 81 48 112 193 53 95 35 48 1 3 6 11 4 12 2 4 5 3 8 2 1 3 1 14 8 49 174
Per 1,000 (2) 46 90 138 136 103 78 63 112 128 125 109 98 94 104 108 126 126 86 103 96 148 111 91 74 52 65 120 94 159 80 139 7 29 72 221 38 317 338 71 107 100 341 177 117 222 89 490 71 142 68
(1)/(3) 45 58 68 47 59 55 49 65 57 54 45 56 55 54 55 43 51 59 55 51 50 49 58 61 78 66 56 43 57 55 52 100 28 55 66 91 40 100 39 13 100 18 60 100 100 49 41 49 39 66
Sex of head of household Wealth index quintiles
214 .Northern Mindanao XI .Central Luzon IVA .MIMAROPA V .Eastern Visayas IX .Zamboanga Peninsula X . Region I .Caraga ARMM Urban Rural 660 10 103 101 361 6 55 58 662 9 635 36 42 18 21 23 46 58 41 39 90 58 54 13 44 44 35 31 15 270 401 670 104 68 101 145 43 169 71 107 71 75 192 95 207 116 157 50 150 160 114 163 50 83 122 103 359 8 343 23 28 8 12 11 31 38 18 23 50 30 28 5 30 18 17 13 8 172 194 367 54 89 54 65 67 46 55 47 67 65 44 58 56 52 53 38 67 41 49 42 53 64 49 55 Residence National Source: National Demographic and Health Survey.SOCCSKSARGEN XIII .Cagayan Valley III .Central Visayas VIII . National Statistics Office.Bicol VI .Ilocos II . Cebuano Ilocano Bicol Hiligaynon Waray Aklanon Chavakano Maguindanao Maranao Pangasinense Surigaonon Tausog Cuyono Karay-a Kankanay (Kankaney) Christian Islam Secular-NonreligiousAgnostic-Atheist DK or others Yes 231 46 27 79 37 39 4 8 1 4 4 4 8 4 1 631 16 1 22 670 131 107 84 177 143 167 95 82 15 74 147 30 354 200 272 106 42 76 133 103 122 21 15 38 18 16 3 5 1 2 2 3 3 2 1 345 10 53 45 54 49 48 41 64 60 100 58 50 68 36 67 100 55 61 Religion Adult of primary working age in household Working child in household Adult(s) with chronic illness in household Child with disability in household Single parent (adult) household Orphan child in household High dependency ratio (4+ children per adult) Elder person (70+) in household Region 12 367 52 55 No data No data No data No Yes No data No Yes No Yes National Capital Region Cordillera Admin.Western Visayas VII .CALABARZON IVB . 2003.Davao XII .
7–12 months Male. and continued feeding % who received ORS No.000 (2) 57 146 217 151 123 62 32 119 203 161 109 57 107 113 103 94 114 103 107 110 132 110 96 90 95 98 100 117 144 95 103 81 90 45 130 129 190 130 49 104 219 215 157 Number (3) 6 32 47 38 35 1 5 26 47 29 31 77 114 107 6 109 182 276 21 88 68 52 50 40 75 70 18 41 22 12 10 5 2 7 (1)/(3) 23 40 52 47 44 16 28 37 49 41 42 42 43 42 36 38 46 42 43 38 42 43 51 45 44 43 28 48 54 33 67 63 29 52 Household size Education level of head of household Sex of head of household Wealth index quintiles Ethnicity 3 2 1 1 0 47 73 29 35 25 215 . Appendix Table III. 36 months+ Female. Related Care. and Correlates for Diarrhea. 4–6 months Male. 0-3 months Female. 0–3 months Male. 4–6 months Female. 2005 Child who had diarrhea in last 2 weeks prior to survey Child w/ diarrheareceived ORS. Young Children’s Health Outcomes. 24–35 months Male. (1) Age group by sex Male. 13–23 months Female. 24–35 months Female. 36 months+ < 3 members 3–4 members 5–6 members 7+ None Primary Secondary + Male Female Poorest Second Third Fourth Richest Tagalog Cebuano Ilocano Ilonggo Bicolano Waray Kapampangan Maranao Panggalatok/Pangasinense Surigaonon Tausog Akeanon/Aklanon Karay-a Bisaya Boholano Chavakano Cuyuno Ibaloi Ifugao 12 24 80 91 81 81 6 18 70 95 69 75 185 262 255 18 288 392 652 50 231 164 121 98 88 169 162 66 86 42 35 15 8 4 6 13 7 7 2 3 5 3 2 Per 1.2. 7–12 months Female. 13–23 months Male.
Region I – Ilocos II .Western Visayas VII .Central Visayas VIII .Zamboanga Peninsula X .Central Luzon IVA – CALABARZON IVB – MIMAROPA V – Bicol VI .Eastern Visayas IX .Cagayan Valley III . Igorot Kankanaey Manabo Sama Maguindanaon Other Tagalog Cebuano Ilocano Bicol Hiligaynon Waray English Aklanon Chavakano Maguindanao Maranao Pangasinense Surigaonon Tausog Cuyono Kapampangan Karay-a Kankanay (Kankanaey) Christianity Islam Secular-Nonreligious-AgnosticAtheist DK or others Yes No data No data No data No Yes No data No Yes No Yes National Capital Region Cordillera Admin.Northern Mindanao XI – Davao XII – SOCCSKSARGEN XIII – Caraga ARMM 690 12 695 6 673 29 97 22 37 15 60 85 38 46 67 42 33 11 30 28 36 19 35 107 117 109 49 107 118 100 211 126 69 93 110 176 113 154 85 97 42 104 99 118 98 121 293 4 293 4 293 5 51 9 7 4 26 40 15 21 25 20 10 6 10 12 19 7 15 43 36 42 68 44 16 53 40 19 27 43 47 41 47 38 47 29 51 33 42 53 35 43 3 2 7 1 19 35 263 153 61 34 68 30 2 36 3 18 2 2 2 14 5 8 2 637 45 258 238 255 77 172 101 103 87 141 107 152 115 382 155 64 193 31 31 73 115 226 98 133 107 120 2 1 2 1 11 11 125 58 16 16 32 12 11 10 57 63 26 50 57 33 48 38 26 47 47 40 30 54 Language 1 6 1 7 2 264 24 67 41 29 84 100 41 53 Religion Adult of primary working age in household Working child in household Adult(s) with chronic illness in household Child with disability in household Single parent (adult) household Orphan child in household High dependency ratio (4+ children per adult) Elder person (70+) in household Region 19 702 116 108 10 298 49 42 216 .
National Statistics Office. 217 . Residence National Urban Rural 352 349 702 109 106 108 165 132 298 47 38 42 Source: National Demographic and Health Survey 2003.
151 (-1.85) -0.705*** (-4.020** (2.064** (-2.03) -0.92 -1.84) 0.07) -0.008 (-0.014* (1.24) 0.08) -0.05) Woman currently working (1=yes) Wanted child (1=yes) 0.96) 0.203** (2.138* (1.068** (2.21) -0.015 (0.657*** (-3.48) -0.05) Poor (1=yes) -0.05) -1.71) 0.33) 0.195 (-0.95) 218 .196** (2.03) -0.081*** (-2.15) 0.21) -0.37) 0.4) -0.27) 0.179** (2.823*** (-4.082 (1.77) 0.072** (-2.273*** (3.82) -0.53) -0.17) -0.005 (0.79) -0.79) 0.031* (-1.042 (-0.1) 0.52) -0.8) -0.466*** (4.577*** (-3.054*** (4.9) 0.29) 0.212 (-1.471*** (-3.37) 0.43) 0.259 (-1.664*** (-3.614*** (-3.73) -0.653*** (-3.73) -0.015 (-0.107 (-1.96) -0.325* (-1.15) Birth parity -0.81) -0.320** (-2.8) Household Characteristics Number of household members Residence in urban area (1=yes) Husband’s education (years) 0.26) 0.85) -0.014 (-0.00) Geographic Dimension (dropped=NCR) Cordillera Administrative Region Ilocos -0.036 (1.13) 0.056* (-1.3.035*** (4. Appendix Table III.169 -0.23) Household Wealth (dropped=richest) Poorest (1=yes) 0.07 (0.096*** (7.68) 0.54) -0.012 (1.030*** (3.017*** (-5.82) Middle (1=yes) -0.24) 0.052* (1.134 (-0.068** (2.086 (1.73) -0.073 (-0.299 (-1.883*** (-5.48) Individual Characteristics Woman's age 0.29) 0.009 (1.46) -0.56) 0.036*** (-4.585*** (-4.004 (0.99) -0.37) 0. Determinants of Maternal Care Utilization ANTENATAL VISIT FIRST TRIMESTER IRON INTAKE MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL FACILITY Woman's Education Education (years) 0.43) 0.054* (-1.78) -0.181 (-1.099 (1.53) -0.01 (1.035* (-1.356* (-1.048 (-0.47) -0.00) -0.11) -0.074*** (5.402* (-1.64) -0.68) -0.069*** (5.89) -0.52) -0.152 (-0.181** (1.021** (2.33) -0.3) -0.14) 0.04) -0.012 (1.11) 0.026 (-0.19) Decision-making power 0.94) 0.217 (1.88) -0.67) Richer (1=yes) -0.008 (0.025 (-1.31) 0.254 (-1.44) 0.82) Number of children who died 0.246 (-0.03) 0.178 (-1.014 (1.587** (-2.102 (1.
12) 0.301 (-1.005 (0.25) -0.004 (-0.077 (0.067 (0.35) 0.02) Northern Mindanao -0.49) -0.77) -0.16 (-0.248 (1.23) 0.65) 0.15) -0.54) CALABARZON -0.196 (-1.38) -0. Cagayan Valley -0.18) -0.785 1526 -0.7) -0.456 1427 -0.28) Davao 0.082 (0.57) 0.452** (2.207 (1.475 (-1.42) -0.027 (-0.16) -0.03) Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao Constant -0.34) -0. National Statistics Office.149 (-0.44) -0.22) Caraga 0.04) 0.09) -0.91) 0.563** (2.237 (-1.253 (-1.648*** (-2.14) Zamboanga Peninsula 0.714*** (-3.831*** (-3.411* (-1.540** (-2.84) -0.966*** (-4.44) -0.87) -0.22) -0.89) -0.26 (-1.62) -719.686*** (-3.32) -0.716*** (3.351 (1.704*** (-3.339 (1.533*** (-2.11) Bicol -0.43) 0.95) -0. 2003.051 (-0.64) 0. Note: Absolute value of t-statistics in parentheses * significant at 10%.35) -0.01) -0.13) -0.27) -0.41) -703.365* (-1.142 (0.111 (0.18) 0.1) 0.413** (-2.594*** (-3.865*** (-3.84) -0.96) -0.44) -873.752*** (-4.01 (0.323 (-1.24 (1.101 (-0.773 1526 Data source: National Demographic and Health Survey.258 (-1.39) 0.05 (-0. ** significant at 5%.027 (-0.255 (-1.35) -731.06) 0.122 (0.32) -0.367* (-1.35) -0.61) -0.59) Central Visayas 0.635*** (-2.77 1515 0.24) -0.081 (0.092 (-0.234 (1.624*** (-3. and *** significant at 1% 219 .245 (1.28) Western Visayas 0.53) -0.556** (2.41) -0.13) -0.59) -0.197 (0.091 (-0.67) -0.2) MIMAROPA 0.15) 0.71) Central Luzon -0.549*** (-3.249 (-1.9) -0.27) -0.54) -0.688*** (3.58) -0.43) -0.694*** (-3.456** (-2.188 (-0.097 (-0.427 1526 -0.41) -0.205 (-1.53) -0.58) Eastern Visayas -0.01) Log-likelihood Number of Observations -820.571** (-2.592*** (2.14) -0.621*** (-2.21 (-0.614*** (-2.36) Soccsksargen 0.75) 0.816*** (-3.918*** (-4.429** (-2.673*** (-3.427** (-2.
2009]. 2005. and A. J. 603). Gillispie. ______. The Philippine National Strategic Framework for Plan Development for Children. Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition 12(4): 438–446. Lanzona. C. ______. Determinants of two major earlychildhood diseases and their treatment in the Philippines: findings from the 1993 National Demographic Survey.” Penn Institute for Economic Research Working Paper 97-025. 2007. ACC/SCN: Geneva in collaboration with the Asian Development Bank. M. “Mother’s schooling and child education: a survey.asp [Accessed April 14. Chenery and T.adb. pp. The Child and Youth Welfare Code (Presidential Decree No. and A. Campbell. J.. L. 2005. L. Subaybay Bata Monitoring System. and J. 2009]. 3rd and 4th Periodic reports on the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC). Amsterdam: North-Holland. 2009.V.. 2003. Reducing risks. Impact stories Philippines. Deolalikar. Tamangan. ______. Laws and Issuances on Children Vol. “A probit model of school attendance for children 7– 14 years old. A case study on dual forms of malnutrition among selected households in District 1. Aldaba.C. Berhman. Manila. Quezon City: Council for the Welfare of Children. 2003. 2001. 2000. Asian Development Bank (ADB). Philippine Institute for Development Studies and International Labour Organization.). Allen. Food insecurity: a nutritional outcome or a predictor variable? The Journal of Nutrition 121(3): 408-415.” World Bank Economic Review 13(2): 211–56. SR. In H. 1988. http://www. 2nd Report on the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Hawaii: Asia Pacific Population Research. and S.” Microeconomic Impact of Macroeconomic Adjustment Policies (MIMAP) Research Paper. Laña and C. 220 . What works? A review of efficacy and effectiveness of nutrition interventions. Quezon City: Council for the Welfare of Children. II. Lleno. Alba. 2003. Costello. Tondo. ______. 1991. Health and nutrition. 1999. Berhman. 2003. n. Quezon City: Council for the Welfare of Children.T. 2008.asp [Accessed April 14.d. ______ . Handbook of Development Economics. Social protection. Orbeta. R.org/SocialProtection/default. Srinivasan (eds. and E.adb. M. Knowles. 2009. ______.org/socialprotection/child. Behrman. References Agdeppa. ______. increasing opportunities. I. Laws and Issuances on Children. 2004. Quezon City: Council for the Welfare of Children. Volume I.631– 711. Quezon City. Jensen. ______. 1999. ______. Philippines. A. “Household income and child schooling in Vietnam. J. F. http://www. 1996. L. Manila: ADB. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies. D. A national policy on child labour and development in the Philippines. Quezon City: Council for the Welfare of Children. State of the Filipino Children: Report. and R. Barba. Vol. H. Child protection. R. (Reprinted). Philippines (popular version). I. 1997. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.N. Manila.
Studies in Family Planning 29(1):69–78. J. Food and Nutrition Bulletin. 2009].” Ph. “Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps). A. de la Briere. “Situationer on Filipino children. Qayyum. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 20(4): 340–344. J. 2007.. Manila: World Bank and ADB.” Manila: Bureau of Women and Young Workers. Manasan. Dawe. Cuenca. Liaqat. P. 2006. 1999. “Raising primary school enrolment in development countries: the relative importance of supply and demand. Volume 22 No. E. New York: United Nations Development Programme. D. 2009. Valencia. P. S. Handa. R. T. Parker and U. A. Makati City: PIDS.D. D. 221 .ph [Accessed April 14. Department of Labor and Employment.d. (n. Japan: United Nations University Press. Association between complementary feeding practice and mothers education status in Islamabad. Department of Labor and Employment. 1998. “Review of social protection programs in the Philippines. E. 2006. _______. E. and L. 2009.” Public Health Nutrition.d. Lavado. Ahmed. Fuentes. 76. Dissertation. Jonsson. “LGU spending for Millennium Development Goals in LSD study areas.dole. S. Miles. “Essays in health economics. 0603.. and K. R. 2001. D. http://www. Jensen. Forthcoming. Rawlings. 1996.R. M. E.” DSWD powerpoint presentation. 2009].” Philippine Institute for Development Studies Discussion Paper.L. Villate. Maglen.). and L. ______.ph/downloads.C. (n. R. Lopez.cwc. Seck.. Rizvi. Westley. _______.gov. Washington. 2009. D. and S.B. 2007. Pfutze and P.gov. Lutsey. Do family planning programs enhance children’s health? Asia-Pacific Population and Policy No. Does access to water and sanitation affect child survival? A five country analysis. Ours to protect and nurture: the case of children needing special protection. Washington. Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD).: International Food Policy Research Institute. Hunt. 2007.” (A Powerpoint presentation).php [Accessed April 14. the Philippines. “Examining conditional cash transfer programs: a role for increased social inclusion?” SP Discussion Paper No. S. Improving child health in Asia.” Manila: UNICEF.” Food Consumption and Nutrition Division. B. “Iron supplementation compliance among pregnant women in Bicol. Hitotsubashi University: Tokyo. Philippine Journal of Development 34(1)1–33. Who benefits from the Food-for-School and Tindahan Natin Programs: lessons in targeting. IFPRI Discussion Paper No. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies. 2000. 3. Famador.. The impact of type of employment on women’s use of prenatal care services and family planning in urban Cebu. Brewster.). and H. 38. 2008. “A Consolidated Report of the Sagip Batang Manggagawa Assessment Workshops. D. Honolulu: East-West Center. 1998. Manila: De La Salle University-Social Development Research Center. Mason. Education costs and financing in the Philippines. Lamberte. 2001. http://www. and O. _______ and J.: World Bank.C.
N.. “Education Quality and Relevance Updates. National Education for All Committee. Manila: NEDA-UNDP. 2006.pdf Office of the Presidential Assistant for Education. 1997. 2005-21. Rao. 2006. S. and A. “Protecting Filipino children from abuse.nscb. 1987.org. and A. the Philippines. 1991–1998 National Education Expenditure Accounts (NEXA).” Paper presented at the 6th National Social Science Congress. K. 1994. 2001. Manila: Malacañang Palace.: World Bank.org. 2002.d. Wongkhomthong. 2009].ph/activestats/psgc/NSCB_PSGC_SUMMARY_Mar312 009. S. Pasig City: NEDA. Subbarao.ph/_files/Reinventing_Local_School_Boards. Washington. Second Philippines Progress Report on the Millennium Development Goals. National Economic and Development Authority. (n. and S. Philippine Social Science Center . Orbeta. Philippine Constitution. Pasig City: NEDA. Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan 2004–2010. exploitation and violence: a comprehensive programme on child protection. Republic Act No.ph/stats/nexa/default. 2008. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 46:187-95. 2004. Kanade. K. 2005. by region as of December 31.doc Sakisaka. Bonnerjee. 222 . “Achievement tests scores and school characteristics: quantile regression evidence on Philippine public elementary and secondary schools. http://www.” PIDS Discussion Paper Series No. National Statistical Coordination Board. C.C. 9155. municipalities. Philippine Resource Network.gov.” Manila: Department of Justice. “Domestic hygiene behaviour of mothers with children aged 0–5 years old in Tayabo Village. A planning framework for social development. 2008).synergeia. Integrated Population and Development Planning Project. Makati City: Philippine Institute for Development Studies. cities. and barangays. 2005. 2008. “Number of children and their education: Philippine households. _______. Governance of Basic Education Act. D. http://www.. National Economic and Development Authority. Special Committee for the Protection of Children. Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda: 2005–2010. Republic of the Philippines. S. Wakai. [Accessed April 14. Carvalho. Provincial summary (number of provinces. 2008.” Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health 14(2):91-8. Manila: NEDA-UNDP. A. _______.nscb. Functionally literate Filipinos: an educated nation. Nueva Ecija. http://www.gov. _______. http://www. _______. Graham. J.d. J. Safety net programs and poverty reduction: lessons from cross-country experience. 2007. Child protection in the Philippines. _______. Ezemenari. 7–9 May. Robredo. 2009. Prolonged breastfeeding and malnutrition among rural Indian children below 3 years of age.childprotection. 1992. 2006. A. 2006–2010: building a protective and caring environment for Filipino children. Thompson. Manila: Department of Education. Manila: Department of Education. Philippine Midterm Progress Report on the Millennium Development Goals. Braithwaite. National Statistical Coordination Board. National Economic and Development Authority – United Nations Development Programme (NEDA-UNDP). n.asp [Accessed 2 April 2009].).” January.ph. K. LSB reinvention according to Mayor Jesse Robredo.
” State of the world’s children 2009. T. World Bank. http://www.” Education Policy Notes.childfriendlycities. “Towards greater equity in health for mothers and newborns. 2004b. Completion. United Nations Millennium Declaration.org/sp/safetynets/Gender. 2009]. ______. (n. 2008. “Teachers’ development. Social protection and labor. [Accessed April 14. World Declaration on Education for All. Dakar Framework for Action 2000.org [Accessed April 14. “Maternal and newborn health.asp. Manila: World Bank. and Results Report. United Nations Educational.” Manila: World Bank. Victoria C. 1984.” State of the world’s children 2009. ________. _______. 2004a. 223 .” Education Policy Notes. United Nations General Assembly. Schultz. 1990.). Manila: World Bank. 2009. recruitment. Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).” Population and Development Review 11: 215– 235. World Bank. World Bank.worldbank. 2000. Paris: UNESCO. New York: UNICEF. 2000. Child friendly cities. Paris: UNESCO. 2008. and performance: key to improving Philippine basic education. “Building a case for school-based management.d. http://www. “Philippines’ Third Elementary Education Project – Implementation. 2009]. New York: UN. United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). New York: UNICEF. 2007. “Studying the impact of household economic and community variables on child mortality.
the situation has worsened. half of the families were considered income poor but the proportion has been declining ever since. As pointed out in Chapter 1 and detailed in subsequent chapters. other dimensions or correlates of poverty that should be looked into.2%. housing. Though not yet empirically established. While only sustained and inclusive economic growth can make a huge dent in poverty reduction. there were 12. While the number of poor families with children was around 3.9 million in 1985. Two. Addressing Child Poverty and Disparities: A Strategy for Results Introduction Based on the authors’ estimates.000 livebirths in 2003. 224 .000 children in 1990 to just 40 deaths in 2003. This situation can be explained by one or by all of the following: One. believed to be the foundation for promoting and sustaining child well-being. poverty incidence among these households was down to 34%. expenditures on Basic Social Services and on MDG targets had declined since 1996. and land distribution. focus is on the five pillars. estimates show that in 2006.4% in 2003 while those without sanitary toilets and safe water were also reduced to 2. particularly national government expenditures on basic health and nutrition. Three. 7 of 10 families in the country have children between 0–14 years old in 2006. respectively. In 2006.000 livebirths in 1986 to 30 per 1.6 deaths per 1. and almost the same rate more than two decades ago.1 million. Frameworks for Defining Effective Strategies The Philippines is not wanting in programs and projects particularly on the five pillars of child well-being. Translating these figures into incidence of poverty among children. its estimate in 2006 was 4. Chapter IV. Children without access to electricity went down to 5.8 million. In terms of magnitude. however. infrastructure. For children’s welfare. In 1985. This estimate is higher by around 1 million from the 2003 figure of 11.4% and 1. infant mortality rate was halved from 63 per 1. The under-five mortality rate also declined from 79. poverty alleviation programs have not truly permeated the root causes of the problem or that targeting mechanisms are still not effective. This represented 44% of all children of that same age range. improvements in some of the multiple indicators of child poverty may be attributable to these programs.8 million children 0–14 years old living in families that did not meet the basic food and non-food requirements based on their household income. resource allocation and spending priorities are skewed so that public expenditures for social services that matter most to children’s welfare are channelled elsewhere. these gains should not be reasons for complacency but instead serve as catalysts for more cost-effective and efficient efforts. As pointed out earlier in this report that while there are conceptual and legal frameworks already in place—both at international and national levels—it is essential that these are translated into doable action plans and programs. As discussed in Chapter 2. population growth has surpassed any economic gains that may have trickled down to the lowest income deciles of the population. water and sanitation. By no means.
The technological revolution that has led to conveniences in the workplace and in household activities has. protect. Some recent trends. one looks at the macroeconomic picture and prospects for socioeconomic growth of the country in general. and adequately claimed by children. Moreover. Labor migration will continue over the years. Secondary school participation rate remains relatively low at 59%. Migration complexities also bring forth other sociological issues both within the receiving and sending countries. and synergistic partnerships should be formulated and put into action. institutional reforms. this should be approached through the lens of rights-based mechanisms while focused on the glaring disparities in terms of income. the community. rationalizing priorities based on data and information for evidence-based responses. and the state—the dutybearers—the obligation of ensuring that the rights of the child are well-preserved. at the same time. Efforts to prepare for this eventuality may pull out meager resources from various directions. adversely affecting the social sectors. Although general trends of national level data give helpful insights in analyzing performance at the country level. This has to be “guarded” by the duty-bearers to ensure that adequate resources remain for child rights-holders. and the local level in particular. development interventions should not focus solely on the rights-holders but also on strengthening the capacities of duty-bearers to enable them to perform their obligations. In any development programming exercise. The confluence of these realities also served as forces that led children to 225 . adhered to. as one of the guiding frameworks. a comprehensive strategy comprising policies. The rights-based approach being promoted by the United Nations places on the shoulders of rights givers and stakeholders like parents. With the breadth and depth of deprivation among Filipino children. and location to help prioritize and optimize resources. This approach equally gives importance to both the processes of development and their outcomes. Climate not only affects children’s health but also the income situation of their families due to climate impacts on livelihood sources. The detrimental effects of global warming are slowly being felt through erratic weather. gender. and fulfil these claims to children’s rights as detailed in the CRC. Elementary school participation rates have been declining in recent years and this could have serious implications on the children’s future productive capacity. became another tool for unscrupulous persons to prey on children by drawing them into pornography and trafficking. bringing with it the possibility of more children being left to fend for themselves or left to caregivers that have conflicting priorities. scrutinizing and addressing the gaps at within-country level should be given more attention. The current global economic slowdown experienced by the developed world is expected to be felt eventually in the developing countries. Information and analyses coming from multiple correlates of child poverty would enable stakeholders to look at the child in an integrated and holistic manner. This is particularly true in the country’s present decentralized regime. Thus. unfortunately. In laying down the pathways toward promoting the well-being of children and reducing disparities. Under this approach. are alarming particularly on the education front with a growing number of children not attending school. however. the duty-bearers are obliged to respect. the large disparities among regions and provinces are too obvious and significant to ignore.
there are quite a number of recent programs and projects being implemented in the Philippines based on the five pillars of children’s well226 . The fact that official data are not available is already an indication of the neglect that children with special needs are experiencing. or could be due to environmental factors and negative externalities arising from heightened economic activities and hard infrastructure. MIMAROPA. Children trapped in conflict grow up in less than normal circumstances. further constraining their rights to education and good health. it can be established that the regions of ARMM. As illustrated in Chapter 3. household. Such disparities show that stakeholders. based on unofficial data. the country could remain captive in the grinding cycle of poverty and underdevelopment. it was found that poor children continue to be the least educated and the least reached by health and nutrition services. that is. not only in this report but in various literatures as well. early sex and marriage and even commercial exploits that carry risks such as AIDS and child exploitation. It has been well established. The previous chapters pointed out the regional ‘hot spots’ in the country and for most of the five pillars of well-being. depending on the indicator of child deprivation. if not being left behind. or greater awareness of parents. between urban and rural areas. while all the multiple dimensions of child well-being (disparity) are also affecting each other. An increasing number of children with special needs could be a function of the availability of more appropriate measurements for diagnosis. Western Visayas. especially in areas where ideological and religious differences could not be tolerated by parties. It does not help to look at the situation of children in the country at the national level alone since the disparities are significant enough at the local level. At the micro level. The number of children with developmental delays is also increasing. These are clear signals of where resources should be channelled. Strategies for Action In three of the five pillars where data and standard indicators are available. there are individual. Armed conflict. The regional data is a helpful tool for the same stakeholders—both national and local governments—in terms of prioritization and targeting. that serious attention should be given to controlling rapid population growth in the country. These data provide the direction as to where to channel meager resources—to specific needs and to areas needing them most. In the complex issue of child poverty. should enter into their configurations the differences among regions or localities in the country. The reasons behind this. From the detailed information presented in the previous chapters. traps children into a culture of violence and despair. the geographical disparities are glaring across regions beyond what is usually reported. Poverty incidence among children residing in rural areas is more than twice as that in urban areas. Bicol. the same set of regions were highlighted. It is also imperative to deal with the chronic macroeconomic problems that plague the country as these not only weaken economic performance but also aggravate the incidence of poverty. are not that simple. Unless an effective population management program is implemented. and SOCCSKSARGEN are the ‘hot spots’ when it comes to child poverty and disparities in the country. however. and community factors that come into play. including policymakers and service providers. It is ironic that the group that needs the services the most are the ones that could not be reached.
A widespread program providing better access to water and sanitary facilities should be launched as these have a major effect on malnutrition. massive information campaign on its benefits and proper practice should be continued. one has to look deeper into their profiles and not just into the families to which they belong. the methodologies for estimating the various indicators of child well-being/deprivation should be established and agreed upon first to lend meaning and depth on analyses of indicators. NSCB’s technical committee for poverty statistics can be tapped to consider this issue in its deliberations. Prior to this. Barring differentials in standards and definitions. DOH’s FHSIS reports that in 227 . education. and others). Since mothers are crucial in effective infant-feeding practices. Since breastfeeding is vital to infant nutrition. These clearly show that. The fact that available survey data are quite fragmented and difficult to put together to make deeper analysis on the correlates of child poverty highlights the need for a concrete policy toward building up a database or a repository of information on children’s well-being. including statistics on child welfare. are available in areas they frequent such as hospitals and malls. helped in sorting out the conceptual definition of child poverty and the multiple indicators related to it. Incentives for breastfeeding may likewise be offered to ensure that conducive and safe breastfeeding places. child protection. human. information sharing. sectoral data are being published by the NSCB. and augmented with information that are equally significant but remained uncollected. this should be continuously pursued.e. These data and analyses should be made widely available and accessible to the public and treated as public goods. The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) survey and the Bristol University studies. and overall social protection. Data that are currently available and to be augmented in the near future should be used by researchers and policy analysts to promote evidence-based policymaking and program planning. for both mother and infant. data build up should be maintained. Poverty and Children Chapter 2 correctly pointed out that to understand better the poverty situation of Filipino children. Geographical Information System (GIS)-based mapping of child wellbeing indicators is a helpful format for duty-bearers to appreciate better the information and to enable them to easily determine where and what interventions are most needed. resources (i. In the Philippines. It should be acknowledged that data building in relation to child well-being (or poverty and disparities) indicators are increasing. sustained. In the Philippines. institutional. if it has not already done so.. Children’s Health and Nutrition Having established that the nutritional status of children depends on the kind of care they receive (from the kind of care mothers receive while pregnant—maternal care programs—to vitamin supplementation. and financial) are being allocated to elevate the plight of children. be it nutrition. health. vital information should be made available to them. among others. they affirm that it is a step in the right direction. These efforts should lead to the formulation of a composite index of child poverty that could eventually be a companion to the Human Development Index. Innovative efforts such as conditional cash transfer programs are relatively still on their early stages but the fact that such programs combine both geographical and institutional targeting. being.
While increasing participation is not enough. the program should include mass feeding in schools and appropriate lessons on proper nutrition and sanitation programs. logistics. Economic reasons such as high cost of education and employment are important factors cited for being out of school and these can only be addressed by a consistent and a more inclusive economic growth and scholarships for the poor. this is compounded by the insufficient number of health personnel deployed in remote areas. and management capacity. There may be a need to revisit DOH’s policy of letting LGUs purchase their own syringes for EPI use. and its administrative order on micronutrient supplementation. For key programs such as EPI and Micronutrient Supplementation. teachers and facilities. e.g. In this regard. Aside from transportation problems. Lack of interest also figures prominently 228 . their implementation must be tailored to the realities in the provinces. the quality of early childhood education should also be improved through investments in teacher training.7% of households have access to safe water. Essentially. such may not be the case in rural areas. Moreover. particularly in the early stages of the program. the national government should provide the supplies. 85. While policies such as those promoting facility-based delivery are steps in the right direction. transportation. and 77. given the relatively stagnant enrolment rate in secondary education at 59 percent. Thus. A key challenge that is evident in all indicators is reaching mothers and children that reside in remote rural areas. while the DOH policy of facility delivery through BEmONC/CEmONC may be easier to implement in urban areas. at all costs. The youth seem to be leaving school early with only basic literacy skills and without sufficient functional literacy. It must be recognized that a one-size-fits-all strategy does not apply to the sector. There must be a concerted effort to bring back the out-of-school youth into formal schools or alternative learning systems. should be explored. incentives and/or premium for transition to secondary school and completion. existing assistance for private education for the poor. To promote the health status of Filipino children. a key policy direction would be to invest in infrastructure.. the government should boost the program on early childhood education and put more resources into it. The high gender disparity in enrolment rate in favor of girls and the particularly sharp decline in enrolment rate among boys at the secondary level require an encouragement of more participation among boys in this cohort. Children’s Education To enhance participation in early childhood education. there should be a conscious effort to significantly improve secondary school enrolment. facilities. school supplies. should be increased to cover full tuition and other related expenses. which states that LGUs must augment DOH supply of micronutrients. in the form of scholarships among others. the government needs to invest more on early childhood education.5% of households have sanitary toilet facilities. Innovative ways of supporting secondary education for the poor. It is equally important to give attention to the out-of-school youth since the poor is over-represented in this group as indicated by disparity in enrolment rates in terms of income decile. 2007. In addition. This practice adds impediment to the implementation of otherwise very important programs.
e. While palliative measures are enforced. exploitation and abuse) and what the duty-bearers are doing to alleviate their plight. disability. water and sanitation. They are in the best position to assess the plight of children and their families in the community. Further. Resource Allocation and Targeting Implementing policies and programs require financial resources that are not abundant in this country.1%–1.g. especially in areas where many Muslims and IPs reside. The menu of government spending 229 . housing. Given this huge resource gap. there is a need to address disparities in education outcomes across areas. Child Protection Policies The section on child protection provided comprehensive information on the policy frameworks and programs that cater to Filipino children. The cumulative resource gap of all MDGs from 2007 to 2010 is estimated to be PhP350. These can be addressed by improving the efficiency and relevance of the school system. Public school resources should not contribute to but instead counteract this normal resource allocation tendency and reduce the prevailing disparities. the establishment of registration centers at the barangay levels. urban. rural and across administrative regions. Allocation of education resources should have built-in equalizing factors because household and community characteristics all favor the better endowed. and land distribution. it is equally important to determine ways and means to prevent children from falling prey into these insidious conditions. It also extensively tackled the circumstances and conditions faced by children (i. the expenditures on Basic Social Services and MDG targets had declined since 1996. This can be due to several reasons such as a lack of appreciation for the value of education or that the educational system is not producing relevant results for them. the national and local governments have the most critical role in advocating for children’s rights as they are the ones that formulate and implement plans and programs. among the reasons for non-participation in early elementary grades.2% of the GDP).. infrastructure. Among the duty-bearers. based on a low-cost assumption. Engaging key education partners’ greater involvement should always be an important pillar of the strategy to improve the efficiency and equity in the school system as well as enhance the relevance of schools. it is unlikely that the Philippines will achieve all its targets unless it prudently channels scarce resources or will tap other sectors to help. these should be accompanied by a sustained advocacy on the value of education among parents. These children must be prioritized in resource allocation and program implementation. At the same time. LGUs are ideally the prime movers in the delivery of basic social services such as basic education and healthcare because of their proximity to their constituents. lack of formal registration. specifically national government expenditures on basic health and nutrition. particularly among the poor where lack of personal interest is a much more prevalent reason for children not attending school. As earlier noted. Caution must also be made when allocating scarce resources given the fiscal bind faced by the government.6–PhP389 billion (or 1. However. early marriage. life in the streets. For instance. is a step in the right direction.. particularly children in need of special protection. child labor. e.
Alongside the efficient allocation. The chapter on child protection has presented the many iterations of these intersectoral and interagency groupings and the various avenues of cooperation and collaboration.g. These interventions operate under appropriate legislative framework and international agreements. medical students subsidized by the government (e. This would enable the CHO/MHO to allocate more time for clinic hours. Public institutions such as the CWC. Some of the functions of the CHO/MHO are administrative. presented in the first chapter that are expected to yield high returns to the poor with the least leakage of benefits to unintended non-poor groups should well be considered. Action plans are already in place as well as programs providing direct and indirect interventions. programs are most likely to have a positive impact on household and child welfare. which the Philippines has committed to adhere to. as female-headed households are generally poorer than male-headed households. Incentive problems created by unfunded laws such as the Magna Carta for Health workers should likewise be addressed. and private organizations particularly NGOs have their own niches when it comes to responding to children’s needs. Another overriding concern is to prevent the occurrence of leakages. as discussed in this report under the five pillars of child well-being. However. those studying in public universities) should have minimum years of service to the government. 230 . structures ensuring intersectoral and interagency cooperation are likewise in place. consider the gender of the household head. The dearth of medical doctors in the country also points to the need for reexamining the roles of city/municipal health officers and public health nurses. as much as possible. The manpower complement in institutions serving the education and health needs of children must also be considered. Similar to other countries. Institutional Reforms The framework for ensuring the rights and well-being of children in the Philippines are already well established. Beyond the performance of their individual mandates. In targeting efforts. an interim solution was to hire casual employees through job orders. the key to the cost-effectiveness of any program is to identify correctly which households or individuals are poor and which are not. This probably signifies the need to revisit DBM limitations on personal services to see whether such limitation is indeed appropriate for the health sector. casual employees cannot be sent to DOH trainings. If done well. proper targeting must be done to concentrate the benefits of policies and programs to the segment of the population that need them most. Evidences suggest the importance of targeting programs to women as they manage resources better than men. Quality of teacher skills was emphasized as an important driver of educational outcomes among children. which could be passed on to the PHN.. Resource allocation does not refer only to financial matters but to human resources as well. The dearth in health personnel was also indicated as affecting health services for children. The temporary nature of the job also makes it difficult to integrate these personnel with the rest of the health staff. As the section on social protection pointed out. Due to hiring limitations.
these should yield high returns for the poor. a pillar that is more 231 . it will only draining the coffers of the government and grantgiving development institutions. Good Governance Needless to say. PNP. Child protection is primarily the responsibility of DSWD and CWC but draws enforcement agencies like the DILG. utmost care must be exercised when allocating scarce resources and when choosing from a menu of public spending. and DOLE. good governance benefits children as the efficient. With health and social services already devolved to LGUs. based on their own circumstances and aspirations. permeate the lives of children as “bad” governance aggravates their deprivation and erodes their moral values. to make it more participatory and responsive. Though the impact on children may be indirect. Perhaps. Resources. Duty-bearers should be able to translate this information into evidence-based interventions and monitor them continuously for impact assessment and evaluation. even the children themselves. and LGUs. However. Partnership Identifying Duty-Bearers and their Specific Roles Under each pillar of child well-being. are channelled toward self-interested individuals and groups to the detriment of children’s well-being. National Nutrition Council. with the country ranked very high in terms of prevalence of corruption. Monitoring and Evaluation Putting together data and information on the various indicators of child poverty and disparities is an important mechanism toward identifying appropriate responses. The ‘Voices of the Poor’ initiative of the World Bank comes to mind as a possible model for getting inputs from children. This implies that research work should continue to look for reasons why gaps persists. and to examine the interrelated forces and relationships that would strengthen the pillars of child well-being. some benefits accruing to children. further affecting the future of this country. Bureau of Immigration and Deportation. The overall duty-bearer is the national government. Otherwise. is available every year from public appropriations or from grants and soft loans from development institutions. However. Each of the child-directed programs should be time-bounded to allow for periodic assessments and redirection of resources or rationalization of program designs when necessary. and accountable delivery of services addresses their particular needs. the effects nevertheless. more attention should be given to program design involving as many duty-bearers as possible. there are already existing studies that propose appropriate interventions corresponding to the desired outcomes. This is affirming that the infrastructure for enabling children to claim their rights is available. Nutrition and health services are the responsibilities of the DOH. It is quite easy to determine responsible agencies under each pillar. Combined with proper targeting mechanisms. particularly poor children. In fact. given their state-given mandates. though meager. the local chief executives become important duty-bearers as well. particularly DSWD and CWC. responsible institutions are clearly identified. to analyze the correlation between interventions and outcomes. Education services are the purview of the DepEd at the national level and the Local School Boards at the LGU level. transparent. Social protection.
The Committee brings together under one umbrella relevant government agencies. these duty-bearers are able to focus their efforts in specific advocacies and programs. teachers. school heads. strengthening the role of the grassroots health workers is necessary. professional. Local School Board. it was found that in many LGUs. Under the education sector. Synergistic Mechanisms Aside from acknowledging and performing their obligations as duty-bearers in promoting the well-being of children. Meanwhile. education. a long list of public action in the form of both policies or programs needs to be done by various duty-bearers to reduce child deprivation in the Philippines. mostly NGOs that have taken upon their shoulders the role of duty-bearers. capacity. Other important dutybearers. To address this issue and to encourage local leaders to be active in the LHBs. Given their role in WHTs. law. Evidences show that adequate involvement of these partners in any education strategy lead to positive education outcomes. those with global orientation and holistic view of the condition of children. they are not functional. thereby avoiding the risk of spreading their resources too thinly in multiple efforts. they should also be able to work together in synergy to ensure that service gaps are covered. and economic opportunities. What is essential is the definition of roles of these duty-bearers and identifying the areas where their capacities should be built in to enable them to perform their obligations to the children. a possible solution is to make the Board a subcommittee of the Local Development Council since the LHB members are normally from the LDC as well. and delivery of services. involves institutions that have something to do with mitigating the vulnerability of children. research. it can be assured that local executives will be present in LHB meetings and civic organizations. 232 . Many are involved in advocacy. These include the DepEd particularly the Division Office. UNICEF provides technical. through their participation in the local health boards. employers. there are private institutions. Aside from providing the guiding frameworks and state-of-the-art approaches. While each of the strategies for action is important. are development institutions such as the UNICEF. The Philippines has shown possible models of synergistic mechanisms. labor groups. and policy. Civic organizations are supposed to be part of the local health system. Impact could even be maximized if these partners can be brought together into one synergistic mechanism. and the community. Organized into subgroups. their tenure should be protected from political interference. These BHWs should be given appropriate incentives to ensure that they carry out their tasks. However. and NGOs. complex and multidimensional. This way. LGUs. The same should be true among duty-bearers in nutrition and child health. social protection. One is the National Child Labor Committee (NCLC) organized into five subgroups namely. In mobilizing societies to strive for better health. Moving Forward As the preceding section has shown. there are at least five key partners in any basic education strategy. there is increasing awareness of the clear roles of each of the duty-bearers involved. and financial resources to ensure that direct and indirect interventions for children do take off. protection. For the school.
• A key policy direction to promote the health status of Filipino children would be to invest in infrastructure. while laws passed to protect children should be widely disseminated and strictly enforced. given the finding that more children are out of school due to “lack of personal interest. exploitation. • LGUs as duty-bearers should take a more active role in ensuring that the rights of children are preserved. logistics. • Public investments aimed at improving the efficiency of the education system are needed. 233 . • Data relating to child deprivation indicators are quite fragmented. These efforts should lead to the formulation of a composite index of child poverty that could eventually be a companion to the Human Development Index. • Allocate more resources to alleviate the plight of children who have to face disability. This makes it difficult to conduct deeper analysis on the correlates of child poverty. limitations in resource allocation is a constraint that requires conscientious prioritization. there is a need to go deeper and beyond the data that are usually reported. from macro to pragmatic perspective are summarized below: • Pursue an effective population management program to stop the vicious cycle of poverty and underdevelopment. NSCB’s technical committee for poverty statistics can take the lead in drawing up the methodologies and documentation necessary. • Stabilize macroeconomic fundamentals to strengthen the country’s economic performance in order to reduce the incidence of poverty. • With geographical disparities found to be glaring across regions. Strategies to address child deprivation. child labor. and abuse. and management capacity in the health sector.” All these actions require the concerted effort of key education partners. so that meager resources could be channelled to specific needs and to areas that are most needed. facilities. early marriage. life in the streets. lack of formal registration. Duty-bearers should determine ways and means to prevent children from falling prey into insidious conditions. A GIS-based mapping of child deprivation indicators would enable duty-bearers to better appreciate the information and pinpoint where interventions are most needed. These data should enter into the configuration when prioritizing programs and projects. Community and personal appreciation of the value of education should be promoted. A key strategy is to reach out mothers and children in remote areas of the country who have difficulties accessing health services and information. Local government executives must join networks and consortia promoting child well-being and allocate enough resources to support these efforts. A policy that would require building up of database or repository of information on such indicators would address this problem.
• Resource allocation does not refer only to financial matters but to human resources as well. and monitoring and evaluation. which entail rationalizing the roles and functions of key personnel. The dearth in health personnel was also indicated as affecting health services for children. and to examine the interrelated forces and relationships that would strengthen the pillars of child well-being. Continued partnerships with development organizations that cater to the needs and welfare of children would augur well for the success of these interventions. mechanisms for collaboration should be instituted to strengthen interventions. implementation. particularly involving programs and services for children as these incidences erode their significant impacts to child well-being. to analyze the correlation between interventions and outcomes. appropriate teacher training programs should continue to be implemented along with periodic assessments of competencies and teaching skills. Manpower complement in institutions serving the education and health needs of children must be considered. 234 . • Conduct research that would continue to look for reasons why gaps persist. Grassroots or community-based organizations and personnel must be mainstreamed into program design. which should be time-bounded to allow for periodic assessments and redirection of resources or rationalization of program designs when necessary. With guiding frameworks and appropriate structures in place (such as the NCLC and similar organizations). As quality of teacher skills is an important driver of educational outcomes among children. and minimize duplication of efforts. optimize resources. • Pursue decisive actions that would eradicate corruption and leakages. More service personnel should be on hand than those taking on administrative roles. • Institute monitoring and evaluation systems in each of the child-directed programs.
Conclusions This country report has come up with very significant findings that can directly feed into the design of development interventions in the country. location-specific policies. The report also highlighted that beyond disparities surrounding income and gender characteristics. and the rights-based approach to attacking child poverty as framework—serve as building blocks toward laying down the pathways to promoting child well-being. it has become clear that the regions of ARMM. and on the flipside. . It was able to establish that income indicators alone could not capture the actual conditions of well-being. it has provided a profile of the poor Filipino child and discovered the fact that although income poverty among children in general has improved over the years. Armed with this information. the details of deprivations of the Filipino child. MIMAROPA. All these information—including the macroeconomic context by which the well-being of the Filipino child is being shaped. and programmatic priorities can be established. there are significant differences in the condition of children across the regions of the country. and SOCCSKSARGEN are the worse-off localities in the country in terms of the multiple indicators of child poverty. Among others. All the mechanisms that were proposed and discussed make use of infrastructures already in place while calling for synergistic relationships among the duty-bearers. Western Visayas. Under the five pillars of well-being are various measures that could be useful in providing insights about the conditions and challenges faced by the Filipino child. Based on data presented. recent estimates show that there are more poor Filipino children at present than a few years back. Bicol. 235 . resource allocation.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.