Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 1

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Introduction

Cagayan de Oro City is a highly urbanized city and is the main contributor to the

economy in Northern Mindanao. As the city continues to grow, the demand for transportation

follows. As it offers lots of jobs, people consistently need something that could make their

lives a lot easier; and traveling to their workplace is most common and biggest deal to

consider.

There are different kinds of public vehicles present in the city, such as jeepneys, taxis,

buses, habal-habal, and tricycles or most commonly known in the city as motorela. The

motorela’s style was designed by a Kagay-anon named Rafael D. Floirendo and became a

landmark of Cagayan de Oro This vehicle gives a specific advantage to the accessibility of

most centers of activity in the heart of the city with the lowest fare rate of 4 to 8 pesos only,

depending on the prompt price (V. Sabuga-a, personal communication, July 31, 2019). Thus,

sustaining and developing the said vehicle is a must.

In the Comprehensive Development Plan of Cagayan de Oro City for 2017-2019, the

regulation and improvement of motorela is included. Sabuga-a added that the Tourism

Department has fabricated two types of motorela and released last July 29, 2019, for

promotion, testing, and exposition to the public. With this ongoing plan of development for

motorela, public transport should take account of the transportation equity.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 2

In the study of Littman and Burwell (2006), in recent decades, in some other places,

conventional transportation planning tends to focus on economic objectives such as

congestion reduction and increased travel speeds, travel cost savings, and traffic safety.

Transportation equity is essential and unavoidable. Litman (2014) states that equity

issues often affect transport policies and planning, which are sincerely addressed in the

majority of practitioners and decision-makers. Consequently, there is no sufficient published

data on motorela transportation equity in the City which becomes a crucial factor for

transportation planning.

Boucher and Kelly (1998) defined equity as “the distribution of benefits and costs

over members of society.” According to Di Ciommo and Shiftan (2017), the primary

challenge for evaluating equity in the transportation sector is to identify and operationalize

expenses and advantages as well as the distributive principle. In addition to that, the

definition and operationalization of population groups are carried out in many domains of

research and policy, including transportation.

Thus, this paper will explore the impacts and unravel the problems on the equity of

policies and practices for both passengers and drivers and help the local lawmakers improve

the City’s transportation system and to serve the individual justly.

Conceptual Framework

This study was anchored on the theory of Litman (2014) on Evaluating

Transportation Equity, which relates to the equity of impact allocation (benefits and

expense). In transport planning, in particular, the transport assessment is essential and

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 3

inevitable. Three significant transportation equity categories exist. First is horizontal equity

in which people and organizations are entitled to equal shares of assets and equal expenses.

In other words, all are treated the same. Second is vertical equity concerning income and

social class. This type of equity states that transportation policy is fair if it favors the

economically and socially disadvantaged people. Thus, the allocation of effects is, therefore,

distinct in terms of their financial and social capacity and needs. Third is vertical equity

regarding mobility needs and ability. This type of transportation equity concerns that the

distribution of impacts to people that differ in need, and ability, thus, the point to which the

transportation system meets the needs of travelers with mobility impairments. This definition

is used to support universal design (also called accessible and inclusive design), which means

that transport facilities and services accommodate all users, including those with special

needs.

This paper focused mainly on vertical equity – concerning income and social class

and about mobility needs and ability. As such, the researchers focused on the factors of

transportation equity, as shown in the figure on the next page.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 4

Figure1. Schematic Diagram

The first variable is the demographic factors of the user. It is necessary to identify

firsthand the different categories of people, both drivers and commuters, who use motorela

transport. Litman (2018) quoted the need to categorize individuals according to demographic

and socioeconomic variables for assessment to assess travel fairness (Fan and Huang, 2011).

Some of these demographic and socio-economic factors include age, gender, civil status,

employment status, income, size of household, and even physical impairments. This is
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 5

important in order to assess their capabilities and to be able to identify those who are

transport disadvantaged, as classified by Litman (2014), those people with relatively low

income, has no driver’s license, with disabilities, with obligations (those who attends school),

and those accountable for dependent children, disabled adult, or elderly.

Secondly, the assessment of the measure of the respondents’ mobility and using

motorela and its accessibility to famous places of activities and opportunities is essential; this

is because mobility and accessibility is the ultimate goal of most utmost transport activity

(Litman, 2018) and fundamental components for social equity (Di Ciommo and Shiftan,

2017).

In addition to that, in a vertical equity category, equity in motorela public

transportation can be measured by the commuter’s ability to access the motorela, its comfort,

and accommodation, given its utility design. Also, the safety of the infrastructure and the

vehicle itself should not be ignored when waiting and in transit. In this regard, this paper

discussed and analyzed the motorela Transportation's equitability through a survey of the

expectations of users and the satisfaction of their services.

The user costs and benefits were explored in terms of income of the drivers and

operating expenses. A cost and benefit ratio, meaning the average income per day over the

average expenses per day, were generated to interpret a relationship between the income of

drivers versus their expenses to determine whether it is positive or negative. This, in turn,

gave a simple check on the impacts of the fare policy of motorela to its drivers.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 6

Statement of the Problem

This study deals with Social Equity (Fairness) of the policies and practices of

motorela as public transportation on the City of Cagayan de Oro. Specifically, this study

sought to answer the following questions:

1.) What is the demographic and socio-economic profile of the users of the

motorela transport in terms of:

a.) Age;

b.) Gender;

c.) Civil Status;

d.) Employment;

e.) Ability (Physical Impairments);

f.) Size of the household?

2.) What is the level of mobility and accessibility of commuters in terms of:

a) Number of trips per day;

b) Trip purpose?

3.) What is the perception of the users of motorela facilities and services in

terms of:

a.) Safety;

b.) Accommodation;

c.) Waiting time?

4.) What is the cost/benefit ratio of the income versus expenses of drivers?
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 7

Scope and Delimitations of the Study

The study is descriptive and focused on vertical equity of passengers and drivers who

consistently use motorela. The researchers prepared survey questions to gather information to

attain their objective. The research was conducted within the City of Cagayan de Oro only.

The research data was based on the user’s experience on motorela which discussed

mainly on safety, accommodation, mobility, accessibility, and user’s perception and

satisfaction in using the said vehicle as an independent factor of transportation equity. Also,

the study described only the frequency distribution of respondents’ demographic profiles.

Furthermore, the exploration of the analysis of cost and benefit was limited only to the

drivers of motorela.

Significance of the Study

The results of the study would be a great benefit to the following:

Commuters. The study may help the commuters get excellent and fair service,

particularly in motorela transport. Furthermore, they may be able to participate in transport

system improvement.

Drivers/Operators. The research may be able to help drivers/operators to balance

cost vs. income, based on assessment. Also, they may convince the commuters to ride on

motorela.

Policy Makers. The results of the given data may give ideas to the policymakers to

come up with a better transportation system for motorela in Cagayan de Oro City. Thus, this

may help them improve their transportation policies and planning decisions that they have

implemented. Also, this would lead to new opportunities with other sectors.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 8

Students/Researchers. This study may serve as a future reference for the researchers

on the subject of transportation and traffic issues that they were not able to explore. With this

research, new knowledge may be achieved in improving the motorela policy and practices.

Definition of Terms

To give proper understanding of some words that are used in this study, the following

are defined operationally;

Ability. This term refers to the transportation capacity or the physical ability of a

person to access transportation.

Accommodation. This term refers to the convenience of the services and the

universality of the motorela design. This involves the design of the fare rate of transportation

service.

Age. This term refers to the number of full years that the participant has been alive.

Civil Status. This term refers to the distinct options that describe a person’s

relationship with a significant other.

Cost/Benefit Ratio. This refers to the ratio of the expenses of the drivers over their

income. It is an indicator used in cost-benefit analysis to show the relationship between the

income and expenses.

Economically disadvantaged. This term refers to socially-disadvantaged people,

whose capacity to compete in the scheme of free enterprise has been affected by reduced

assets and loans as opposed to those who are not socially-disadvantaged in the very same

company sector.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 9

Employment. This term refers to whether the participant is self-employed,

unemployed, or employed under government or public agency.

Expenses. This term refers to the operational costs of driving motorela

Gender. This term refers to the identification of a male or a female and association

with their role in society.

In Transit. This term refers to the state of traveling in a motorela public transport.

Mobility/Physical impairment. This refers to the inability of a person to use one or

more of his/her extremities, or a lack of strength to walk, grasp, or lift objects.

Number of trips per day. This term refers to the average number of trips commuters

have using motorela.

Safety. This refers to the condition of being protected from harm or other non-

desirable outcomes in riding and waiting for motorela.

Size of the household. This refers to the number of direct and extended family

members and relatives that currently live with respondents and to which the respondent is

responsible for.

Social class. This term refers to a division of a society based on social and economic

status.

Transportation system. This term refers to a facility consisting of the means and

equipment necessary for the movement of passengers or goods.

Trip purpose. This term refers to the usual destination and the reasons for

commuters to use motorela.

Users. This term refers to all both commuters/passengers and drivers of motorela.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 10

Waiting time. This refers to the time when commuters and drivers wait for motorela

to transit from alley stations or loading and unloading zones.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 11

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the review of related literature and studies that have significant

bearing to this study. Because this study is an exploration, most of the studies and literature

that this chapter will cite are those of transportation equity of different transportation modes.

Transportation Social Equity

Equity—just and fair inclusion of all—is essential to growing a strong economy and

building vibrant and resilient communities. According to an article released by PolicyLink

(2016) about the economic benefits of equity entitled “Transportation for All: Good for

families, communities, and the economy”, equitable transportation system strengthens the

economy by ensuring that all people – regardless of race, income, or ability – can connect to

opportunities they need, such as education and work, to participate in and contribute to the

society and the economy. Also, safe, reliable, and affordable public transportation helps

people access these opportunities. Moreover, in the article, they added that this connectivity

is essential for employers who depend on workers to succeed in their businesses.

Social equity has been the focus of studies of different transportation groups from all

across the globe. Mainly, the purpose of the study of social equity is related to the

improvements and revisions of existing transportation practices. Manaugh, Badami, & El-

Geneidy (2015) concluded in their study that throughout the 20th century, transportation
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 12

planning goals were almost entirely mobility-based. However, they added that since the early

2000’s, society had acknowledged social equity issues as relevant to the transportation

industry.

According to Litman (2014), transport equity assessment is essential and unavoidable.

He said that equity issues most frequently affect the decision on transport planning. He said

that transport planners and professionals are sincere about achieving transport equity goals.

Equity analysis can help planners better anticipate problems and consequently reduce

conflicts and delays.

Manaugh, et al. (2014) claimed that by careful consideration of the issues of social

equity transportation planners could move towards making a more sustainable transportation

system. According to their study of the integration of social equity to the urban transportation

planning in North America, they found out that social equity goals and objectives are in

many cases not addressed clearly into specified objectives, but, at the same time, they also

found good social equity objectives in some of the plans.

Transportation equity has a variety of types, impacts, measurement units, and

categories of people to consider. One type of transportation equity to consider is Vertical

Equity, which this research focuses on. According to Todd Litman (1996), vertical equity

needs that low-income drivers profit from profits as a class at least as much as the cost they

carry and that disadvantaged citizens (including non-drivers) benefit generally. In 2014,

according to Todd, vertical equity involved the identifying and planning of affected persons,

to ensure that their situation does not deteriorate and to accommodate their requirements.

However, in 2002, he said that the poor also paying a part of the driving and sprawling
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 13

external costs. Those who cannot afford to drive are much worse off because they cannot

access many destinations, including schools and colleges, employment sites, and social

activities.

Demographic Factors

The analysis of transportation equity requires the categorization of people according

to their demographic profiles to evaluate the capabilities of the users and to identify those

who are transport disadvantaged (Litman, 2018).

According to Todd Litman (2012) which he cited Sawicki and Moody (2011), that

although cars are expensive and expenses are regressive, studies suggest that ownership of

cars is a significant contribution in supporting the obtaining and maintaining of employment

for disadvantaged people. This theory by Litman has various implications for equity. It

suggests that strategy which helps poor people access automobiles, such as in the framework

of workplace welfare programs, which can provide equity benefits. Sharing cars and other

vehicle rental services, special vehicle insurance and loan programs, and Pay-As-You-Drive

insurance can increase mobility and economic opportunities for some disadvantaged people

(VTPI 2005).

Todd (2014) also said that automotive solutions generate other equity issues because

driving is expensive, retrieval, and hard (especially for some disadvantaged individuals, for

example, disabled individuals or non-English speakers). Cheap cars affordable for poor

people are sometimes unreliable and unsafe. Low-income drivers often share vehicles with

other members of the household. Even poor people who own cars rely on different methods.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 14

The outcome is a better range of transport systems that tend to benefit disadvantaged

individuals. In other words, disadvantaged individuals can benefit from driving policies and

programs that boost general travel choices. They can benefit even more from policies and

programs.

Car subsidies benefit only a subset of disadvantaged individuals who can drive and

impose high direct and indirect costs. The insurance premiums for low-income motorists are

often high, and old cars are untrustworthy, with enormous repair expenses In consequence,

much of the extra revenue generated by car owner needs to be spent on car maintenance costs

to reduce net income. The threat of auto-travel also tends to rise, and the risk of accidents to

local populations and sedentary life-related health issues (APHA 2010; Lachapelle et al..

2011), as well as the cost of traffic congestion, traffic and parking facilities, accident risk and

pollution emissions. This assessment shows that although the car can help some

disadvantaged individuals, the general benefits and cost-effectiveness of other transport

enhancement approaches are often better. These include enhanced circumstances for hiking

and biking, enhanced transport and rideshare, car sharing, long-distance vehicle, and

registration costs, and more accessible accommodation (Sullivan 2003; Litman 2010). All

citizens, particularly those in physical, economic, or social disadvantage, are benefiting from

these alternatives.

Accessibility and Mobility

Bajada et al. (2016) said that accessibility is a necessity for people to reach their

destinations, whether they are daily commuters or not. A non-commuting group is an elderly
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 15

population. Due to age-related circumstances, several elderly persons have to surrender on

driving. Consequently, they become highly dependent on public transport (Whelan,

Langford, Oxley, Koppel & Charlton, 2006). Also, Todd Litman, in 2016, defines

accessibility as ability to reaching goods, services, and destinations. Accessibility and

mobility provide the opportunity for people to move from an origin to a destination. Hence,

accessibility and mobility are two interdependent concepts that encourage independent living

(Suen & Mitchell, 2000).

Mobility has several definitions, according to Wrestrand (2009), it ranges from

“moving by changing position or location or by transferring from one place to another”

(WHO 2002b), to a more holistic view, “also taking movement and degree of independence

during such a movement in consideration” (Peel et al. 2005). Outdoor mobility is the ability

to move about– either ambulant, using an assistive device, or using transportation –

sufficiently to carry out activities outside the home. Such outdoor mobility could be seen as a

prerequisite not only for obtaining essential commodities and consumer goods but also for

general societal participation (Mollenkopf et al., 2005). Furthermore, they continued to cite

Mollenkopf, et al. (1997), who continuously said that personal interactions and events are

significant components of the quality of life of the elderly. With increasing age, these

elements are for various reasons, more difficult to maintain. Therefore, mobility becomes

fundamental for older and disadvantaged people’s participation in social relations and

activities.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 16

Transportation Policies, Facilities, and Services

Napalang (2017) analyzed the social equity consideration in public transport

development in Metro Manila. Her paper presented the challenges faced by commuters in

Metro Manila, based on the results from the satisfactory commuter survey conducted by

Metro Manila Comprehensive Public Transport Evaluation Study (COMPUTES According

to her study, among the top challenges of commuters in using public transport are discomfort

due to overloading, long waiting time, vehicle moving before the passenger is seated, and

physical harassment for female commuters.. Additionally, according to the respondents,

safety in using public transportation is below satisfactory, both while waiting and in transit.

Moreover, according to her analysis, the survey revealed that most respondents consider the

current public utility vehicles as physically inaccessible by senior citizens and disabled

persons.

There are also a few notable studies in the Philippines that consider equity variables

for the development of transportation policies and the improvement of transportation modes.

In most developing countries, like the Philippines, the motorcycles’ being part of the

essential mode of transportation (Guillen and Ishida, 2003) led to the emergence of

motorcycle-propelled public transportation.

In the year 2003, research was conducted in Davao City as to the case of this

motorcycle-propelled public transport, specifically the Tricycles and Habal-Habal. The study

was headed by Guillen and Ishida (2003), which aimed to describe the policy developed

locally in the case of tricycles and habal-habal. Researchers concluded that in the
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 17

development of local transport policy, the need to consider the effects of policies on the

drivers was essential.

In the case of Quezon City, a tricycle mapping survey was conducted to assess the

operational characteristics and performance indicators for tricycle operations (An Ordinance

Adopting The Quezon City Council Tricycle Management Code of 2014, 2014). The list of

indicators included speed, travel time, waiting time, loading and unloading points, and load

profile. Consequently, Proposed Ordinance No. PO19CC-170 entitled, “An Ordinance

Adopting the Quezon City Tricycle Management Code Of 2014” was submitted and was

approved on July 21, 2014.

Throughout the years of motorela practice, Cagayan de Oro City has developed

several policies and ordinances. There are a total of 2,222 registered motorela in the citywith

additional 222 temporary motorela (Office of theCity Council: Major Legislations, 2007).

The five motorelas zones in Cagayan de Oro city are: (1) Carmen, (2) Agora, (3)

Consolacion, (4) Camaman-an, and (5) Macasandig. Each zone has 430, 237, 458, 419, and

687 motorelas respectively and they are expected to operate at their respective zones

(Progress Watch: CDeO & Mis Or, 2018).

The basic policies relevant to this study are as follows: (1) the issuance of fare matrix

must provide operator and driver a reasonable profit and still be affordable to the general

public; (2) motorelas are restricted to operate at National Highways; (3) Full capacity is 7

people per motorela, including the driver (Office of the City Council: Major Legislations,

2007).
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 18

Driver Income versus Expenses

Transportation is one of the main economic burdens that commuters and customers

are facing, particularly those in low-income households and those with social and physical

disadvantages (Litman, 2014). Thus, fare discounts were thus implemented to assist

disadvantaged commuters. However, it is also necessary to consider the side of the drivers.

Consequently, a study in Catbalogan, Samar was conducted for the case of Pedicab

transport, particularly, the drivers of pedicabs. The paper made mention of pedicab industry

as a booming industry in other parts of the world, like New York and Macau (Irene et al.

2015). Their study aimed to assess the pedicab operations and its effect to the tourism

industry in Catbalogan City. It sought to determine the profile of the pedicab drivers and

operators as well as the benefits received. The researchers found out that most of the drivers

spend five to eight hours of driving a day with a mean income of Php150.00 per day (roughly

around $3). This daily income is not sufficient as Millennium Development Goal benchmark

is set at $2 per day (roughly around Php100.00) per person (Irene et. al, 2015). Their

recommendations emphasized on enhancing and setting a standard for operations for Pedicab

drivers.

Moreover, the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) stated in that

because of 2018 inflation rate, an average Filipino household of five would need to have a

family income that would amount to Php42,000 per month to live beyond the poverty line

(NEDA: Family of 5 needs P42,000 a month to survive, 2018). That is Php280 per person per

day or an average Php1,400 pesos per family of five.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 19

Thus, in this paper, driver perception of fare will be explored and will be aided by a

cost and benefit analysis of their average daily income and expenses. Additionally, this paper

will put into one all these different identified transportation equity indicators to assess the

motorela public transportation of Cagayan de Oro City; in which this transportation is one of

the pride and contribution of the city in the field of transportation.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 20

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

The researchers discuss the research methods that were used to conduct the study in

this chapter. Research setting and design, respondents and sampling procedure, research

instrument, and data analysis used were also given.

Research Setting

The researchers conducted the study in June 2019 at the alley stations and loading and

unloading areas known by most commuters located in the following barangays in Cagayan de

Oro City: (1) Carmen, (2) Agora, (3) Consolacion (which includes Cogon), (4) Camaman-an,

and (5) Macasandig. These areas represent the five main zones of motorela identified by the

Road and Traffic Administration (Progress Watch: CDeO & MisOr, 2018).

Figure 2. Five Major Zones of Motorela

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 21

Research Design

This research used Descriptive Survey Design. Descriptive design is a research

method that describes the characteristics of the population that are studied. This technique

focused on the present situation of the respondent, which matches the study. The research

design addressed the social equity of transportation in motorela. It determined and described

the fairness of using the motorela concerning the passengers and drivers in terms of policies

and practices implemented. The researchers also used the quantitative method to get

statistical data using the measure of central tendencies.

Participants and Sampling Procedure

In this study, the researchers categorized the participants into two, commuters and

drivers. To get the sample size, the researchers used the Slovin’s formula for sample size,

with 90% confidence rate, 10% margin of error, and a total of 2,222 registered Motorela

(Ordinance No. 10862-2007), which results to 66 for passengers and 66 for drivers. Using

these sample sizes, the researchers purposely selected at random possible participants for

passengers and drivers in every research location. After the researchers had identified the

respondents, they began to ask several questions in an informal interview setting based on the

survey questionnaire. The researchers recorded the answers of the respondents.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 22

Research Instruments

In this study, a researcher-made questionnaire was used to obtain data relevant to the

objectives of the study and research questions. The first part highlights the demographic

profile and socio-economic background of the commuters and drivers. However, the

researchers place optional the name of the respondents for privacy and confidentiality.

Second, is the perception of the respondents on the facilities and services of motorela. Lastly,

the respondents answered the questions that were prepared only for their category (whether

they were passenger or driver). The second part of the survey questionnaire for both drivers

and commuters used a five-point scale continuum based on the Likert Scale.

Table 1

Likert Scale
Point Value Response Interpretation
5.0 - 4.6 Very Satisfactory Very Good
4.5 – 3.6 Satisfactory Good
3.5 – 2.6 Neutral Neither Good nor Bad
2.5 – 1.6 Unsatisfactory Bad
1.5 & below Very Unsatisfactory Very Bad

Validity and Reliability of the Instruments

The survey questionnaires were tested for reliability and validity by the Office of the Vice

President for Research, Publication, and Extension. The score of passenger and driver survey

questionnaires was 0.725 and 0.712, respectively.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 23

Data Analysis

The data gathered were presented using the tables and other graphical presentations.

It was then described using the frequency and percentage distribution. The findings were

discussed according to the order of the objectives of the study using the results and their

comments.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers sent a letter to the Local Government of Cagayan de Oro to ask for

the data regarding the number of registered motorelas. After that, the researchers prepared a

letter of consent to the people involved in the study such as the adviser of this research, the

Dean, the Vice President for Research, Publication, and Extension, and of course to the

respondents. Then, the researchers started the survey in the research setting and ask for the

cooperation of a selected number of respondents in each location. The researchers randomly

selected the passengers at the identified research settings as respondents and randomly

selected every third driver of the motorela at the alley station. Also, the researchers asked the

respondents with some questions that were based on the survey questionnaire and recorded

additional comments.

After the researchers conducted a survey and gathered responses from the users, the

researchers interviewed a representative or a person from the City Administration and

addressed the users concerned and informed them about the result of the survey or user’s

comments and asked for their response about the motorela problems and plans on the

motorela itself.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 24

Statistical Technique

The researchers used Frequency and Percentage of Distribution to define the trends

and variables of the study. The measure of central tendencies, specifically the mean and

mode, were used to describe the responses of the participants.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 25

Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the findings and interpretations from the survey for

Transportation city-based equity of Motorela public transport according to the order of the

statement of the problem. During the whole month of June 2019, the researchers surveyed the

different loading and unloading stations of the five identified routes within the city: Carmen,

Agora, Cogon, Camaman-an, and Macasandig.

Problem 1: What is the demographic and socioeconomic factors of the users of the Motorela

transport in terms of:

a.) Age;

b.) Gender;

c.) Civil Status;

d.) Employment;

e.) Ability (Physical Impairments);

f.) Size of the household?

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 26

Table 2

Profile of Respondents for Passengers

Demographic and Socio Economic
Frequency Percentage
Factors
Age
Below 15 5 7.6
15 – 24 37 56.1
25 – 44 20 30.3
45 – 64 4 6.0
Above 65 0 0
Total 66 100.0
Gender
Male 25 37.9
Female 41 62.1
Total 66 100.0
Civil Status
Single 44 66.7
Married 20 30.3
Separated 1 1.5
Widowed 1 1.5
Total 66 100.0

Employment/Present Status
Government 5 7.6
Private 17 25.8
Self-Employed 13 19.7
Student 26 39.4
Others 5 7.6
Total 66 100.0

Average Income per Month

less than 10,000 38 57.6
10,000 - 15,000 18 27.3
15,001 - 20,000 4 6.1
20,001 - 25,000 0 0
25,001 - 30,000 3 4.5
above 30,000 3 4.5
Total 66 100.0
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 27

Table 2 shows the demographic profile of the passengers of Motorela public

transport. Out of 66 respondents, 56.1% is between the ages of 15 – 24 years old, and 30.3%

are 25 – 44 years old. The majority is Female (62.1%), showing that women benefit more

from this mode of short-distance transportation. There are no senior citizens of age 65 and

above. Moreover, commuters 15 years old below are at least a percentage.

The results determined 66.7% is single, and 30.3% is married. The majority of the

respondents are students (39.4%), and this is due to the two of the city’s major universities

and colleges within the setting of the study. There were 25.8% employed in private

companies, and most private offices are just by the streets passed by motorelas.

More than half of the respondents have income less than 10,000 pesos per month

(57.6%), followed by those with 10,000 – 15,000 pesos per month (27.3%). Thus, more than

75% of the respondents have income less than 15,000 pesos per month. It shows that

motorela public transportation usually caters to most low-income individuals.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 28

Table 3

Household Background and Special Needs (for Passengers)

Household Background and Special
Frequency Percentage
needs
PWDs
Yes 2 3.0
No 64 97.0
66 100.0
Number of Household
2 5 7.6
3 10 15.2
4 16 24.2
5 10 15.2
6 11 16.7
7 3 4.5
8 5 7.6
9 2 3.0
10 3 4.5
11 1 1.5
66 100.0
Number of Household members with
Special Needs
0 50 75.8
1 9 13.6
2 6 9.1
4 1 1.5

Total 66 100.0

Table 3 shows the different household backgrounds and special needs of the

respondents. Only 3% of the respondents are members of People with Disabilities (PWD).

By inference, motorela is accessible to those with no lower body difficulties.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 29

Also, 75.8% of the respondents have no family members with special needs. The

highest number of family members with special needs is 4 and is 1.5% of the total

respondents.

Table 4

Profile of Respondents for Drivers

Age Frequency Percentage
Below 15 0 0
15 – 24 5 7.6
25 – 44 46 69.7
45 – 64 14 21.2
Above 65 1 1.5
Total 66 100.0
Gender
Male 66 100.0
Female 0 0
Total 66 100.0

Civil Status

Single 15 22.7
Married 49 74.3
Separated 0 0
Widowed 2 3.0

Total 66 100.0

Table 4 shows the demographic profile of drivers of motorela. Out of 66 respondents,

the majority of the drivers are of ages 25 – 44 years old, followed by ages 45 – 64 years old.

Only 1.5% of the respondents are above the age of workability, which is 65 years old. All

drivers are males, and most of them are married.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 30

Table 5

Household Background and Special Needs (for Drivers)

Household Background and Special
Frequency Percentage
needs
PWDs
Yes 2 3.0
No 64 97.0
Total 66 100.0
Number of Household
0 3 4.5
3 11 16.7
4 15 22.7
5 15 22.7
6 12 18.2
7 5 7.6
8 3 4.5
10 2 3.0
Total 66 100.0
Number of Household members with
Special Needs
0 51 77.3
1 10 15.1
2 5 7.6
Total 66 100.0

Table 5 shows the different household backgrounds and other needs of the drivers.

3% of the drivers are members of the PWD. For the number of members in a household of

the motorela drivers, most of the answers are from 4 to 5. The household with the most

number of members is ten, while only 4.5% live on their own. In terms of the number of

household members with special needs, most of the drivers said that they have none.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 31

Problem 2: What is the level of mobility and accessibility of commuters in terms of:

a.) Number of trips per day;

b.) The trip purpose?

Table 6

Commuter Mobility and Accessibility

For Commuter Mobility and Accessebility
Trips per day Frequency Percentage
1 time 37 56.2
2 times 23 34.8
3 times 1 1.5
4 times 3 4.5
5 times 1 1.5
more than 5 times 1 1.5
66 100.0

Table 6 shows the frequency of trips for each passenger who uses motorela public

transport. The majority of the commuter respondents use motorela once or twice per day

while only a few ride on motorela for three (3) times to more than five (5) times a day.

Entertainment/Leisure 26 39.40%
School 25 37.90%
Home 24 36.40%
Market 19 28.80%
Work/Office 14 21.20%
Others 7 10.50%
Church 6 9.10%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Figure 3 – Trip Purpose

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 32

Figure 3 shows the trip purposes of all the passenger respondents. Based on the

results, most of the commuters ride on motorela to go-to entertainment and recreational

places. Also, almost an equal percentage of the respondents ride on motorela to schools, and

also in getting back home. Other trip purposes include visiting a friend or a relative and

running an errand to small stores.

Problem 3: What is the perception of the users of motorela facilities and services in terms of:

a.) Safety;

b.) Accommodation;

c.) Waiting time?

The tables show the frequency of the different perceptions in terms of level of

satisfaction by motorela passengers towards the safety of traveling in the Motorela, the safety

of the different loading stations while waiting, and accommodation in terms of seating

capacity and practices, and affordability.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 33

Table 7

Mean Distribution with Passenger Respondents’ Satisfaction of Motorela Facilities and

Services
Indicators Mean Interpretation
Safety in using motorela as public transportation during the
3.6 Good
day
Neither Good nor
Safety while waiting for motorela on designated loading area 3.4
Bad
Neither Good nor
Seating accommodation 3.0
Bad
Neither Good nor
Motorela loading and unloading practices 3.1
Bad
Affordability (Fare) 4.0 Good
Over all mean Neither Good nor
3.42
Bad
Legend: Scale Response Interpretation
5.0 - 4.6 - Very Satisfactory - Very Good
4.5 – 3.6 - Satisfactory - Good
3.5 – 2.6 - Neutral - Neither Good nor Bad
2.5 – 1.6 - Unsatisfactory - Bad
1.5 & below - Very Unsatisfactory - Very Bad

The table shows the satisfaction ratings of the 66 passenger respondents of motorela.

Safety using motorela (Mean = 3.6) shows a Good rating. The highest mean score is

Affordability in terms of motorela fare (Mean = 4.0 - Good). Most of the respondents

interviewed commented that the fare rate of motorela is very friendly to commuters, like

students, those who cannot drive, and to those who cannot afford to have their car or any

mode of personal transportationSafety on waiting time at the designated loading area (Mean

= 3.4) shows a Neither Good nor Bad rating with responses mostly neutral. Motorela loading

and unloading practices (Mean = 3.1) and seating accommodation (Mean = 3.0) both have

the lowest mean scores with a Neither Good nor Bad rating. However, both have the most
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 34

unsatisfactory responses among the five categories. Common reasons given by respondents

for these responses are; (1) Drivers force to accommodate passengers which makes it very

inconvenient for all passengers, especially as they get down; (2) Drivers do not consider the

variety of sizes of passengers; (3) Drivers usually load and unload passengers while on the

road; (4) Drivers don’t follow traffic rules and regulations.

Table 8

Mean Distribution with Driver Respondents’ Satisfaction of Motorela Facilities and Services
Indicators Mean Interpretation

Safety in using motorela as public transportation during the day 4.7 Very Good
Safety while waiting for motorela on designated loading area 4.0 Good
Seating accommodation 4.8 Very Good
Motorela loading and unloading practices 4.7 Very Good
Affordability (Fare) 4.2 Good
Over all mean 4.48 Good
Legend: Scale Response Interpretation
5.0 - 4.6 - Very Satisfactory - Very Good
4.5 – 3.6 - Satisfactory - Good
3.5 – 2.6 - Neutral - Neither Good nor Bad
2.5 – 1.6 - Unsatisfactory - Bad
1.5 & below - Very Unsatisfactory - Very Bad

From the perspective of the drivers of motorelas, safety while waiting on identified

loading and unloading station, has the lowest mean score (Mean = 4.0) among the five items,

though collectively it shows a Good interpretation, it is important to note that it has a

relatively higher unsatisfactory response. The most common reason from the 17 respondents
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 35

who responded unsatisfactorily/very unsatisfactory, is that there is no designated alley station

assigned by the city administration, which would cause disputes when authorities penalize

drivers for violation.

Moreover, second to lowest in the mean score is the Fare (Mean = 4.2 - Good). Safety

using of motorelas and their motorelas loading/unloading practice both are Very Good (Mean

= 4.7). The highest rating is seating accommodation (Mean = 4.8).

However, interviews show that although generally, drivers rated the services highly,

they have their specific concerns. These concerns are: (1) regularize the increase of fare as

increase in commodities and fuel usually happens; (2) provide designated public alley

stations with proper management; (3) Passengers who do not pay the exact fair; (4) allow

passengers to sit at the front seat; and (5) install side wheel breaks for motorela design

improvement.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 36

Table 9

Waiting Time
Commuter and Driver Waiting Time
For Commuter Waiting Time at Alley/Loading Stations
Waiting time in minutes Frequency Percentage
Less than 10 minutes 27 40.9
10 min – 20 min 24 36.4
21 min – 30 min 9 13.6
31 min – 40 min 4 6.1
41 min – 50 min 2 3.0
50 min – 60 min 0 0
More than 60 min 0 0
66 100.0
For Driver Waiting Time at Alley Stations
Waiting time in minutes Frequency Percentage
Less than 10 minutes 16 24.3
10 min – 20 min 23 34.8
21 min – 30 min 26 39.4
31 min – 40 min 1 1.5
41 min – 50 min 0 0
50 min – 60 min 0 0
More than 60 min 0 0
66 100.0

Results show that most of the commuters experience 1 to 20 minutes of waiting

before they were able to transit with motorela at alley stations or other designated loading

stations along its route. On the other hand, the majority of the drivers experience about 10 to

30 minutes waiting time at alley stations before they can transit at full or mostly full

passenger capacity.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 37

Problem 4: What is the cost/benefit ratio of the income versus expenses of drivers?

Table 10

Drivers’ Net Income vs. Average Expenses per Day

Drivers’ Net Income Drivers’ Average Expenses
Net Income Income per Day
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
less than 200 3 4.5 7 10.6
200 – 300 12 18.2 23 34.8
301 – 400 27 40.9 14 21.2
401 – 500 13 19.7 11 16.7
501 – 600 7 10.6 7 10.6
601 – 700 4 6.1 2 3.0
701 – 800 0 0 0 0
801 – 900 0 0 1 1.5
901 – 1000 0 0 1 1.5
above 1000 0 0 0 0
Total 66 100.0 66 100.0

Table 10 shows that 40.9% of the driver respondents daily income range from 301 –

400 pesos, which, is the mode of the responses. 19.7% ranges from 401 – 500 pesos and

18.2% from 200 – 300 pesos. The highest range of daily income is 601 – 700 pesos, which

comprise 6.1% of the total sample size.

On the other hand, the most frequent range, and the mode of the responses for

average expenses per day is 200 – 300 pesos (34.8%), followed by a range of 301 – 400

pesos (21.2%) and 401 – 500 pesos (16.7%). The highest identified average expense per day

is 901 – 1000 pesos (1.5%).

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 38

Table 11

Average Hours Driving per Day

Hours Driving per day Frequency Percentage
less than 5 hours 1 1.5
5 - 6 hours 1 1.5
6 - 7 hours 18 27.3
7 - 8 hours 19 28.8
more than 8 hours 27 40.9
Total 66 100.0

Table 11 shows that 40.9% of the respondents drive for more than eight (8) hours per

day. Most answers range from six (6) hours to more than eight (8) hours.

Using the mode as a measure of central tendencies for tables 10 and 11, the

researchers got the ranges 301 – 400 pesos income per day and 200 – 300 pesos expenses per

day. In order to compute for the cost/benefit ratio, the medians of both ranges were

calculated using the formula:

𝐸𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑎𝑦

𝐶𝐵𝑅 =
𝐼𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑎𝑦

Where, if CBR > 1, then it shows that operational expenses (costs) overshadow the

income (benefits). However, if CBR < 1, then it shows that income overpowers the costs.

250
𝐶𝐵𝑅 =
350

𝐶𝐵𝑅 = 0.714 < 1

The result shows that the income of motorela drivers overpowers their daily

operational expenses. However, given the average number of household members of

motorela drivers, as mentioned previously, which is four (4) – five (5) household members,

the result is that the everyday income is not sufficient.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 39

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents a summary of the results and findings of the study. It also

discusses the conclusions and proposes appropriate recommendations based on the findings

and conclusions of the study.

Summary

The study dealt with Social Equity or the fairness of the policies and practices on the

motorela as public transportation in the City of Cagayan de Oro. The researchers conducted

surveys at the five identified routes of motorela in the city. The results were presented using

other statistical procedures and central tendencies to describe the frequency and percentage

distribution of the responses.

1.) What is the demographic and socio-economic profile of the users of motorela

transport?

The results show that most of the passengers of the motorela are students of both high

school and college-age groups and majority of them are females and are singles in status.

Most of them have a low monthly income range. On the other hand, demographic and socio-

economic profile results reveal that most driver respondents are adults at the age of

workability, are married, and all of them are males. The results of the household backgrounds

of both driver and passenger respondents were relatively identical. Some drivers and

passengers are persons with disabilities (PWD). Moreover, the household sizes of drivers and
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 40

passengers are at the average at four (4) to five (5) members, and majority of all respondents

have no household members with special needs.

2.) What is the mobility and accessibility of commuters?

Most commuters ride on motorela once or twice per day, and the top three trip

purposes are (1) Entertainment/Leisure, (2) School, and (3) Home.

3.) What is the perception of the users of motorela facilities and services?

Overall, results show that for the passengers, the facilities and services of motorela

are neither good nor bad. The results reveal that one of the most common concerns of

motorela commuters are the following: (1) overloading of passengers causing inconvenience;

(2) attitude of drivers; and (3) undisciplined loading and unloading practices. The motorela is

a seven (7) seating capacity, including that of the driver, and assigned to designated alley

stations that are not being utilized (V. Sabuga-a, personal communication, July 31, 2019).

However, this contradicts to the response of drivers of having legalized alley stations.

4.) What is the cost/benefit ratio of the income versus expenses of drivers?

Analysis of the daily income and expenses of the motorela driver shows that income

overpowers the operational costs of motorela. However, drivers still demand an increase of

motorela fare. According to the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), an

average Filipino household of five must-have a family income of Php 42, 000 to live above

the poverty line (NEDA: Family of 5 needs P42,000 a month to survive, 2018). That is

approximately Php 280 per person per day, which is already equal to the average daily

income of a motorela driver.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 41

Conclusions

Based on the results presented, the researchers concluded that the equitability of the

motorela public transport system has inconsistencies between the variables involved.

Services of motorela are extended towards those who are socially-disadvantaged (students,

PWD, people with low income). Motorela is accessible, and it has access to the top places of

activity within the city like malls and schools Moreover, motorela facilities and services are

good with only a few notable concerns, as mentioned. Demographic and socio-economic

profile, motorela mobility and accessibility, and the overall perception of both drivers and

passengers have signs of transportation equity. On the other hand, the economic status of the

drivers has inequity and insufficiency. Therefore, the average daily income of a driver of

motorela is not sufficient enough to provide for their household needs.

Recommendations

From the results and conclusions of the study, the following are presented as

recommendations:

1. For the lawmakers/policymakers, researchers suggest the following:

a.) To identify, revisit and reorganize alley stations for motorelas;

b.) To regularly study and monitor effects of existing fare matrices;

c.) Come up with a policy that controls imposing high fare by drivers to

oblige commuters to pay the proper amount listed in fare matrix;

d.) Come up with a policy for commuters observe properly

loading/unloading zones;
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 42

e.) To strongly instill the awareness of drivers and commuters on traffic

laws and policies.

2. That the enforcers regularly monitor the overloading of motorelas and their

loading/unloading practices.

3. To future researchers that further study and research of the following are

recommended:

a.) There must be a study for innovation of motorela design that

promotes comfort;

b.) A study must be done to assess the awareness of motorela drivers and

commuters on the laws and ordinances created by the city for

motorela public transport;

c.) Further study should be done to extensively describe the mobility of

the motorelas;

d.) Further study should be done to describe the effects of waiting time;

e.) Further study and analysis should be done to describe the

relationship between the variables aforementioned in the study.

4. Conduct another study to explore further study on the other aspects of

transportation equity of motorela public transport to further develop

motorela facilities and practices.

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 43

REFERENCES

Office of the City Council: Major Legislations. (2007). Retrieved December 28, 2018, from

SANGGUNIANG PANLUNGSOD of Cagayan de Oro City: https://www.cdeo-

sanggunian.online/legislations

All Aboard! Making Equity and Inclusion Central to Federal Transportation Policy. (2009).

Retrieved from Policy Link: www.policylink.org

An Ordinance Adopting The Quezon City Council Tricycle Management Code of 2014.

(2014). Retrieved December 2018, from Sangguniang Panlungsod: Lungsod Quezon:

http://quezoncitycouncil.ph/index_readmore-TODA.php

Updated Comprehensive Development Plan 2017-2019. (2017). Cagayan de Oro City,

Misamis Oriental, Philippines.

NEDA: Family of 5 needs P42,000 a month to survive. (2018, June 8). Retrieved August 5,

2019, from philstar GLOBAL:

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/06/08/1822735/neda-family-5-needs-

p42000-month-survive

Progress Watch: CDeO & MisOr. (2018, March 2). Retrieved March 22, 2019, from

CDODev.com: www.cdodev.com/2018/03/02/city-implements-re-numbering-of-

motorelas-offers-social-services-for-drivers/
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 44

Bajada, T., & Mifsud, D. C. (2016). Accessibility as an Indicator of Transport Equity. The

Case of Public Transport Infrastructure in Malta, and its Impact on the elderly. Xjenza

Online - Journal of The Malta Chamber of Scientists, 4, 72-81.

Boucher, D., & Kelly, P. (1998). Social justice: From Hume to Walzer. Retrieved December

28, 2018, from Routledge: Psychology Press.

Di Ciommo, F., & Y, S. (2017). Transport Equity Analysis. Transport Reviews, 139-151.

Guillen, M., & Ishida, H. (2003). Motorcycle-Propelled Public Transport and Local Policy

Development - The Case of "Tricycle" and "Habal-habal" in Davao City Philippines.

CURRENT RESEARCH TOPICS ON TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC SAFETY

IN ASIAN COUNTRIES.

Irene, E., Laurilla, F., & Bajado, J. (2015). Non-Motorized Public Transport and Tourism -

The Case of Pedicab Drivers of Catbalogan, Samar, Philippines. Journal of

Socialomics, 4(2), 118.

Lachapelle, U. (2011). Commuting by Public Transit and Physical Activity: Where you live,

where you work, and how you get there. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 8,

S72-S82.

Litman, T. (2014, June 11). Evaluating Transportation Equity. Retrieved December 5, 2018,

from Victoria Transport Policy Institute: www.vtpi.org/equity.pdf

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 45

Litman, T., & Brenman, M. (2012, March 8). A New Social Equity Agenda For Sustainable

Transportation. Retrieved December 18, 2018, from Victoria Transport Policy

Institute: www.vtpi.org/equityagenda.pdf

Litman, T., & Burwell, D. (2006). Issues in Sustainable Transportation. International Journal

of Global Environmental Issues, 6(4), 331-347.

Manaugh, K., Badami, M., & El-Geneidy, A. (2014). Integrating social equity into urban

transortation planning: A criticalevaluation of equity objectives and measures in

transporation plans in North America. Transport Policy, 37, 167–176.

Napalang, S. (2017). Social Equity Considerations in the Public Transportation Development

in Metro Manila.

Peel, N., Westmoreland, J., & Steinberg, M. (2002). Transport Safety for Older People: A

study of their experiences, perceptions and management needs. Injury Control and

Safety Promotion, 9(1), 19-24.

Suen, S. L., & Mitchell, C. G. (2000). Transportation in the New Millennium: State of the

Art and Future Directions, Perspectives from Transportation Research Board

Standing Committees. Washington D.C., USA: Transportation Research Board.

Sullivan, K. (2003). Transportation and Work: Exploring Car Usage and Employment

Outcome LSAL Data. Retrieved from NCSALL Occasional Paper:

www.ncsall.net/fileadmin/resources/research/op_sullivan.pdf.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 46

Whelan, M., Langford, J., Oxley, J., S., K., & Charlton, J. (2006). The Eldery and Mobility:

A Review of the Literature. Victoria, Australia: Accident Research Centre, Monash

University.
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 47

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Letter to Motorela Administration

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 48

APPENDIX B. Figures and Plates

Appendix B.1 – Figures

Figure 1 – Schematic Diagram

Figure 2 – Five Major Zones of Motorela

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 49

Entertainment/Leisure 26 39.40%
School 25 37.90%
Home 24 36.40%
Market 19 28.80%
Work/Office 14 21.20%
Others 7 10.50%
Church 6 9.10%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Figure 3 – Trip Purpose

Appendix B.2 – Researcher’s Schemes

Plate 2.0 – The researchers conducting a survey

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 50

Appendix C – Survey Questionnaire for Motorela Drivers and Commuters

TRANSPORTATION CITY-BASED EQUITY: A BASIS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF

MOTORELA POLICY AND PRACTICE
We are Civil Engineering students from Liceo de Cagayan University. We are directing a
study on the equity of transportation policies and practices of Motorela in CDO and this
survey is a vital part of it. We ask for your opinion and experience with regards to the topic.
Your answer will go a long way in making this study successful. Thank you very much.
Put a check on the space [ ] provided for the most appropriate description of your
personal profile and personal perception of the Motorela Transportation System

Part I - Personal
Profile/Background [ ] Passenger [ ] Driver/Operator
Name (Optional): __________________________________________________
Age: _________
Gender: [ ] Male [ ] Female
Marrie
Civil Status: [ ] Single [ ] d
[ ] Widowed [ ] Separated
Are you a member of the
PWD? [ ] Yes [ ] No
Number of Household Members: __________
Number of Family Members with Special Needs (PWD, elderly, etc.):
___________
Employment/Present Status:
[ ] Government [ ]Private [ ]Self-employed
[ ] Others (Student, etc.) If Others, please specify: _________________
Average Income per Month: [ ] less than ₱10,000 [ ] ₱20,001-₱25,000
[ ] ₱10,000-₱15,000 [ ] ₱25,001-₱30,000
[ ] ₱15,001-₱20,000 [ ] Above ₱30,000
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 51

Part II - Motorela Facilities and Services

Choose only one remark the best fit your perception on the following:
Safety using Motorela as public transportation during the day
[ ] Very Satisfactory [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Neutral
[ ] Unsatisfactory [ ] Very Unsatisfactory
Safety while waiting for Motorela on designated loading area
[ ] Very Satisfactory [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Neutral
[ ] Unsatisfactory [ ] Very Unsatisfactory
Seating accommodation
[ ] Very Satisfactory [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Neutral
[ ] Unsatisfactory [ ] Very Unsatisfactory
Motorela Loading and Unloading practices
[ ] Very Satisfactory [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Neutral
[ ] Unsatisfactory [ ] Very Unsatisfactory
Affordability (Fare)
[ ] Very Satisfactory [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Neutral
[ ] Unsatisfactory [ ] Very Unsatisfactory

Part III
For Motorela Passengers only:
How long do you usually wait for motorela in the alley stations/loading area?
[ ] less than 10 min [ ] 41 - 50 min
[ ] 10 - 20 min [ ] 51 - 60 min
[ ] 21 - 30 min [ ] more than 60 min
[ ] 31 - 40 min
How often do you use Motorela in a day?
[ ] once [ ] 3 times [ ]5 times please specify:
[ ] 2 times [ ]4 times [ ]more than 5 times
Where do you usually go to when using Motorela? (Check as many as would apply)
[ ] Home [ ] Church [ ] Market
[ ] School [ ] Work/Office [ ] Entertainment/Leisure
[ ] Others; please specify _____________________________
What other concerns about the Motorela/Riding a Motorela public Transport?
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 52

For Motorela Drivers only:

How long do you usually wait in the alley station?
[ ] less than 10 min [ ] 41 - 50 min
[ ] 10 - 20 min [ ] 51 - 60 min
[ ] 21 - 30 min [ ] more than 60 min
[ ] 31 - 40 min

Net Income per day (total earnings minus expenses):

[ ] less than ₱200 [ ] ₱401-₱500 [ ] ₱701-₱800 [ ] above ₱1000
[ ] ₱200 - ₱300 [ ] ₱501-₱600 [ ] ₱801-₱900
[ ] ₱301 -₱ 400 [ ] ₱601-₱700 [ ] ₱901-₱1000
Hours of driving per day:
[ ] less than 5 hours [ ] 7 - 8 hours [ ] more than 8 hours
[ ]5-6
[ ] 6 - 7 hours
hours
Total expenses (maintainance cost, rent, gasoline, and other fees) per day:
[ ] less than ₱200 [ ] ₱401-₱500 [ ] ₱701-₱800 [ ] above ₱1000
[ ] ₱200 - ₱300 [ ] ₱501-₱600 [ ] ₱801-₱900
[ ] ₱301 -₱ 400 [ ] ₱601-₱700 [ ] ₱901-₱1000
What other concerns about the Motorela/Riding a Motorela public Transport?
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 53

Appendix D. TIMEFRAME

(Gantt Chart)

Week
Septemb
Activities April May June July August October
er
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Sending of
Letters
Data
Collection
Data
Analysis
Enrollment
Report
Writing
Submission
of Final
Draft
Final
Defense
Revision
RPE &
Editor
Submission
of Paper
Submission
of Hard
Bound
Copy
Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 54

CURRICULUM VITAE

JOSHUA C. LABUSAN

Zone 6, Molugan El Salvador City, Mis. Or.

Mobile No.: 09061772314

tinakot10@gmail.com

PERSONAL DATA

Date of Birth: 12/08/96

Place of Birth: Molugan, El Salvador City

Sex: Male

Civil Status: Single

Citizenship: Filipino

Religion: IFI

Mother’s Name: Maridel C. Labusan

Father’s Name: Jerry M. Labusan

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Primary: Molugan Central School

Secondary: St. Joseph Academy

Tertiary: Liceo de Cagayan University

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 55

KRISCIAN V. SANTOS

Julio Gaboa Street, Patag CDOC

Mobile No.: 09750492362

krisciansantos41@gmail.com

PERSONAL DATA

Date of Birth: March 25, 1997

Place of Birth: Cagayan de Oro City

Sex: Male

Civil Status: Married

Citizenship: Filipino

Religion: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Mother’s Name: Grace V. Santos

Father’s Name: Feliciano A. Santos Jr.

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Primary: Liceo de Cagayan University

Secondary: Liceo de Cagayan University

Tertiary: Liceo de Cagayan University

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 56

CRISEL MEE S. TORILLO

Zone 6, Molugan El Salvador City, Mis. Or.

Mobile No.: 09058864244

criselhar8@gmail.com

PERSONAL DATA

Date of Birth: July 12, 1998

Place of Birth: City Hospital, Cagayan de Oro City

Sex: Female

Civil Status: Single

Citizenship: Filipino

Religion: Roman Catholic

Mother’s Name: Medy S. Torillo

Father’s Name: Crispher N. Torillo

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Primary: Molugan Elementary School

Secondary: St. Joseph Academy of El Salvador

Tertiary: Liceo de Cagayan University

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 57

APPENDIX G. Minutes of the Proposal

Liceo de Cagayan University College of Engineering Page 58