Indigenous Peoples Plan

Project number: 41220-013

September 2019

PHI: Integrated Natural Resources and

Environmental Management Project

Subproject: Improvement of Kela-Bangtitan-Bacao-Duyaas Footpath, Lubuagan, Kalinga

Prepared by the Municipality of Lubuagan, Province of Kalinga for the Department of Agriculture,
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and the Asian Development Bank.
This Indigenous Peoples Plan is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not
necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be
preliminary in nature.

In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation
of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian
Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any
territory or area.

iii
 CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
(as of 15 September 2019)
Currency unit – peso (PhP)
PhP1.00 = $0.01900
$1.00 = PhP 52.1700

ABBREVIATIONS

ADB Asian Development Bank

ADSDPP Ancestral Domains Sustainable Development and Protection Plan
BLGU Barangay Local Government Unit
BPMET Barangay Participatory, Monitoring and Evaluation Teams
CADT Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title
CENRO Community Environment and Natural Resources Office
COE Council of Elders
DA Department of Agriculture
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
FPIC Free, Prior and Informed Consent
ICC Indigenous Cultural Communities
INREMP Integrated Natural Resources and Environment Management Project
IP Indigenous People
IPDF Indigenous People’s Development Framework
IPP Indigenous Peoples Plan
IPRA Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
LGU Local Government Unit
OMAS Office of Municipal Agricultural Services
MLGU Municipal Local Government Unit
MPDO Municipal Planning and Development Office
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NCIP National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
NPCO National Project Coordinating Office
PSO Project Support Office
RA Republic Act
RHU Rural Health Unit
RI Rural Infrastructure
SB Sangguniang Bayan
SMR Semi-Annual Monitoring Report
SPMU Sub-Project Management Unit

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 1

II. INREMP AND SUBPROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................... 2
III. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................... 4
A. Relevant Legal and Institutional Framework Applicable to the Indigenous Peoples .......... 5
1. Philippine Constitution of 1987 ....................................................................................... 5
2. Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 (RA 8371) ........................................................ 5
3. NCIP Administrative Order No. 3, Series of 2012 .......................................................... 6
4. DENR-NCIP Memorandum of Agreement and Implementing Guidelines ...................... 6
5. Basic Principles of ADB Safeguard Policy, 2009 ............................................................ 6
B. Brief Description about the Indigenous Peoples in the Project Site ................................... 8
1. Population ....................................................................................................................... 8
2. Population Density .......................................................................................................... 8
3. Ethnicity and Cultural Practices ...................................................................................... 8
4. Education ...................................................................................................................... 10
5. Means of Livelihood ...................................................................................................... 11
6. Poverty ......................................................................................................................... 11
7. Living Conditions .......................................................................................................... 12
C. Key Subproject Stakeholders ........................................................................................... 12
D. Gender Sensitive Assessment of IP Perceptions ............................................................. 12
E. Anticipated Positive and Negative Impacts of the Project ................................................ 12
IV. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE. CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION ........................ 13
A. Consultation and Preparation ........................................................................................... 13
B. Information Disclosure ..................................................................................................... 14
V. BENEFICIAL AND MITIGATIVE MEASURES ..................................................................... 15
VI. CAPACITY BUILDING ......................................................................................................... 15
VII. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM .............................................................................. 16
VIII. MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION .............................................................. 17
A. Internal Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 17
B. External Monitoring .......................................................................................................... 17
C. Reporting .......................................................................................................................... 17
IX. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT ..................................................................................... 18
X. BUDGET AND FINANCING ................................................................................................. 20

iv
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Income Distribution by Household ................................................................................ 11

Table 2. Number of Participants in the Community Consultations during the IPP Preparation .. 13
Table 3: Summary of Stakeholders Views of the Improvement of Kela-Bangtitan-Bacao-Duyaas
Footpath, Lubuagan, Kalinga ...................................................................................................... 14
Table 4. Summary Matrix of Impacts and Enhancement/ Mitigation Measures .......................... 15
Table 5. Implementation Schedule for the IPP ........................................................................... 20
Table 6: Proposed Budget for IPP .............................................................................................. 20

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: The location of the subproject at Barangay Upper Uma, Lubuagan, Kalinga ................ 3
Figure 2: Existing conditions of the proposed subproject ............................................................. 4

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: NCIP Certification on Ancestral Domain ................................................................. 23

Appendix 2. NCIP Certification Precondition .............................................................................. 24
Appendix 3: Minutes of Meeting, Attendance Sheet and Pictures .............................................. 25
Appendix 4: SB Resolution Accepting and Supporting the Subproject ......................................... 1
Appendix 5: Internal Monitoring Indicators .................................................................................... 3
Appendix 6: External Monitoring Indicators .................................................................................. 4
Appendix 7: Executive Order Organizing the Sub-Project Management Unit ............................... 5

v
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. This Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) intends to address the indigenous peoples’(IPs)
concerns/ issues on the proposed improvement of Kela-Bangtitan-Bacao-Duyaas footpath at
Barangay Upper Uma, Municipality of Lubuagan, Kalinga province. As one of the projects under
the Integrated Natural Resources and Environmental Management Project (INREMP), the
subproject will improve the existing 3.8 km footpath with a width of 0.9 meter. The subproject will
be implemented by the Local Government Unit (LGU) of Lubuagan with an estimated amount of
PhP 5,000,000 for the duration of 180 calendar days.

2. The proposed subproject is within the ancestral domain claim of the Iyuma sub-tribe who
are the main beneficiaries of this project comprising about 98% of the total 892 population
beneficiaries.

3. The main beneficiaries of the subproject are the IP farmers known as the Iyuma sub-tribe
of Barangay Upper Uma are the main users of the footpath to transport their farm products and it
is only accessible to another barangays and other services.

4. A community consultation meeting was conducted by the LGU of Lubuagan and DA-
INREMP in the preparation of the IPP on October 4, 2018. The consultations provided a venue
for the discussion of the background of the project, project scope of work, importance of the
community consent, Barangay Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation Team (BPMET),
discussion of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement, social and environmental safeguards, role of
the community in implementation of the project and compliance to free prior and informed
consent. A total of 86 community members (41 males, 45 females), the majority of whom are IPs,
attended in the consultation.

5. There were no significant negative impacts that were identified during the consultations.
However, the IP community raised an issue on the environment such as vegetation and soil during
the construction. The mitigative response to address this issue relied on the active involvement
of the LGU and BPMET to monitor the construction activities, and ensure that there will be no
significant adverse environmental effects.

6. In the consultation, the IP community expressed support to the subproject implementation

and look forward to the completion.

7. The subproject is classified as Category B for IPs based on the ADB Safeguard Policy
Statement (SPS) 2009, given that the subproject has limited negative and positive impacts on the
Iyuma Tribe that will be affected.

8. Considering that the majority of the beneficiaries are IPs and the subproject is located
within the ancestral domain claim of the Iyuma sub-tribe, the grievance redress mechanism will
follow the traditional dispute resolution process. This will be reiterated to the community that will
be affected by the subproject implementation by way of information, education, and
communication (IEC) to ensure that complaints that may arise from the community will be
appropriately addressed.

9. The implementation of the IPP will be internally monitored by the LGU Sub-Project
Management Unit (SPMU) and externally by an external monitoring agency (EMA). A semi-annual
internal monitoring report will be submitted by the SPMU to DA-INREMP and DENR-NPCO. EMA

1
will submit an external semi-annual monitoring report (SMR) to the DA-INREMP and DENR-
NPCO. DENR-NPCO, in turn, will submit these SMRs to ADB for review and disclosure.

10. The capacity-building initiative will consist of skills development training for the IP
community as well the LGU of Lubuagan to develop and enhance traditional and learned skills in
monitoring the subproject implementation, awareness in the social and environmental
safeguards, maximizing the positive benefits of the subproject and addressing its potential
negative impacts. The training that will be developed and delivered will be held collectively for the
tribe or barangay at a time and place chosen by the participants and in cognizance of their
traditional and customary processes. The LGU of Lubuagan allocated funds to support capacity-
building activities under this IPP as detailed in Chapter X.

11. The estimated budget for the IPP implementation is PhP 316,800.00 and will be covered
by the DA-INREMP.

II. INREMP AND SUBPROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. The INREMP, implemented by DENR with funding from Asian Development Bank (ADB),
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), and Climate Change Fund (CCF),
addresses the unsustainable watershed management in four (4) priority river basins: (i) the Chico
Upper River Basin in the Cordillera Administrative Region, Northern Luzon; (ii) the Wahig–
Inabanga River Basin on the island of Bohol in Region 7; (iii) the Lake Lanao River Basin in the
province of Lanao del Sur in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao; and (iv) the Bukidnon
Upper River Basin in Bukidnon and Misamis Oriental provinces in Northern Mindanao (Region
10).

2. The INREMP has four (4) outputs namely: (i) River basin and watershed management
and investment plans established; (ii) Smallholder and institutional investments in conservation
increased and URB productivity enhanced in the forestry, agriculture and rural sectors; (iii) River
basin and watershed management capacity and related governance mechanisms strengthened;
and (iv) Project management and support services delivered.

3. Under Output 2, the LGU of Sabanga, Kalinga province has proposed the subproject –
the improvement of Kela-Bangtitan-Bacao-Duyaas footpath at Barangay Upper Uma, Municipality
of Lubuagan, Kalinga province (Figure 1). The subproject will improve the existing 3.8 km
footpath with a width of 0.9 meter. The subproject will be implemented by the Local Government
Unit (LGU) of Lubuagan with an estimated amount of PhP 5,000,000 for the duration of 180
calendar days.

4. The topography of barangay Upper Uma is a rugged mountain terrain characterized by

rolling to moderately sloping areas utilized for ricefields, vegetable gardens, and residential
purposes. Sitio Magmag-an has the highest elevation of 1,700 m above sea level. Sitio Duya-as
is located at 1,045 m asl while Sitio Bangtitan is located at 800-1,000 m asl.

5. The proposed project will start at Kela, towards the community at Bangtitan, Dacao and
Duya-as. The footsteps height will not be too high as it will be hard for the women and children
to climb through it.

2
Figure 1: The location of the subproject at Barangay Upper Uma, Lubuagan, Kalinga

6. Provision of railings on some critical areas will also be installed to guarantee safety of the
passers. Grouted rip rap will also be provided in some areas especially to the one passing the
rice paddies to safeguard the rice paddies and the footpath from erosion.

7. At present, the existing footpath is not concrete and is more of a trail (Figure 2). Due to
the geographical location of Upper Uma, access to the barangay as well as to its three (3) Sitios
are only possible thru footpath. The slope condition and the high elevation of the barangay makes
this footpath and steps unsafe especially to women, children, elderly, and persons with
disabilities. In this setting, it needs hand rails for community member safety and support. A
certain portion also needs slope protection or riprap to make the footpath stable and safe.

8. The proposed subproject is within the Ancestral Domain of Uma which is currently on
process with NCIP for CADT (Appendix 1).

9. About 98% of the total 892 populations (CBMS, 2015) belong to the Iyuma sub-tribe of the
Kalinga tribe. While the remaining percentage are distributed to Ipasil, Ibalbalan, Ibaloi, Ilocano,
and Tagalog. While some are married with certain locals, almost all inhabitants of the barangay
belong to the Kalinga Tribe of the Cordillera Administrative Region. With this, the subproject will
definitely benefit the target IPs.

3
Figure 2: Existing conditions of the proposed subproject

III. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

10. In accordance to the Philippine law and ADB policy on IP’s safeguards, all proposed
projects must undergo the procedures required in social impact assessment. This is to ensure
that IPs will benefit from a project, and that adverse impacts from the project will be avoided, or
where this is not possible, can be mitigated and compensated for. Looking at the Philippine
history, the indigenous communities including the original settlers in the country were deprived of

4
their rights and displaced since the colonization. Many forms of injustices such discrimination,
marginalization, and oppression of the IPs continued even after the colonial rule. The injustices
to the IPs pushed them to resist against the projects that were supposed to benefit them. With
that, the rights of the IPs were recognized through the passage of the Indigenous Peoples Rights
Act (IPRA).

A. Relevant Legal and Institutional Framework Applicable to the Indigenous Peoples

11. The ADB, the Philippine Government, and project proponents shall recognize the vital role
of indigenous peoples (IPs) as autonomous partners in development and shall fully support the
development and empowerment of IP and their associations in order to pursue and protect their
legitimate and collective interests and aspirations. Thus, all subproject implementers should
recognize, protect, and promote the rights of IPs and establish culturally-appropriate subproject
implementing mechanisms.

1. Philippine Constitution of 1987

12. Under the Constitution of the Philippines, several articles have been included for the
protection of the Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) in particular. These are:
a. Article II of Section 22 recognizes and promotes the rights of ICCs within the
framework of national unity and development.
b. Article XII of Section 5 empowers the State, subject to the provisions of this
Constitution and national development policies and programs, shall protect the rights
of ICCs to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social, and cultural well-
being.
c. Article XIII of Section 6 confers the State shall apply the principles of agrarian reform
or stewardship, whenever applicable in accordance with law, in the disposition or
utilization of other natural resources, including lands of the public domain under lease
or concession suitable to agriculture, subject to prior rights, homestead rights of small
settlers, and the rights of IP communities to their ancestral lands.
d. Article XIV of Section 2(4) encourages non-formal, informal, and indigenous learning
systems, as well as self-learning, independent, and out-of-school study programs
particularly those that respond to community needs.
e. Article XIV of Section 17 stipulates that the State shall recognize, respect, and protect
the rights of ICCs to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions, and institutions. It
shall consider these rights in the formulation of national plans and policies.
f. Article XVI of Section 12 empowers the Congress to create a consultative body to
advise the President on policies affecting ICCs, the majority of the members of which
shall come from such communities.

2. Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 (RA 8371)

13. The Indigenous Peoples (IP) in the Philippines remain as the most marginalized sector of
society. This status continues despite the tremendous in footpaths achieved by communities,
partners and advocates through years of struggle. In 1997, as a result of vigilance and the
sustained advocacy of the IP sector and its partners, the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA)
was enacted. This provided venues and legal backbone for the recognition of the Traditional
Rights of communities over their ancestral domain.

14. The IPRA provides for the recognition of the traditional rights of IPs over their ancestral
domains through the issuance of Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles (CADT). It recognizes

5
the rights of ICCs to define their development priorities through their own Ancestral Domain
Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP) and exercise management and utilize
the natural resources within their traditional territories

3. NCIP Administrative Order No. 3, Series of 2012

15. The NCIP Administrative Order (AO) No. 3 underscores the policy of the state that no
concession, license, permit or lease or undertaking affecting ancestral domains will be granted or
renewed without going through the free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) process, which is
needed in the issuance of a Certification Precondition by the NCIP.

4. DENR-NCIP Memorandum of Agreement and Implementing Guidelines

16. The DENR and NCIP entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for the
implementation of INREMP to ensure that provisions of the NCIP Administrative Order No. 3,
Series of 2012 or the Revised Guidelines on FPIC and Related Processes of 2012, are fully
considered and complied (see Appendix 2 for the Certification Precondition)

17. Meanwhile, the Implementing Guidelines on the MOA between DENR and NCIP for the
Implementation of the INREMP in Municipalities with IP communities was promulgated with the
following objectives:
a. Establish a common understanding and framework for the operationalization of the
MOA between DENR and NCIP for the implementation of the INREMP in areas with
IP communities;
b. Set the requirements and procedures in ensuring compliance to NCIP Administrative
Order No. 3, Series of 2012 or the Revised Guidelines on FPIC and Related
Processes of 2012;
c. Provide and ensure compliance with the procedure and the standards in the conduct
of the required validation process; and
d. Protect the rights of the ICCs/ IPs in the introduction and implementation of plans,
programs, projects, activities and other undertakings that will affect them and their
ancestral domains to ensure their economic, social and cultural well-being.

5. Basic Principles of ADB Safeguard Policy, 2009

18. ADB Policy on Safeguards requirement for IPs recognizes the right of IPs to direct the
course of their own development. IP are defined in different countries in various ways. For
operational purpose, the term IP is used to refer to a distinct, vulnerable, social and cultural group
with following characteristics:
a. Self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition
of this community by others;
b. Collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the
project area and to the natural resources in the habitats;
c. Customary, cultural, economic, social or political institutions that are separate from
those of dominant society and culture; and
d. A distinct language, often different from the official language of the country or region.

19. According to the ADB policy, IP safeguards are triggered if a project directly or indirectly
affects the dignity, human rights, livelihood systems or culture of Indigenous people or affects the
territories, natural or cultural resources that IP own, use, occupy or claim as their ancestral
property.

6
20. The SPS sets out the following principles for IP safeguards in all the projects in which ADB
is involved:
a. Screen early on to determine (i) whether IPs are present in, or have collective
attachment to, the project area; and (ii) whether project impacts on IPs are likely.
b. Undertake a culturally appropriate and gender-sensitive social impact assessment or
use similar methods to assess potential project impacts, both positive and adverse,
on IP communities. Give full consideration to options the affected IPs prefer in relation
to the provision of project benefits and the design of mitigation measures. Identify
social and economic benefits for affected IPs that are culturally appropriate and
gender and inter-generationally inclusive and develop measures to avoid, minimize,
and/or mitigate adverse impacts on IPs.
c. Undertake meaningful consultations with affected IPs communities and concerned IP
organizations to solicit their participation (i) in designing, implementing, and
monitoring measures to avoid adverse impacts or, when avoidance is not possible,
to minimize, mitigate, or compensate for such effects; and (ii) in tailoring project
benefits for affected IP communities in a culturally appropriate manner. To enhance
IPs’ active participation, projects affecting them will provide for culturally appropriate
and gender inclusive capacity development. Establish a culturally appropriate and
gender inclusive grievance mechanism to receive and facilitate resolution of the IPs’
concerns.
d. Ascertain the consent of affected IP communities to the following project activities: (i)
commercial development of the cultural resources and knowledge of IPs; (ii) physical
displacement from traditional or customary lands; and (iii) commercial development
of natural resources within customary lands under use that would impact the
livelihoods or the cultural, ceremonial, or spiritual uses that define the identity and
community of IPs. For the purposes of policy application, the consent of affected IP
communities refers to a collective expression by the affected IP communities, through
individuals and/or their recognized representatives, of broad community support for
such project activities. Broad community support may exist even if some individuals
or groups object to the project activities.
e. Avoid, to the maximum extent possible, any restricted access to and physical
displacement from protected areas and natural resources. Where avoidance is not
possible, ensure that the affected IP communities participate in the design,
implementation, and monitoring and evaluation of management arrangements for
such areas and natural resources and that their benefits are equitably shared.
f. Prepare an IPP that is based on the social impact assessment with the assistance of
qualified and experienced experts and that draw on indigenous knowledge and
participation by the affected IP communities. The IPP includes a framework for
continued consultation with the affected IP communities during project
implementation; specifies measures to ensure that IPs receive culturally appropriate
benefits; identifies measures to avoid, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for any
adverse project impacts; and includes culturally appropriate grievance procedures,
monitoring and evaluation arrangements, and a budget and time-bound actions for
implementing the planned measures.
g. Disclose a draft IPP, including documentation of the consultation process and the
results of the social impact assessment in a timely manner, before project appraisal,
in an accessible place and in a form and language(s) understandable to affected IP
communities and other stakeholders. The final IPP and its updates will also be
disclosed to the affected IP communities and other stakeholders.

7
 h. Prepare an action plan for legal recognition of customary rights to lands and territories
or ancestral domains when the project involves (i) activities that are contingent on
establishing legally recognized rights to lands and territories that IPs have traditionally
owned or customarily used or occupied, or (ii) involuntary acquisition of such lands.
i. Monitor implementation of the IPP using qualified and experienced experts; adopt a
participatory monitoring approach, wherever possible; and assess whether the IPP’s
objective and desired outcome have been achieved, considering the baseline
conditions and the results of IPP monitoring. Disclose monitoring reports.

B. Brief Description about the Indigenous Peoples in the Project Site

21. The section describes the general socio-economic profiles of the IP community in the
subproject area. The information was collected from the Community Based Monitoring Survey
(CBMS) conducted by the Municipal Planning and Development Office (MPDO) in 2015.

22. To ensure that a baseline data of the IPs are obtained to be able to monitor and evaluate
if all the impacts by the subproject are effectively managed, a data gathering and household
survey on the IPs will be conducted before monitoring. Similarly, the LGU will gather available
baseline information from the Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office (MSWDO), Rural
Health Unit (RHU), NCIP Offices.

1. Population

23. The municipality of Lubuagan has 9 barangays. Based on the 2015 Community-Based
Monitoring System (CBMS) Survey, Barangay Upper Uma is ranked no. 4 on the lowest
population with 892 while Barangay Poblacion posted the highest population.

24. Out of the total population of 892, 470 are males and 422 are females. The barangay also
accounted the166 households and with an average household size of 6.

2. Population Density

Based on the baseline survey, the average household size is 6 individuals. The population density
is at 14.00 individuals per square kilometer.

3. Ethnicity and Cultural Practices

25. Majority of the population of barangay Upper Uma belong to ethnic origin of “ iyuma”
covering 98.29% of the community while the remaining percentage are distributed to ipasil,
ibalbalan, ibaloi, Ilocano, and tagalog. They belong to the uma subtribe of the Kalinga tribe. While
some are married with certain locals, almost all inhabitants of the barangay belong to the Kalinga
Tribe of the Cordillera Administrative Region. With this, the subproject will definitely benefit the
target IPs.

26. Strong family and clan relationship exist in the barangay. According to interview with
barangay elders, the first persons who settled at Sitio Bangtitan, Upper Uma came from Mabilong,
Lubuagan. However, intermarriage from nearby places has taken place.

8
27. As compared to other Cordillera groups, there is no traditional form of physical socio-
political structure that exist within the entire barangay although the bodong system is still very
strong as seen by the number of sub tribes/tribes that they have been relating with.

28. Cultural practices in relation to life cycle still exist although they are diminishing at present.
One factor which caused non-performance of these practices could be attributed to the
decreasing number of elders. The elders are responsible in remolding the attitude of young
generation who are exposed to the Western culture and education.

29. Cultural practices which have been observed starts from birth, marriage and death include
the following:

Social Functions:

Byakas – This involves dismantling a house or rice granary and transporting/hauling all
the materials to a new site. The owner makes an announcement of the task at least a day
or two before it is undertaken. Early morning of the set day, the structure is dismantled
starting from the roofing and some of which may be salvaged, bundled and hauled to the
new site. The owner’s obligation is to butcher a pig to feed the volunteers.

Boted- This is an alarm or call for assistance when someone is injured in the forest, taken
ill in another village or died in a far place. It is an alarm obliging all abled-bodied men and
women to the site of the incident. All go to the place of the injured, sick, to carry the body.
For mere injury or illness, only basi is served to the people upon their arrival in the village.
When the place is far, a big pig or carabao is butchered and served to the people besides
the basi. In case of dead person brought home by the village folks, animals are butchered
ans served with basi during the wake for two to three days.

Bagungon – When someone dies in the community, members of the community.neighbors

help or assist the family. All activities in the rice fields, uma, and elsewhere are suspended
until the dead is interred. Especially on the part of the relatives and friends, materials or
goods are given to the members of the bereaved family. They bring in rice, firewood,
tobacco, and other goods necessary for the duration of the wake. BAsi, blankets, g-
strings, dogs and pig constitute the kaling aching.

Byachang- This means helping or providing assistance voluntarily to a family whose

harvesting of palay or planting rice in the paddies has been lagged behind. They render
full day service. The sympathy arises from the common desire to prevent the play grains
from falling off into the mud or to prevent the rice seedlings from being overdue for
planting.

Socio-Cultural Values

Akaw – a very degrading and shameful act of a person. The person committed akaw
leaves a stigma on the personality of the culprit and on the reputation of his family.
Stealing animals such as pigs, carabaos, or dog, the thief will not have animals of his own
no matter how much he tries. For stealing a palay, he will always have poor crops.

Igeb – Thi is an evil act equivalent to cheating or one’s acquisition of what is not due to
him. The punishment is that the materials surreptitiously acquired will soon fly away
together with other belongings legitimately owned or earned. Beside this, illness or

9
 misfortune will occur in the family of the perpetrator in such a way that he will use what he
cheated. This is similar to “karma” of the tagalogs.

Sugsug – This act is considered wicked which comprises of inciting a person agains
another a clan against another clan when the two parties have only trivial differences. It
is making a molehill a mountain to the effect that injury or death becomes the
consequence. It is believed that a person committing this act shall be likewise be victim
of the same process.

Chegchegas – Is the amorous relationship between a man and woman without the
intention of getting married. Chegchegas should not be indulged into by a married man
or woman. The punishment is frequent death of one’s own children.

Langsit- Is an embracing term equivalent to maliscious mischief in the legal parlance.

Tabooed by the Kalinga because it is believed to be morally wrong before the author of
life, it consists of destroying things or belongings of people, defecating or urinating in water
sources, soiling food stuff, giving innocent children dirty food to eat and all other contrary
to health and saniatation. Thepubishment is a short life either snapped out by violence or
long lingering illness.

Disrespect to parents and elders- Discourtesy to parents and elders by hurting their
feelings and neglecting to take care of them in their old age is a cursed. It is firmly believe
that it is moral obligation of children to respect their parents and elders because one
comes from them. Failing in this regard is despicable and the punishment is that one will
surely be treated likewise by his own children besides frequented by bad luck if the forms
of failure, frustrations and inadequate family life.

Apos – Apos means envy. Being envious to other people including wishing them evil so
that they will fail in their ventures towards prosperity is cowardly. It is believed that one
who is maliciously envious of other people will never prosper. Envy shall be his only share
during his life time.

Killing or Injuring a Child – a child is always looked upon as an innocent person having no
fault of his own and incapable of doing harm to other people. Therefore, killing or injuring
a child is one of the most evil acts one can commit. The punishment is believed to be that
one has committed the act will have no children of his own. If he already has children,
they will die one by one until the person become entirely childless.

Kindness to other people – A kind heart is believed as a spiritual shield from dangers in
life. If a person is kind to other people especially to the weak and the helpless, other
people will also be kind to him. In other words, kindness is a protective virtue.

4. Education

30. In terms of education level, the Philippine Statistics Authority (2015) reported that 9% of
the total population of the municipality graduated from primary school, 10% graduated from
secondary school and 3% completed post-secondary education. Education level of women is
lower (47%) compared to that of men. Out of the total number of persons 10 years old and above,
the literacy rate of Lubuagan is computed at 93%.

10
31. In terms of facility, there is only one elementary school in the barangay which is located in
Bacao. Most of the children in the barangay have to hike the proposed project going to Uma
Elementary School and also going to the Lubuagan National High School and Senior High School.
For early childhood care development services, it is being provided by day care centers and day
care workers.

5. Means of Livelihood

32. Livelihood in the barangays are dominated by agriculture/farming, followed by livestock

raising, and small business such as sari-sari store. About 70% of the total labor force are
employed in a short-term or seasonal works and about 43% are working without pay in a family
operated farms or business. These farms are mostly rice and vegetables while business are soft
broom making and blacksmithing.

6. Poverty

33. With the physical characteristics of the municipality and considering its geographical
location, accesses to far flung barangays are through footpaths and footsteps. During
consultations, barangay visits and planning activity, issue on the accessibility of the Barangay
Upper Uma always brought up. Barangay Upper Uma ranked no. 2 as to the proportion of
households living below poverty thresholds. As per the result of the 2015 Community-Based
Monitoring System (CBMS) Survey, 89.16% of the total household in Upper Uma are living below
poverty threshold.

Table 1. Income Distribution by Household

Annual Income Bracket Number of Households Percentage
65,001 and above 8 4.97
60,001 – 65,000 24 14.91
55,001 – 60,000 6 3.73
50,001 – 55,000 11 6.83
45,001 – 50,000 20 12.42
40,001 – 45,000 10 6.21
35,001 – 40,000 5 3.11
30,001 – 35,000 17 10.56
25,001 – 30,000 12 7.45
20,001 – 25,000 48 29.81
15,001 – 20,000 0 0
10,001 – 15,000 0 0
5,001 – 10,000 0 0
5,000 and below 0 0
Total 161 100
Source: CHARMP2 PIP

34. The above table show that majority of the household have annual income from 20,001 to
25,000 with 30% of households and non-have annual income from 20,000 below. The result
reveals that there are 144 households living below the poverty threshold.

11
 7. Living Conditions

35. The houses are mostly combination of concrete, galvanized iron, sheets, wood, and brick
materials. The IP residents use KAELCO as the main power source for lighting and a combination
of gas and wood is being used for cooking. The spring (ubbog) is the potable water for barangay
Upper Uma. In Bangtitan, potable water is sourced from the Battiway Spring and
Tumog/Binologbolog Spring. Other underdeveloped spring-water sources are those at Potakn
and Dos-akan.

C. Key Subproject Stakeholders

36. The key project stakeholders are as follows:

 IPs community in the barangay;
 DENR, as the executing agency of the INREMP;
 DA-INREMP, as the implementing agency of rural infrastructure subprojects under the
INREMP;
 NPCO who shall oversee all safeguards compliance and provide technical support in
the preparation and implementation of the IPP;
 Municipal LGU of Lubuagan as the implementing agency of the subproject;
 BLGU of Uma and the SPMU – that support the IPP implementation under the
guidance of Municipal LGU of Lubuagan;
 Council of Elders (COE) that looks after the welfare of the tribe and its members; and
 NCIP - the primary agency in regulation and support of the IPs in the area.

37. Contractors which are private and independent companies contracted to implement the
Improvement of Kela-Bangtitan-Bacao-Duyaas Footpath are also stakeholders.

D. Gender Sensitive Assessment of IP Perceptions

38. The participation of women will be sustained through the subproject implementation.
Local employment that will be needed during the implementation will be available for both men
and women in the subproject area.

39. Women have also been involved in the preparation of the subproject documents, initial
environmental examination, IPP preparation, and other planning and consultation activities.
During the preparation of the IPP, women participated in the consultation meetings and expressed
support and benefits of the project. In fact, out of 86 participants who attended the community
consultation in Barangay Upper Uma, 45 of which are women. The women are also involved in
the documentation process.

40. Better representation of women is also observed through the Barangay Project Monitoring
and Evaluation Team (BPMET). Out of seven (7) members of the BPMET, three (3) are women.

E. Anticipated Positive and Negative Impacts of the Project

41. The subproject aims to provide impacts to IPs, with them as the primary and major
beneficiaries. Majority of Upper Uma residents are indigenous peoples. Except for very small
number of non-IP who are married with certain locals, almost all inhabitants of the barangays
belong to the Iyuma sub tribe of the Cordillera Region. Having said this, the subproject will

12
definitely benefit the target IPs. The benefits identified during the consultation are presented in
Table 4.

42. The proposed subproject will not, in any way, affect the IP’s traditional socio-cultural and
belief practices. Moreover, it will not negatively or adversely affect the livelihood systems of the
IPs.

43. The subproject will help promote commercial development of cultural and natural
resources. As the barangays is keen on promoting the tourism industry of the area, this
intervention is welcomed. This will, in no way, cause for the neglect of cultural, ceremonial, and
spiritual uses that defines the identify and community of IPs.

44. The proposed subproject does not require acquisition of lands that are traditionally owned
or customarily used, occupied or claimed by IPs. Moreover, it does not overlap with other existing
tenured areas.

45. The only negative issue that can be gleaned in the implementation of the subproject is the
minimal effect of the construction on the environment such as on vegetation and soil. Through
active involvement of the LGU and organized BPMET, they will help monitor construction activities
and ensure that there are no significant adverse environmental effects if not properly mitigated.

IV. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE. CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION

A. Consultation and Preparation

46. The IPP process included stakeholders’ participation and consultation to help LGUs
achieve public acceptance of the subproject. The consultation also served as a venue for the
discussion of the background of the project, project scope of work, importance of the community
consent, organization of the barangay participatory monitoring and evaluation team and
discussion of the role of the community in implementation of the project and compliance to free
prior and informed consent. A public consultation was conducted in Barangay Upper Uma on
October 4, 2018 for the orientation of the INREMP rural infrastructure component with a total of
86 participants consisting of 41 men and 45 women (Table 2). The participants were barangay
officials, elders, women, youth, and affected claimants of the proposed subproject majority of
whom are IPs. The activities were conducted collaboratively by the Municipal Local Government
Unit of Lubuagan, the MLGOO, MPDO, MEO, MAO, BLGU, DENR-CENRO-Tabuk and the DA-
INREMP-CAR (Appendix 3).

47. With the involvement of the LGU in the subproject, they dedicated time and effort in
participating the orientation, consultation, planning and training activities. Indeed, the
Sangguniang Bayan (SB) passed a resolution affirming support to INREMP and authorizing the
Local Chief Executive (Municipal Mayor) to enter into contract for the improvement of Kela-
Bangtitan-Bacao-Duyaas footpath (Appendix 4).

Table 2. Number of Participants in the Community Consultations during the IPP Preparation
Date of Consultation Consultation and Venue Total Males Females
Barangay Orientation and Consultation
October 4, 2018 at Brgy. Upper Uma, Lubuagan, 86 41 45
Kalinga

13
48. The community consultations confirmed the support of the IPs to the subproject
implementation and provided venue for them to identify the benefits and possible negative
impacts of the subproject. The table below summarizes the discussions in the community
consultation.

Table 3: Summary of Stakeholders Views of the Improvement of Kela-Bangtitan-Bacao-Duyaas

Footpath, Lubuagan, Kalinga
Issues
Right of way and compensation
Barangay Participatory
Monitoring and Evaluation Team
(BPMET)
Free Prior Information Consent
(FPIC)
Engineering Design
Subcontract
Opinions, Suggestions and
Concerns raised by the
Participants
Compensation to the private lots
that will be affected should be
provided by the LGU
Selection criteria for the BPMET
members
Placement area for the
installment of railings and riprap
Construction of footbridge over
creeks
To allow subcontract with the
purpose of ensuring appropriate
implementation of the project
and willingness to provide
assistance to contractor
How the opinions, concerns
and suggestions have been
addressed
The DA-INREMP staff explained
that RI subprojects are civil
works and is intended to benefit
the community, and that the
LGU already has contribution/
compensation to the subproject
implementation given the 12%
part of the LGU in the total
budget of the subproject
The DA-INREMP staff facilitated
and discussed the qualifications
and/or selection criteria of the
BPMET members.
The DA-INREMP staff asked if
the community accepts and
commit their participation and
cooperation in the full
implementation of the
subproject.
The RI Engineer explained that
there will be railings, bridges
(short length) and riprap
especially along critical areas
based on the design prepared
by the municipal engineer
The DA-INREMP staff reiterated
and discouraged the use of
subcontract. They were given
option which is to lobby the
contractor to hire them (the
locals) as their laborers.

B. Information Disclosure

49. The final IPP, its revision, if any, internal and external monitoring reports monitoring will
be submitted to ADB for posting on their website, DENR-Forest Management Bureau (FMB), DA,
the Municipality of Lubuagan and the subproject barangay offices, the PENRO, and DENR
regional office will make the documents in the indigenous language available to the public. The
documents shall be posted in accessible public places such as barangay halls, DENR regional
office and tribal halls. In case the documents are lengthy, copies of the documents will be provided
to tribal leaders.

14
V. BENEFICIAL AND MITIGATIVE MEASURES

50. The table below shows the subproject impacts and corresponding enhancing and
mitigative measures identified during the consultations with the IP communities.

Table 4. Summary Matrix of Impacts and Enhancement/ Mitigation Measures

Subproject Enhancement or Responsible Estimated
Targets
Impacts Mitigation Measures Unit Cost
Positive Impacts
Easy Ensure the availability of To be
transportation of funds from the LGU for the Beneficiaries LGU provided by
their products operation and maintenance the LGU
Accessible
Ensure the availability of To be
especially to
funds from the LGU for the Beneficiaries LGU provided by
people with
operation and maintenance the LGU
disability
Safer pathway Ensure the availability of To be
for children funds from the LGU for the Beneficiaries LGU provided by
going to school operation and maintenance the LGU
People can able Ensure the availability of Beneficiaries LGU To be
to walk safely funds from the LGU for the provided by
even without operation and maintenance the LGU
using flashlight
Negative Impacts
Minimal effect of Active involvement of the Beneficiaries LGU and To be
the construction LGU and BPMET to monitor BPMET provided by
on the construction activities and the LGU
environment ensure that there is no
such as on significant
vegetation and adverse environmental
soil effects if not properly
mitigated

VI. CAPACITY BUILDING

51. Being in an area where majority are IPs, the beneficiary barangays, like other barangays,
are regular recipients of various trainings and workshops to capacitate them. Livelihood groups
have been organized and various proposals to funding agencies for livelihood activities were
approved.

52. The capacity building initiatives for the community are outlined with respect to all affected
IPs including women and youth. These trainings are meant to be held collectively for a tribe or
barangay at a time and place chosen by the participants and would be specifically customized for
each target participant. The skills training modules should be in their vernacular language.

53. Before arranging skill development trainings, the IP community will be organized for
orientation workshop by the social safeguards expert. The orientation program will comprise
sessions on development of the human capital especially women and youth groups by
acclimatizing them to the oncoming opportunities, enhancing traditional and other learned skills

15
and empowering them in a socio-culturally beneficial and appropriate manner. The workshops will
be organized at various suitably located place as per convenience of the IP community.

54. There are training programs on project implementation that will be provided to the project
proponent, beneficiaries, to include the IPs and the LGU implementing staff. As the main
beneficiaries of the proposed subproject are the indigenous peoples in the locality, the training
programs are intended to capacitate the members of the Sub Project Management
Unit (SPMU) in handling project operation towards strengthening their knowledge and
skills in managing possible IP-related project implementation concerns (see Table 5).

VII. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM

55. The Local Government Unit of Lubuagan has properly conducted the consultations with
the different stakeholders of the sub-project site. However, it still has to make room for possible
issues, concerns, or grievances and disputes arising from the communities in relation to the
project implementation. Thus, it sets up a Grievance Redress Mechanism to provide a venue for
resolving grievances and disputes even at the lowest level. This will be done to resolve disputes
as early and as quickly as possible before it escalates to an unmanageable level.

56. Since, the community consultations were conducted smoothly and no adverse or violent
reactions have been noted, there are only minor grievances that are anticipated which may arise.
These are listed below:

1) Footpath accessibility related grievances – This may include complaints from

communities using the footpaths under repair or construction due to temporary
obstructions, which may cause delay in travel tome and other inconveniences of the
travelling public.

2) Constructions related grievances – Community members may demand to be hired as

part of the labor force in the project construction/implementation. This may also include
complaints of community members regarding noise, drainage, and etc.

3) Indigenous Peoples related grievances – It may come from IPs residing within the
influence areas concerned with potential effects to ecological and social resources of their
area/abode.

57. Giving primacy to the traditional conflict resolution system, grievances will be handled
following the procedure outlined below. In resolving disputes among the indigenous peoples, the
determination or decision is usually reached through dialogue and consensus. There may be
several conflict resolution sessions according to the specific tribe’s customary laws before the
dispute may be resolve. Thus, there is no clear definite timeline on when the conflict or dispute
should be settled at the level of the clan and the Council of Elders.
 Dispute/grievance will be resolved first among the members of the clan;
 If the said grievance/dispute is not resolved at the clan level, this will be brought to the
level of the Council of Elders (COE); and
 If still unresolved at the COE level, the said dispute/grievance will be submitted to the
NCIP Regional Hearing Officer (RHO), for resolution, where the decision will be final and
executory. The dispute/ grievance will be heard and adjudicated in accordance with the
Rules on Pleadings, Practice and Procedures before the NCIP.

16
VIII. MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION

58. The implementation of the IPP will be monitored to (i) ensure that mitigation measures
designed to address adverse social impacts and measures to enhance positive impacts are
adequate and effective; (ii) determine if there are any issues and concerns of the IP communities
regarding the subproject implementation; (iii) propose corrective actions when needed and (iv)
determine the benefits of the subprojects

A. Internal Monitoring

59. Safeguard Officer, IP community and the affected IPs through their respective tribe and
any other social institutions to monitor the IPP implementation. For daily monitoring of the IPP
implementation, the PSO will engage a dedicated person at community level, who will interact
closely with the IP households, and tribe on a priority basis. The focal person will also disclose
the subproject-related information to the IP households. Also, the IP safeguard officer will observe
the construction progress at the construction site and make plans of implementing the mitigation
measures and enhancement measures as agreed in the IPP. The social safeguards specialist will
provide guidance to the PSO, IP safeguard officer to carry out the tasks. Periodic internal
monitoring reports will be prepared by IP Safeguard Officer.

60. Regarding the involvement of the IP community in the monitoring of the IPP
implementation, a BPMET has been established for each barangay during the community
consultations. The BPMETs are composed of both male and female volunteers. The BPMETs
have a responsibility in monitoring, evaluation and reporting of all subproject activities
implementation including the IPP implementation and civil construction works. The BPMETs will
be trained by the PSO who will work in close association with the community group and give
necessary feedback to support internal daily monitoring and supervision of the subproject
construction and IP activities with the support of the PMIC.

61. Internal monitoring indicators of the IPP implementation are outlined in Appendix 5.

B. External Monitoring

62. An external monitoring agency (EMA) will be engaged by the DENR for INREMP. The
EMA will be either a qualified individual or a consultancy firm with qualified and experienced staff.
Activities to be undertaken by the EMA are as follows:
 conduct a socio-economic baseline survey;
 verify results of internal monitoring;
 verify and assess the results of the subproject Information, Education and
Communication (IEC) for IPs and non-IPs;
 assess efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the IPP implementation;
 suggest modification in the implementation procedures of the IPP if necessary, to
achieve the principles and objectives of the INREMP IPPF; and
 review of the handling of compliance and grievances cases.

63. Indicators for external monitoring of the RP implementation are presented in Appendix 6.

C. Reporting

17
64. The Municipal LGUs will submit quarterly progress reports to PSO of the DA-INREMP and
DENR. The NPCO will consolidate all reports from the project municipalities and prepare internal
semi-annual SMRs for submission to the ADB. The EMA will submit semi-annual social
safeguards monitoring reports (SMR) to the DENR and DA-INREMP and the DENR through the
NPCO will be responsible for submitting the reports to ADB for review and disclosure. Monitoring
reports will be uploaded on the ADB and INREMP websites for disclosure.

IX. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT

65. Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is the executing agency
for the INREMP and DENR has full responsibility for Project administration and management. The
NPCO has been established at the DENR Central office to oversee the Project implementation,
including all safeguards compliance and technical support in the preparation and implementation
of the IPP. The tasks of NPCO are to:
 Coordinate with NCIP and field implementing units in the preparation, planning, and if
needed, revision of the IPP;
 Monitor the IPP implementation and fund disbursement;
 Address grievances filed at its offices by the IPs for conflict mediation if these are not
resolved at the regional level;
 With NCIP, amend or complement the IPP in case problems are identified during the
internal and/or external monitoring of its implementation.

66. Department of Agriculture – INREMP (DA-INREMP) is the implementing agency of the

Rural Infrastructure Subprojects under the INREMP in the Chico Upper River Basin. The PSO
under the DA will have responsibility in the following tasks:
 Supervise all the activities under the subproject, including the IP-related issues;
 Conduct consultations with the IP community in coordination with DENR and Municipal
LGU of Lubuagan; and
 Prepare progress reports to submit to the DA and DENR.

67. Municipal LGU of Lubuagan is the implementing agency of the subproject. The
Municipal LGU is responsible for the following tasks:
 Ensure that sufficient funds are available to properly implement the IPP;
 Ensure that subproject implementation complies with the ADB SPS 2009 and
regulations of the Government and tribal groups;
 Obtain necessary approval(s) from NCIP and/or other concerned government
agencies prior to commencement of activities;
 Ensure that tender and contract document for design, supervision and civil works
include the relevant IPP requirements;
 Conduct public consultation(s) and/or secure resolution(s) of support to ensure the
acceptability of the subproject;
 Facilitate resolution of affected peoples' concerns;
 Monitor the implementation of the measures specified in the approved IPP;
 Submit periodic reports of implementation progress to the DA-INREMP; and
 Provide funds in capacity building needs identified to capacitate the IP stakeholders.

68. Subproject Management Unit (SPMU) was created by the Municipal LGU of Lubuagan
(see Appendix 7). It is composed of LGU division heads especially the Municipal Planning and

18
Development Coordinator and the Municipal Engineer. The SPMU is responsible for the following
tasks:
 Prepare, implement and comply with the required social, technical and environmental
safeguards, such as, but not limited to resettlement plan, acquisition of right of ways,
environmental compliance certificate/ certificate of non-coverage to ensure the
readiness of the subproject relative to these;
 Incorporate social dimensions to the subproject design and implementation by
conducting public consultation, information education and advocacy to the local
development council and the communities;
 Design and implement strategies and mechanisms to ensure sustainability of the
subproject to include cost recovery, among others;
 Ensure that IPP provisions are strictly implemented and monitored during the various
project phases; and
 Adopt monitoring and evaluation system to generate baseline data and to monitor and
evaluate the benefits and impact of the subproject.

69. National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) has responsibility to observe and
comply with its duties and functions as follows:
 Protect and promote the interest and well-being of the IPs with regard to their beliefs,
customs, tradition and institutions;
 Issue appropriate certification as a pre-condition to the issuance of permits, leases,
grants or any other similar authority for the disposition, utilization, management, and
appropriation by any private individual, corporate entity or any government agency,
corporation or subdivision thereof on any part or portion of ancestral domains taking
into consideration the consensus approval of the IP concerned;
 Exercise its authority to conduct visitation of the area relative to the applicant’s
program in order to secure the conditions and well-being of the ICCs/IPs; and
 Handle grievances of the IPs if the grievances are not resolved satisfactorily at the
level of CoE.

70. The Social Safeguards Specialist of NPCO will assist and work closely with the NPCO,
PSO and Municipal LGU of Lubuagan as follows:
 The assisting professional/safeguards specialist of NPCO will undertake the
supervision and monitoring of the IPP implementation and contractor’s performance.
 Closely supervise and monitor the contractor’s implementation of proposed measures
specified in the IPP.
 Assist the DA-INREMP/DENR in preparing semi-annual monitoring reports on the
progress of the IPP implementation.
 Facilitate capacity building needs identified to capacitate the IP stakeholders.

71. The Project Management Implementation Consultants (PMIC) will be engaged to

assist and work closely with the NPCO, PSO and Municipal LGU of Lubuagan on the various
activities, including providing capacity to implement and monitor the IP activities.

72. The Barangay Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation Team (BPMETs) have been
established to undertake the following tasks:
 Monitor the performance of PO officers implementing subprojects;
 Monitor the functionality of the association, and the financial aspect of the organization;
 Document findings during the scheduled monitoring and evaluation of infrastructure
subprojects;

19
  Consolidate reports to the general assembly and to other stakeholders;
 Submit reports of findings and recommendations to the Barangay Inspection Team,
Municipal Management Group, and Provincial Management Group. The Barangay
Development Council should be given a copy for information and guidance;
 Monitor the implementation of the Participatory Project Investment Plans (PPIPs) and
other plans agreed upon during meetings;
 Obtain complete and updated copies of the barangay PPIP, documentation on all
project work plans, activities, and programs including copies of performance and/or
accomplishment reports;
 Obtain copies of all contracts, bids, awards for projects/activities/ programs of the
barangay in so far as these apply to DA-INREMP;
 Obtain copies of all complaints, favorable reports of subproject activities; and
 Obtain and maintain files and reports of the Provincial Planning Development Office –
Lubuagan, Barangay Development Council, participating line agencies, barangay
POs, Council of Elders, and DA-INREMP beneficiaries.

73. The indicative implementation schedule of the IPP is presented in the table below.

Table 5. Implementation Schedule for the IPP

Activities Time Frame
Review and approval of the draft IPP by the ADB August 2019
Updating the IPP August 2019
ADB review and approval of the updated IPP August 2019
Disclosure of the approved updated IPP August 2019
Implementation of mitigation measures and enhancement Start in September 2019
measures
Capacity building for the IP community, staff of LGUs and Start in January 2020
BPMETs
Submission of monitoring reports to ADB Semi-annual
ADB = Asian Development Bank; BPMET = Barangay Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation Team; IP =
Indigenous People; IPP = Indigenous Peoples Plan; and LGU = Local Government Unit

X. BUDGET AND FINANCING

74. The total estimated cost for the IPP implementation is Php 316,800 including the cost for
capacity building activities, BPMET assessment and meeting, and contingency cost. The
estimated cost per activity is shown below which will be covered by the DA-INREMP.

Table 6: Proposed Budget for IPP

Objective/
Activity Proposed Schedule Estimated budget (Php)
Particulars
Properly orient the
barangay regarding
social and
Orientation of Indigenous During and after the
environmental 28,000.00
People project approval
safeguards relative
to project
implementation
Capacity building for Provide and
BPMET improve skills 1st quarter of 2018 160,000.00
(Monitoring and evaluation) through training

20
 Objective/
Activity Proposed Schedule Estimated budget (Php)
Particulars
Determine the
BPMET performance and
Per quarter of 2019 100,00.00
assessment/meeting need of
improvement
Contingency (10%) 28,800.00
Total Amount 316,800.00
Source of funds: DA-INREMP

21
APPENDICES

22
Appendix 1: NCIP Certification on Ancestral Domain

23
Appendix 2. NCIP Certification Precondition

24
Appendix 3: Minutes of Meeting, Attendance Sheet and Pictures

25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Appendix 4: SB Resolution Accepting and Supporting the Subproject
Appendix 5: Internal Monitoring Indicators
(Adapted from ADB’s Handbook on Resettlement: A Guide to Good Practice, 1998)
Monitoring Indicators
1. Budget and Timeframe
2. Public Participation and
Consultation
Basis for Indicators
1. Have capacity building and training activities been
completed on schedule?
2. Are IPP and MOA activities being implemented and targets
achieved against the agreed time frame?
3. Are funds for the implementation of the IPP/ADSDPP
allocated to the proper agencies on time?
4. Have agencies responsible for the implementation of the
IPP/ADSDPP received the scheduled funds?
5. Have funds been disbursed according to the IPP/ADSDPP?
6. Has social preparation phase taken place as scheduled?
7. Has all clearance been obtained from NCIP?
1. Have consultations taken place as scheduled including
meetings, groups and community activities? Have
appropriate leaflets been prepared and distributed?
2. Have any Aps used the grievance redress procedures?
What were the outcomes?
3. Have conflicts been resolved?
4. Was the social preparation phase implemented?
5. Were separate consultations done for Indigenous Peoples?
6. Was the conduct of these consultations inter-generationally
exclusive, gender fair, free from external coercion and
manipulation, done in a manner appropriate to the language
and customs of the affected IP community and with proper
disclosure?
7. How was the participation of IP women and children? Where
they adequately represented?
 Monitoring Indicators Basis for Indicators

1. What changes have occurred in patterns of occupation,

production and resources use compared to the pre-project
situation?
2. What changes have occurred in income and
expenditure patterns compared to pre-project situation?
What have been the changes in cost of living compared to
pre-project situation? Have APs’ incomes kept pace with the
changes?
3. Benefit Monitoring
3. What changes have taken place in key social and cultural
parameters relating to living standards?
4. What changes have occurred for IPs?
5. Has the situation of the IPs improved, or at least maintained,
as a result of the project?
6. Are IP women reaping the same benefits as IP men?
7. Are negative impacts proportionally shared by IP men and
women?

Appendix 6: External Monitoring Indicators

(Adapted from ADB’s Handbook on Resettlement: A Guide to Good Practice, 1998)
Monitoring Indicators Basis for Indicators

1. Location
2. Composition and structures, ages, education and skill levels
3. Gender of household head
4. Ethnic group
5. Access to health, education, utilities and other social
services
6. Housing type
1. Basic Information on AP
Households
7. Land use and other resource ownership and patterns
8. Occupation and employment patterns
9. Income sources and levels
10. Agricultural production data (for rural households)
11. Participation in neighborhood or community groups
12. Access to cultural sites and events
13. Value of all assets forming entitlements and resettlement
entitlements

2. Levels of AP Satisfaction
3. Other Impacts
4. IP Indicators
Appendix 7: Executive Order Organizing the Subproject Management Unit
14. How much do IPs know about grievance procedures and
conflict resolution procedures? How satisfied are those who
have used said mechanism?
15. How much do the affected IP communities know about the
IP framework?
16. Do they know their rights under the IP framework?
17. How much do they know about the grievance procedures
available to them?
18. Do they know how to access to it?
19. How do they assess the implementation of the
IPP/ADSDPP?
20. Were there unintended environmental impacts?
21. Were there unintended impacts on employment or incomes?
22. Are special measures to protect IP culture, traditional
resource rights and resources in place?
23. How are these being implemented?
24. Are complaints and grievances of affected IPs
being documented?
25. Are these being addressed?
26. Did the project proponent respect customary laws in the
conduct of public consultations, in IPP/ ADSDPP
implementation, in dispute resolution?
27. Were the public consultations intergenerationally inclusive?
28. Were women and children proportionally represented?
29. Were representatives of the NCIP present in the public
consultations? During the monitoring of IPP/ADSDPP
implementation?