EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Community-Based Forest Management Program (CBFMP) revolutionized forest development and rehabilitation efforts of the government when it was institutionalized in 1995 by virtue of Executive Order No. 263.

Before the adoption of the CBFM approach, the sole motivating factor of contract reforestation awardees was primarily financial gains. With the implementation of the Forestry Sector Project (FSP) using CBFM as its main strategy to rehabilitate the upland ecosystem, it empowered beneficiary communities economically, socially, technically and politically while transforming them into environmentally responsible managers. The tenurial right to develop subproject sites alongside the various inputs from the Subproject deepened their commitment to collaborate with other stakeholders in the implementation of these subprojects.

The Mariveles Watershed Rehabilitation Subproject which has a total area of 2,000 hectares is located in the Municipality of Mariveles within Barangays Biaan and Balon-Anito and covers Sitios Lilimbin and Palanas of Barangay Camaya. The Subproject was undertaken to arrest the environmental degradation as well as to alleviate poverty in the area.

Comprehensive Site Development activities accomplished rehabilitation of a total of 1,893 hectares through reforestation, agro forestry, enrichment planting and rattan planting with an average survival rate of 81.14%.

Although there is no concluding analysis on the extent the Project was able to alleviate poverty within the Subproject site, it is worthy to note that in the five years of Project implementation, both members and non-members of the Mariveles Watershed Farmers Association, Inc. (MAWAFAS) found employment doing either of the following: nursery operation, plantation establishment, and maintenance and protection and also involvement in livelihood operations. From these activities, a total of 93.090 man days were generated covering 450-day contracts.

In terms of increase in members’ income as an offshoot of employment with the Project, there was an additional average gross amount of PHP 37,631.98 a year generated through CSD and infrastructure activities to the average annual gross income of PHP 5,000.00 of the households before the implementation of the Project.

More importantly, knowledge gained on various aspects of nursery operation, plantation establishment and development as well as livelihood

i operation are lifetime learning and will be useful in future endeavors. The future endeavor starts with the new role of MAWAFAS as CBFMA holder.

ii LIST OF ACRONYMS

AO – Assisting Organization AP – Assisting Professional BOD – Board of Directors CBFM – Community-based Forest Management CBFMA – Community-based Forest Management Agreement CO – Community Organizing CSD – Comprehensive Site Development DAO – Department Administrative Order DENR – Department of Environment and Natural Resources EXECOM – Executive Committee FDFI – Forest Development Foundation, Inc. FSP – Forestry Sector Project GIS – Geographic Information System GPS – Global Positioning Satellite System ICM – Inspection Chart Mapping IEC – Information, Education, Campaign IGP – Income Generating Project M & E – Monitoring and Evaluation MAWAFAS – Mariveles Watershed Farmers Association, Inc. MC – Memorandum Circular MFPC – Multi-sectoral Forest Protection Committee NGO – Non-government Organization PO – Peoples Organization SMP – Survey, Mapping, and Planning SUSIMO – Subproject Site Management Office UPLBFI - University of the Philippines Los Baños Foundation,Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ------i

I. Subproject Description ------1 1. Purpose/ Objectives 2. Subproject Scope and Dimension A. Comparison of Original and Actual Scope and Dimensions B. Reasons for Revision/ Modification Of Scope and Dimensions C. Contribution of Subproject to Relevant (Sub) Sectors

II. Subproject Implementation ------14 1. Organizations for Implementing Subproject 2. Implementation Period 3. Subproject Cost 4. Comments on Performance of AO, AP, PO, M&E, and Infra Contractors 5. Other Matters Relating to Subproject Implementation

III. Action taken by the AO, AP, and PO ------24 Relating to Recommendation(s)

IV. Initial Operation and Maintenance Of the Subproject Facilities ------26 1. Present Condition of Facilities 2. Organization for Operation and Maintenance 3. Annual Budget or Actual Expenditure For Operation and Maintenance (by year) 4. Maintenance Method

V. Benefits Derived from the Project ------35 1. Indirect Effects

VI. Conclusions and Recommendations ------37

LIST OF TABLES:

Table 1 : Trainings Attended by the People’s Organization ------39

Table 2 : Subproject Performance ------40

Table 3 : Subproject Site Management Office Equipment ------43

Table 4 : Trainings Attended by SUSIMO ------44

Table 5a : Backyard Poultry Livelihood Project ------45

Table 5b : Hog Fattening Livelihood Project ------46

Table 5c : Handicraft Making Livelihood Project ------47

Table 5d : Tilapia Production Livelihood Project ------48

Table 5e : Micro Lending Livelihood Project ------49

Table 5f : Camote Production Livelihood Project ------50

Table 6 : Subproject Status Report ------51

Table 7 : SMP Cost Estimate per Activity ------52

Table 8 : Community Organizing Cost Estimate per Activity ------53

Table 9a : Cost Estimate for Agroforestry Per Activity ------54

Table 9b : Cost Estimate for Enrichment Planting Per Activity------55

Table 9c : Cost Estimate for Rattan Per Activity ------56

Table 9d : Cost Estimate for Plantation Species/Reforestation Per Activity ------57

Table 10 : Monitoring and Evaluation Cost Estimate Per Activity ------58

Table 11 : Infrastructure Project ------59

Table 12 : Annual Work and Financial Plan ------60

ANNEXES:

1. Organizational Structure ------64

1a. CO Contractor 1b. PO 1c. M&E Contractor 1d. SUSIMO 1e. Infrastructure Contractor

2. Pictures ------69

3. CSD Accomplishment Map ------71

SUBPROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

OF

MARIVELES WATERSHED REHABILITATION SUBPROJECT

Loan Agreement No. PH-P 135 Forestry Sector Project

I. Subproject Description

The Subproject site is situated in the Municipality of Mariveles, Bataan covering Barangays Biaan, Balon-Anito and Sitio Lilimbin and Palanas in Barangay Camaya. It is specifically located between 14° 26’ to 14° 29’ latitude and 120° 27’ to 120° 30’ longitude with a total area of 2,000 hectares. The area has a generally rugged terrain with elevation ranging from 100 to 700 meters above sea level. It is approximately three kilometers away from Mariveles town proper and can be reached through an access road within five to ten minutes using a 4- wheel drive vehicle.

1. Purpose/Objectives

A) Original

The Subproject’s general objective was to pursue sustainable forest management to address the environmental degradation that had been going on in the area and to alleviate poverty among the people.

Specifically, the Subproject aimed to accomplish the following:

1. To establish/develop 1,120 hectares for Reforestation/Protection; 255 hectares for Agroforestry Plantations; 78 hectares for Enrichment Planting; and 547 hectares for Rattan Plantation under the scheme Community-Based Forest Management;

1 2. To restore the protective cover of the watershed to minimize erosion and siltation and increase water yield; 3. To raise income and improve the living conditions of the people in the project area and adjacent communities by introducing more effective techniques on forestry and agricultural productions; and 4. To involve the barangay residents in implementing sustainable use of forest-reserve watershed.

B) Modification

a. Modified purpose/objectives

To establish/develop 311.33 hectares for reforestation/protection; 511.59 hectares for agro forestry plantations; 722.31 hectares for enrichment planting; and 347.77 hectares for rattan plantation through Community-Based Forest Management scheme.

b. Reasons for the modification

The objective of rehabilitating the area through reforestation, agroforestry, enrichment planting and rattan components was not changed. Change in area covered by each component was brought about by the inability of the organized community people to establish the 2,000 hectares within three years and the result of actual resurvey conducted by the Subproject Site Management Office (SUSIMO) in 2001.

2. Subproject Scope and Dimension

A. Comparison of Original and Actual Scope & Dimensions

A.1. Please check: There has been (revision and/or modification or  no revision and/or modification) of the Subproject scope and dimensions.

2 A.2. If “revision and/or modification”, please complete the Table.

Original Scope & Items Dimensions Revised/Modified (At the time of (Actual) Appraisal/Planned) 1. REFORESTATION/ WATERSHED/CBFM A. Survey Mapping and 30-days duration Conducted in 30 days Planning (SMP) April 1997 to May 1997 April 1997 to May 1997 2000 hectares 2000 hectares

B. Community Organizing Two (2) years duration: Extended for six (6) months (CO)1 Year 1 December 1997 to December 1997 to June Year 2 December 1999 2000 2,000 hectares 2,000 hectares  IEC activities  IEC activities  Assistance to  Assistance to CSD CSD activities activities  Assistance on  Assistance on Networking and Networking and Linkage Linkage  Organizational  Organizational Development and Development and Capacity Building Capacity Building  Assistance on  Assistance on Livelihood Livelihood Project Project Identification and Identification Implementation and Implementation

C. Comprehensive Site February 1998 to February 1998 to June Development (CSD) December 2001 30, 2003 Three (3) years Extended for another duration: one and a half years: 2,000.00 hectares 1,893.00 hectares

1. SOIL EROSION CONTROL a. Infrastructure b. Trail and Footpath

3 c. Plantation 2. VEGETATIVE MEASURES2 a. Agroforestry 255 hectares 511.59 hectares b. Assisted Natural Regeneration c. Enrichment Planting 78 hectares 722.31 hectares d. Tree Plantation d.1. Bamboo d.2. Rattan 547 hectares 347.77 hectares d.3. Mangrove d.4. Plantation 1,120 hectares 311.33 hectares Species e. Timber Stand Improvement 3. INVENTORY RESIDUAL FOREST 4. INCOME ENHANCEMENT PROJECT 5. INFRASTRUCTURE a. bunkhouse 2 units 3 units b. lookout tower 4 units 6 units c. footpath 10 sq.meter d. fireline e. graded trail 20 sq.meter

D. MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE 7.20 kilometer long a. Rehabilitation of Farm- to-market road E. Monitoring & Evaluation (M Inspection Chart Physical Validation: & E) Mapping (ICM) Conducted in three (3) passes:

Year 1 January 2000 to April 2000 Year 2 February 2002 to March 2002 Year 3 February 2003 to March 2003 (1,893 hectares)  Verification of

4 boundaries, monuments, and block corner posts  Seedling production inventory analysis  Survival Counting with 20% sampling intensity, including mapping of developed areas  Height and diameter measurement, assessment of overall health/appearance  Inspection of physical infrastructure Institutional and Project Benefit Assessment: Conducted in two (2) passes: (1,893.00) Year 1 December 2001 to April 2002 Year 2 December 2002 to May 2003  Assessment of the overall development of the PO  Assessment of the capability of the PO to pursue sustainable resource management and sustain its livelihood initiatives

5  Identification of various issues/problems/c onstraints related to the development and strengthening of the PO and the relevant support systems  Identification of immediate benefits of the project and evidences that would indicate the intermediate and long-term socio- economic and environmental impacts.

2. Subproject Site Management Office (SUSIMO) Equipment provided to this . 2 units Binocular Office:3 . 4 Calculators . 1 set Computer Desktop with printer . 2 units GPS . 1 set Medical Kit . 2 sets Fire fighting equipment . 1 unit Steel tape . 1 Lettering set . 1 Drafting table . 2 units Petromax . 1 unit UPS 500VA . 1 GIS (maptitude) software . 4 Steel Cabinets . 1 unit Handheld Radio

6 . 1 unit Brunton Compass . 1 unit Abney Hand Level . 2 Cameras . 3 Motorcycles (SUZUKI 125) . 1 Utility Vehicle (KIA Ceres) . 1 unit Forester’s Transit . 1 unit Base Radio . 1 unit Rain Gauge . 3 brushcutters . 1 unit Computer Table . 11 Office tables . 11 chairs . 1 unit Generator

Researches conducted: NONE

Training attended by the 1. Orientation/Reorien SUSIMO personnel:4 tation Seminar on FSP for the PO Cum Action Planning Workshop 2. FSP Re-Orientation Seminar 3. Leadership Capability Enhancement Training 4. Leadership Capability Enhancement Training Track II

7 5. Orientation Seminar for SUSIMO Staff for Watershed Subproject Site

Others: Construction of Subproject Site Management Office (SUSIMO) building 1Please refer to Table 1 for the details on trainings attended by the POs 2Table 2 details the subproject performance in terms of area planted 3Table 3 shows the details of the equipment provided to the SUSIMO 4Please refer to Table 4 for the trainings attended by the SUSIMO Staff

B. Reasons for Revision/Modification of scope and Dimensions

B.1. Where there has been “revision/modification” of the Subproject scope and dimensions.

Please choose the reason(s) from the following list and check.

 Revision of the superior plan (e.g. sector development plan, etc.)  Revision of the supply-and-demand estimate  Large fluctuation in the Subproject cost  Substantial revision of design due to the unforeseeable physical condition at the time of the original design (e.g. poor soil condition, etc.)  Natural disaster/unseasonable weather  Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing Agency  Structural and organizational problems of the agencies concerned (e.g. lack of staff, inadequate coordination with other agencies, etc.)  Availability of funds (e.g. lack of funds, use of contingency, fluctuation of the exchange rate, etc.)  Unrealistic initial plan/Technical problems  Procurement problems  Performance of contractor/supplier  Performance of consultant  Change in construction period  Others

B.2. Detailed statement of reasons

Others

8  Attitude of residents of the community (CO)

A two-year contract was awarded to a non-government organization (NGO) for the conduct of Community Organizing activities. The CO contractor had difficulty in mobilizing the members of the community because the residents were uncooperative during the early part of project implementation.

Major activities like assistance on policy formulation, networking and linkaging, identification and implementation of income generating projects for the PO was not conducted on schedule.

 Resurveying of the area by the SUSIMO (CSD)

Of the total original areas targeted for establishment under Comprehensive Site Development, only 1,848.00 hectares was found out to have been established by the People’s Organization after the Inspection Committee had done its validation and monitoring. The figure went down further after a resurvey was made by the SUSIMO soon after its creation in 2001. Based on the survey using GPS, the total actual area established by the PO was 1,893.00 hectares. This was accepted and served as final area accomplished by the PO.

The construction of additional units of bunkhouse and lookout tower was based on the actual need of the project site. One bunkhouse and two lookout towers were constructed for each of the three barangays.

 Inclusion of Major Infrastructure Development Project

Improvement in the standard of living of beneficiary communities is considered as the key to sustainable management of forest resources. As an additional support for the communities in developing their existing and alternative livelihood projects under the FSP, the rehabilitation and construction of

9 infrastructures that are most directly linked to promoting livelihood in the communities were included as a major project component.

C. Contribution of Subproject to Relevant (Sub) Sector(s)

C.1. (Sub) Sector(s) to which the Subproject belongs Electric Power and Gas  Irrigation and Flood Control  (Multi purpose) Dams  Irrigation  Power plants Flood Control  Transmission lines  Distribution systems  Transportation  Gas  Roads  Others  Railways  Bridges  Telecommunication  Airport  Telecommunications  Ports  Broadcasting  Marine transportation  Others

 Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries  Mining and  Agriculture and Forestry Manufacturing  Fisheries  Mining  Manufacturing  Social Services  Water Supply  Sewerage  Education  Health  Tourism  Others (employment and income raising opportunities)

C.2. Original (At the time of appraisal/Planned)

Item Description 1. Social preparation and  Through NGO contractor and DENR development personnel, the community’s knowledge and skills on forest management will be enhanced through Community Organizing and provision of technical assistance. The organized community will be educated/informed on farm and nursery techniques / environment operation and

10 management, to include the advantages of rehabilitating and protecting denuded forest areas. They will also be trained to manage and operate existing and proposed income generating activities.

2. Project components for  The introduction of multiple tree species in site development the openlands and grasslands will apparently enhance ecological diversity and soil productivity.  Erosion and sedimentation will certainly be reduced to tolerable level. The presence of vegetative cover will intercept the erosive force of rainfall, promote stem flow, increase percolation rate and reduce run- off.

3. Employment and economic  The Subproject is community-oriented in opportunities nature. It will directly involve the local communities in the agro forestry, reforestation, and forest protection works. The community will benefit financially from the CSD activities and livelihood projects to be implemented. The introduction and enhancement of agro forestry products will improve the quality of life of the community people as well.

C.3. Present situation and outlook for the future Item Description 1. The community and  The Mariveles Watershed Farmers tenurial instrument Association, Inc. (MAWAFAS) was organized, educated, and trained to do the CSD activities. Members were trained as well in the identification and implementation of feasible livelihood operations in their locality.  With the assistance of the NGO contractor for CO, the Assisting Professional, and DENR personnel, MAWAFAS capability to conduct sustainable forest management has improved. With a strong leadership that is determined, and core participants who are committed as well, they are now able to act

11 on important issues and concerns needed to further strengthen the organizational capability and performance as well.  The Community-based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA) covering a total area of 2,000 hectares was issued to MAWAFAS on December 16, 1998 as a legal tool in the long-term management and operation of the whole forest area as indicated. The MAWAFAS has achieved a lot but is yet to become viable and enterprising organization. With the continuous provision of technical assistance, especially on networking for livelihood project operations, it is expected that people empowerment in upland communities can be achieved in the immediate future.

2. Project Site Development  A total of 1,893.00 hectares were rehabilitated by MAWAFAS through reforestation, agro forestry, enrichment planting, and rattan component with a weighted average survival rate of 81.14% based on the latest monitoring and evaluation of the NGO contractor.  Significant impact on the water yield, erosion, and sedimentation is yet to be felt considering that the plantations are only six years old.  Continuous maintenance and protection activities should be done in order to maintain the existing condition of the plantations.  Once the site is fully vegetated with trees, approximately 15 years onward, soil productivity and yield of ground and surface water are expected to improve, and so is the quality of agricultural products. Flash flooding downstream during stormy months will be minimized. Bigger and better habitat will be available for wildlife in the Subproject site.

12 3. Employment and socio-  During the five years implementation of economic benefit of the the Subproject, residents of Barangays project Balon-Anito, Biaan, and Camaya, Mariveles, Bataan (members and non-members of MAWAFAS) were employed to conduct nursery operation, plantation establishment, and maintenance and protection. Payments were made based on specific accomplishments governed by the existing policies of MAWAFAS and unit cost set per approved Work and Financial Plan.  Out of the 15% administrative and supervision cost and 5% capital build-up per salary claimed by members, MAWAFAS has embarked on the following livelihood projects: Tilapia Culture, Micro –lending, and SweeT Potato (Camote) Production from which members are expected to benefit as additional source of income.. Please refer to Table 5 for more detailed information on the livelihood projects being implemented by the PO.  With strong leadership and positive response from the DENR and other entities, especially on networking for livelihood operations, financial management system strengthening and managerial capability development for key leaders, empowered MAWAFAS will emerge in less than a decade from now.

4. Infrastructure Project  In support to the operation of livelihood5 activities of MAWAFAS and to facilitate mobility of residents directly and indirectly affected by the project, a 7.20-kilometer farm-to-market road was rehabilitated and a memorandum of agreement between the DENR and the local government unit of Mariveles was signed by both parties to assure the serviceability and maintenance of said infrastructure. Please refer to Table 5 for the livelihood project being implemented by the POs

13 II. Subproject Implementation

1. Organizations for Implementing Subproject

Name of Organization Reasons Function in the for Subproject (1) Original (2) Change Implementation Changed 1. Survey, Mapping Bataan Forest Environmentalist & Planning Association, Inc.

2. AO for Forest Community Development Foundation, Inc. Organizing (FDFI)

3. Assisting Mr. Ferdinand Cruz Professional

4. Peoples Mariveles Watershed Organization Farmers Association, Inc. (MAWAFAS) 5. Monitoring & University of the Philippines Los Evaluation Baños Foundation, Inc. Contractor (UPLBFI)

6. Infra Contractor ABESCO Construction & Development Corporation

Please state:

1.1 Reasons for the change – NOT APPLICABLE

1.2 Problems arising, counter measures adopted and results.

Problems that arose during implementation of Mariveles Watershed Subproject affected the performance of the PO as well as condition of established plantations.

Counter Problem/Concern Measure Remarks/Results Adopted 1. Misunderstanding Continuous Effect of personal (personal) within dialogues, misunderstanding on the the PO leveling-off, and performance of the - during early part meetings whole organization was of project conducted by minimized. The PO was

14 implementation, the AO and able to accomplish its this affected DENR/SUSIMO physical targets on time. the operation of the organization, specially the conduct of CSD. 2. Presence of land claimants Continuous With the concerted (member and non-member Information efforts of the AO and of the PO) Education & DENR field office, the - there was communication claimants were difficulty in the on the convinced and total area identification of importance of required for planting site to be planted rehabilitating was established. with the presence the forest was of claimants. conducted by Majority did not the AO and want to subject DENR their land claims for development.

3. Conduct of illegal grazing Information Such illegal operation at the project site dissemination of still exists but - Planted and existing policies minimized. replanted trees are and Approximately 475 affected by this corresponding hectares of forestland operation (the person penalties were is affected during each involved has strong conducted by grazing period. “political” influence) concerned DENR offices 4. Fire occurrence Conduct of Established plantations - approximately 50-75 intensive were restored but hectares are affected patrolling intensive conduct of by forest fires each activity and patrolling activity is year. replanting in needed in order to affected sites. minimize if not control the spread of fire. 5. Loss in livelihood operation Conduct of The Tilapia Production, (Tilapia Production) due assessment and among other livelihood to mismanagement evaluation with activities is still on regard to the going with three first operation fishponds. Net income is yet to be determined.

15 1.3 The latest organization chart (or equivalent) for the implementation of the Subproject is ( attached or  not available).

The latest organizational chart of the Assisting Organization, PO, M & E and Infrastructure contractors, and SUSIMO are attached as Annexes 1a-1e.

1.4 If the organizational chart (or equivalent) is not available, please state the reason. (NOT APPLICABLE).

2. Implementation Period

A. Comparison of Original Schedule and Actual Period

Please fill in the following blanks with actual period for each item.

ITEM ORIGINAL ACTUAL PERIOD SCHEDULE 1. Contract of NGO for SMP April 24, 1997-May April 24, 1997 – May 30, 1997 30, 1997 2. Contract of AO for CO December 1997- December 1997 – December 1999 June 2000

3. Contract of PO for CSD February 1998 – February 1998-June December 2001 30, 2003

3. 4. Contract of NGO for M&E December 1999 - January 2000 - December 2000 March 2003

5. Contract of Infrastructure December 31, 2001- December 31, 2001- Component April 2002 April 2002

Dec. 2001 June 31, 2003  Completion (completion of Subproject)

Please refer to Table 6 for the subproject status report.

Notes: Completion of the Subproject was defined as ( completion ceremony or  final disbursement or  other than the above.

16 The completion date was scheduled for December 2001 (at the time of appraisal) and is indicated (thus ) in the above Table. B. Reasons for Delay or Early Completion

B.1. In case of delay or early completion, please choose the reason(s) from the following list and check.

 Change in scope/dimensions  Natural disaster/Unseasonable weather (e.g. earthquake, typhoon, etc.)  Shortage of funds/Fluctuation of the exchange rate  Problems in procurement  Inflation  Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing Agency  Structural and organizational problems of the agencies concerned (e.g. lack of staff, inadequate coordination with other agencies, etc.)  Legislative matters  Unrealistic initial plan/Technical problems  Performance of contractor/supplier  Performance of consultant  Others

B.2. Reasons and background for delay or early completion

Natural disaster/Unseasonable weather/Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the executing agency

. On the conduct of Comprehensive Site Development

The PO was not able to meet the 2,000 hectares physical target after three years of project implementation and the condition of the plantations in terms of quality was not good either. During the management by the SUSIMO, it was seen that intensive conduct of replanting in areas affected by the occurrence of El Niño, illegal grazing, and intentional and unintentional forest burning is needed prior to final evaluation by a composite team that will determine whether the 15% Retention Fee will be released to the PO.

17

Legislative matter

 On the conduct of Monitoring and Evaluation

The original schedule of the M & E involved three passes for Physical Accomplishment validation only per Memorandum Circular 99-17 entitled “Guidelines on the Conduct of Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) of Forestry Sector Project under Loan II.” But with the inclusion of another aspect, the Institutional and Project Benefit Assessment per Revised Guidelines on the Conduct of Monitoring and Evaluation of the Forestry Sector Project provided for under MC 2001-04, the contract schedule was revised per pass per aspect.

Others (Attitude of residents of the community)

The uncooperativeness of the community members directly involved in the project led to the delayed completion of Community Organizing activities. Majority of community residents were not supportive of activities that were usually held.

C. Remedial Action Taken in Each Case of Delay

Natural disaster/Unseasonable weather/Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the executing agency

. On the conduct of Comprehensive Site Development

Additional one and a half years was given by the Project Management Office to the PO to conduct intensive maintenance and protection of plantations, at the same time, to further strengthen members’ capabilities in organizational development and forest resources management.

Policy Matter

 On the conduct of Monitoring and Evaluation

In compliance to MC 2001-04 and to further improve the accomplishment and organizational management of MAWAFAS, schedule of the conduct of the activity was further revised in

18 details, per pass per component (Physical Validation and Institutional and Project Benefit Assessment Components).

Others (Attitude of residents of the community)

A six-month extension was given to the NGO for the continuity of unaccomplished activities stipulated in the contract, assistance on networking and linkage, policy formulation, and identification and implementation of income generating projects of MAWAFAS, among others. No additional amount was incurred for the said extension of contract.

3. Subproject Cost

A. Comparison of Original Estimated Cost and Actual Expenditure (by Component) (Unit: in Mil peso)

Item Original Cost Actual Expenditures

Survey, Mapping and 1.350000 1.350000 Planning

Community 3.600000 3.500000 Organization

Comprehensive Site 19.326187 17.849635 Development

Monitoring 1.444190 3.388870 and Evaluation

Infrastructure 9.589131 12.980721 Dev’t Subproject 1.852248 1.468382 Coordinating Office (SUSIMO)

TOTAL 37.161757 40.537608 Please refer to Tables 7, 8, 9a-d, 10 for the details on cost of SMP, CO, CSD and M & E. List of Infra project/s with its corresponding cost is also attached as Table 11.

B. Reasons for Difference between Original Estimated Cost and Actual Expenditure

19 B.1. If there is any difference between Table a.1 and Table a.2 in Paragraph a, please choose the reason(s) from the following list and check.  Increase in reconstruction cost arising from natural disaster/unreasonable weather (e.g. earthquake, typhoon, etc.)  Increase or decrease arising from a change in construction period  Increase or decrease arising from inflation  Increase or decrease arising from fluctuation in the exchange rate  Increase or decrease arising from a change in the scope/work volume of the Subproject  Decrease arising from keen competition in tender  Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing Agency  Unrealistic cost estimates/Technical problems  Others (Reduction of CSD project cost and Performance of Contractor)

B.2. Description of the detailed reason(s) and background

Increase or decrease arising from a change in the scope/work volume of the Subproject and Reduction of CSD Project Cost

. On the Comprehensive Site Development Cost

The original cost amounting to PHP 19,326,187.15 has undergone revisions due to the following; reduction of established plantations as a result of resurveying by the SUSIMO, updating of cost estimates of activities per MC 2000-19 entitled “Guidelines Governing the Updating of Cost Estimates and Intensification of Plantation Maintenance and Protection Activities for DENR-FSP Watershed Subprojects under JBIC Funding”, and reduction of total project cost as a result of the evaluation of the performance of FSP subprojects nationwide. The final revision of the total project cost amounted to PHP 18,382,822.38. Payments for the maintenance and protection activities were based on the new costing. Unit cost per activity increased but with the reduction of the area and the total project cost, the actual disbursement amounted to PHP 17,849,635.25

. On the Monitoring and Evaluation Cost

20 The coverage area per contract and the revision of MC 99-17 reflected a difference between the original and actual disbursement for this activity. The original contract covered a total area of 1,382 hectares to be subjected to three passes at PHP 1,045.00 per pass. Taking into consideration the latest guidelines in MC 2001-04, the cost per hectare per pass has been revised to only PHP 643.00 for the Physical Validation component and an additional PHP 215,000.00 per pass for the conduct of Institutional and Project Benefit Assessment.

. On the Major Infrastructure Development Cost

The DENR-Region 3 has accepted the bidding amount of PHP 9,589,131.49 for the construction and completion of infrastructure works for Mariveles Watershed Subproject. An excess amount of PHP 3,410,868.51 was provided as allowance for the actual conduct of the Project and consequently treated as supplemental contract. The revised project cost then was PHP 13,000,000.00 with an actual disbursement of PHP 12,980,720.87. The balance per revised contract cost amounting to PHP 19,279.13 was a result of the evaluation and review of engineers at the Central Office and representatives from the field office on the actual accomplishments of ABESCO per approved design/specifications. Said amount was reverted to the National Treasury.

Others (Performance of the Contractor)

. On the Community Organizing Cost

The FDFI was able to complete its accomplishments per contract. The quality, however of output was not that impressive as far as the DENR field offices was concerned, hence the PHP 100,000.00 was not disbursed. It was reverted to the National Treasury.

. On SUSIMO Cost

There is a difference between the original and actual cost inasmuch as the allotment or original cost is not necessarily the same amount that was obligated for the expenditures of the SUSIMO.

C. Action taken in Case of Cost Overrun and Results

21

Cost overrun on M & E and infrastructure components was addressed through revision and approval of supplemental contracts. The latest revised contracts were greater than and equal to the amount disbursed for the M&E and infrastructure component, respectively.

D. Comparison of Original Estimated Expenditure and Actual Expenditure (by Year) Unit: (Mil peso) Calendar Year Original Cost Actual Expenditures 1997 1.350000 1.350000 1998 10.136616 5.395187 1999 8.598555 8.175096 2000 4.699445 1.609533 2001 1.708535 3.464362 2002 10.066803 16.983226 2003 0.601803 3.560204

Total 37.161757 40.537608

Please refer to Table 12 for the details of the Annual Work and Financial Plan.

4. Comments on Performance of Assisting Organizations (AOs), Assisting Professionals (APs), Peoples Organizations (POs), M&E and Infrastructure contractors.

Please describe the performance of each organization after checking the item(s) in the relevant lists on which you have any comment. A. Performance of Assisting Organizations & Assisting Professionals (if any) Peoples Organizations, M&E and Infrastructure contractors

A.1.  Overall performance  Design  Contract administration  Construction supervision  Expertise  Staff qualifications  Coordinating ability  Compliance with Contracts  Performance related to any other than the Subproject scope, if any.  Others

A.2. Description

Overall Performance

. Assisting Organization for Community Organizing

22 The contractor has provided social, technical, and managerial assistance to the PO and the Subproject. Deployed staff have shown commitment and patience in dealing with and resolving conflicts within and among the members of the organization.

. Assisting Professional

The AP’s services in MAWAFAS left a significant mark in the implementation of the project. He personally assisted the officers and BOD in dealing with the problems and conflict that the MAWAFAS encountered in the implementation of the Subproject. He also assisted the PO in developing linkages with other government agencies, other POs and NGOs, which helped a lot in obtaining free training and seminars for the establishment of livelihood projects for MAWAFAS. Further, the AP strictly monitored the PO’s capability in managing their finances.

. Peoples Organization for CSD activities

Initially, the MAWAFAS members were uncooperative to the DENR and the Assisting Organization, ignoring some of the recommendations and organizing activities of the Assisting Organization and the DENR field offices. But with continuous dialogues, leveling-off, and meetings on the importance of the Subproject and the inculcation of their responsibilities per signed contract, they have managed to accomplish the CSD activities as well as operate identified livelihood projects. The PO, however, still needs further strengthening and technical assistance to ensure success of their endeavors.

. NGO for M & E activity

The NGO to a certain degree, has been effective in providing assistance as far as overall implementation and improvement of Mariveles Watershed Subproject is concerned. However, it failed to provide deeper analysis of employment trends and income increase of the community that directly participated in the Subproject. The information could have more or less gauged the level of Project success insofar as poverty alleviation is concerned.

23

. Contractor for Major Infrastructure Development

In terms of physical operation and accomplishment, the performance of ABESCO was satisfactory since the activities were successfully finished as scheduled. The contractor has the expertise, experience and available resources to be able to conduct the activities stipulated in the contract. There was full cooperation and coordination from ABESCO that contributed greatly to the realization of the infrastructure project.

5. Other matters relating to Subproject Implementation

Please choose the item(s) from the following list on which you have any comment, check it (them), and describe it (them) with measure and results in (B) below.

A.  Technical  Financial  Institutional  Economic  Social/Distributional  Others

B. Description (in detail)

Institutional

The creation of the SUSIMO and contracting of the Assisting Professional in 2001 per DAO 2000-65 contributed immensely to the improved implementation of the DENR forest development project. Issues and concerns in the field were acted upon immediately. More intense monitoring and necessary assistances were provided to the community involved in the Mariveles Watershed Subproject.

Diverse Culture/Provincial characteristics of members of the organization

Within the PO are members who are Ilocanos, Pampangeños, Batangeños, Visayans, and Bicolanos so that misunderstanding within the organization cannot be avoided nor the existence of factions. This is crucial to the sustainability of the Mariveles Watershed Subproject.

III. Action Taken by the AOs, APs and POs relating to Recommendation(s)

24 1. Recommendation(s) made by SUSIMO

This article is ( applicable  not applicable. There has been no recommendation with regard to the Subproject).

ACTION TAKEN RECOMMENDATION RESULT/REMARK By the AP By the PO 1. Conduct of election Assisted the Participated in Election was held for the officers of SUSIMO during the election peacefully. Despite the PO to start the the election and and afterwards protests from unification process act as the abided by the inactive members, among its members COMELEC results of the the election was done election in accordance with the election guidelines of the PO. 2. Preparation of Assisted in the Adopted cash Financial reports clear policies conduct of receipt and were posted at the regarding financial trainings and cash PO office for and organizational seminars to disbursement transparency on concerns improve the POs books system financial records managerial to separate capability expenses from cash receipts and simplified the format of financial reports through the Cash Position reports per month and the Consolidated Cash Position report per quarter 3. Continuous IEC Assisted in the The officers Awareness of PO activities among its conduct of IEC initiated the members increased members to activities to IEC activities which is envisioned minimize the ensure full through general to further encourage occurrence of participation of assembly, BOD them to give their break-away groups the members meetings, best for the EXECOM and Subproject. Committee meetings

25

IV. Initial Operation and Maintenance of Subproject Facilities

1. Present Condition of Facilities

A. Please check: This article is ( applicable due to problem(s) or  not applicable. No particular problem has occurred since the initial operation started). If there have been any problems, please check the relevant space in the Table.

For the SUSIMO: Item Status Initial Maintenanc Manage Operatio e ment n 1. KIA Cross Truck Serviceable  2. Motorcycle Serviceable  3. Power Generator Serviceable  4. Computer with Serviceable software 5. Printer Serviceable 6. GPS Serviceable  7. UPS 500 VA Serviceable 8. GIS software Serviceable (maptitude) 9. Base Radio Serviceable  10.Handheld Radio Serviceable 11. Forester’s Transit Serviceable 12.Manual Typewriter Serviceable 13.Camera Serviceable 14.Brunton compass Serviceable 15.Steel cabinet Serviceable 16.Medical Kit Serviceable 17.Fire fighting Equip. Serviceable 18.Steel/Nylon Tape/ Serviceable Chain 19.Abney Hand Level Serviceable 20. Rain gauge Serviceable 21. Brush cutters Serviceable 22. Binocular Serviceable 23. Calculator Serviceable 24. Lettering set Serviceable (Leroy Set) Serviceable 25. Drafting Table Serviceable 26. Tables and Chairs Serviceable

26 27. Flashlight 2 units  Unserviceable Serviceable 28. Petromax Serviceable 29. SUSIMO building

For the PO: Initial Item Status Maintenance Management Operation 1. Steel Cabinet Serviceable 2. Electric fan Unserviceable  3. Blackboard Serviceable 4. Wooden tables Serviceable 5. Karaoke Unserviceable  6. Television set Serviceable

7. VHS player Serviceable

8. Set of monoblock Serviceable

long table & 6 chairs 9. Manual typewriter Serviceable 10. Water system Serviceable

B. Please check: The Problem(s) has arisen owing to the following reason(s).

 Technical  Financial  Institutional  Economic  Social/Distributional  Others (Quality/Serviceability)

C. Description (in detail)

For the SUSIMO

1. KIA CERES – had undergone minor repairs like camber adjustment, caster adjustment, drain radiator, break adjustment, wheel alignment and tire mounting but, at present, still being used by the SUSIMO. 2. MOTORCYCLE - minor repair of the flasher, wiring, & bearing but is still serviceable. 3. POWER GENERATOR – at present, it is already subject for overhauling since its gas is fast-consuming. They have allotted a budget for it.

27 4. GPS – the SUSIMO forwarded it to NFDO Central Office because it is not functioning. After its repair it was again brought to the SUSIMO and is now being used. 5. Base Radio Transceiver – it is functioning except that it has limited coverage; can communicate only within the Subproject area.

For the PO:

1. Flashlight –Still not functioning even with new batteries. 2. Electric fan – need to change fan motor. 3. Karaoke – karaoke was burned (result of short circuit) and more expensive to repair than to buy a new one.

D. Aspect of utilizing the Subproject facilities

For the SUSIMO: Item Original Plan Actual Operation 1. KIA Ceres For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 2. Motorcycle For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 3. Power Generator For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 4. Computer with For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use software 5. Printer For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 6. GPS For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 7. UPS 500 VA For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 8. GIS software For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use (maptitude) 9. Base Radio For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 10.Handheld Radio For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 11. Forester’s Transit For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 12.Manual Typewriter For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 13.Camera For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 14.Brunton compass For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 15.Steel cabinet For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 16.Medical Kit For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 17.Fire fighting Equip. For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 18.Steel/Nylon Tape/ For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use Chain 19.Abney Hand Level For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 20. Rain gauge For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 21. Brush cutters For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 22. Binocular For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 23. Calculator For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use

28 24. Lettering set For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use (Leroy Set) 25. Drafting Table For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 26. Tables and Chairs For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 27. Flashlight For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 28. Petromax For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use 29. SUSIMO building For SUSIMO use For SUSIMO use

For the PO: Item Original Plan Actual Operation 1. Steel Cabinet For PO use For PO use 2. Electric fan For PO use For PO use 3. Blackboard For PO use For PO use 4. Wooden tables For PO use For PO use 5. Karaoke For PO use For PO use 6. Television set For PO use For PO use 7. VHS player For PO use For PO use 8. Set of monoblock long For PO use For PO use table & 6 chairs 9. Manual typewriter For PO use For PO use

2. Organization for Operation and Maintenance

A. Name of PO and SUSIMO

Peoples Organization - Mariveles Watershed Farmers Association, Inc. (MAWAFAS)

Subproject Site Management Office – Mariveles Watershed Subproject Site Management Office

A.1. Please give the name of PO/SUSIMO and/or Body in charge of O/M.

For the PO – The PO President, Narciso Vilan, is directly responsible for the operation and maintenance of the PO facilities but in instances where the decision of the Board is necessary, they conduct meetings to discuss their problems, e.g. purchasing of major facilities or equipment. For the SUSIMO – It is the SUSIMO officers who are in- charge of the operation and maintenance of their facilities.

A.2. Please check:

29 The latest organization chart (or equivalent) for O/M of the Subproject facilities is (attached or  not available).

The latest organizational chart of the SUSIMO is attached as Annex 1d.

A.3.If the organization chart (or equivalent) is not available, please state the reason.

Only one person is directly involved in the operation and maintenance of the PO’s subproject facilities, hence organizational chart is unnecessary.

B. Number of staff/workers of the PO or Body for Operation and Maintenance of Subproject Facilities.

For the PO – One person, the PO President

For the SUSIMO – Six persons are directly involved in the maintenance and operation of the facilities.

C. Please check and explain the following.

C.1.The number of staff is currently (sufficient or  insufficient).

If “Insufficient”, please describe your estimate of the optimum number of staff and your plan for providing them.

C.2. Average employment period of the present staff

For the PO – six years

For the SUSIMO – Most of the members of the SUSIMO have been connected with DENR for more than 10 years. On the average, they have served for 18 years.

C.3. Availability of training program to promote the vocational ability of the staff, its contents and expected effects. (NONE)

There is no training program planned for the PO and SUSIMO.

30 3. Annual Budget or Actual Expenditure for Operation and Maintenance (by Year)

A. Original Expected Expenditure

For the PO:

The PO is not practicing budget planning for the maintenance and operation of major facilities. They only allot certain amount when it is needed.

For the SUSIMO: (Unit: Mil Pesos) Item Maintenance Operation Total Calendar year 2001 0.537339 1. SUSIMOffice (office 0.186416 supplies, communication) 2. Vehicles (insurance, gas 0.262665 and oil lubricants for motor, pick-up, petromax, and generator) 3. Others (advertisements, 0.088257 printings)

2002 0.251942 1. SUSIMOffice (office 0.082497 supplies, communication) 2. Vehicles (insurance, gas 0.105440 and oil lubricants for motor, pick-up, petromax, and generator) 3. Others (advertisements, 0.064005 printings)

2003 1. SUSIMOffice (office 0.481143 supplies, 0.203600 communication) 2. Vehicles (insurance, gas and oil lubricants for

31 motor, pick-up, 0.277543 petromax, and generator) TOTAL 0.645648 0.624775 1.270424 B. Actual and Currently Expected Expenditure

For the PO: (Unit: Mil Pesos ) Item Maintenance Operation Total Calendar year 2001 0.04369 1. PO office (rental, 0.037078 0.006612 repair, supplies and materials, communication)

2002 0.035994 1. PO office (rental, 0.010000 0.008552 repair, supplies and materials, communication) 2. Water system 0.017442

2003 0.011398 1. PO office (rental, 0.011398 repair, supplies and materials, communication)

TOTAL 0.06452 0.026562 0.091082

The above yearly expenditure of the PO was the only data available in their office. Data from year 1998 to 2000 is not available. For the SUSIMO: Item Maintenance Operation Maintenance Operation Total Calendar year For expanded Portion 2001 0.53697 1. SUSIMOffice 0.186046 (office supplies, communication) 2. Vehicles 0.262665 (insurance, gas and oil

32 lubricants for motor, pick- up, petromax, and generator) 3. Others 0.088257 (advertisement, printings)

2002 0.24397 1. SUSIMOffice 0.074523 (office supplies, communication)

2. Vehicles 0.105440 (insurance, gas and oil lubricants for motor, pick-up, petromax, and generator)

3. Others 0.064005 (advertisements, printings)

2003 0.31896 1. SUSIMOffice 0.056920 (office supplies, communication)

2. Vehicles 0.262036 (insurance, gas and oil lubricants for motor, pick-up, petromax, and generator)

TOTAL 0.630141 0.469745 1.099886

33

July –December 0.04400 2003 1. SUSIMOffice 0.04400 (office supplies, communication, electricity) 2. Gas and oil lubricants (for motor, pick-up, petromax, and generator) 4. Others (advertisements, printings)

January-March 0.05000 2004 1. SUSIMOffice 0.031250 (office supplies, communication, electricity) 2. Gas and oil 0.018750 lubricants (for motor, pick-up, petromax, and generator) 4. Others 0.08000 (advertisements, printings)

TOTAL 0.018750 0.15525 0.1740 Note: Actual and currently expected expenditure for expansion, replacement or any other improvement purposes. o Please describe the basis for the above estimate and your financing plan for the same.

34

The SUSIMO budgetary and actual expenditures were based on previous experiences of project operations. It has been part of the strategy to facilitate overall subproject activities, specifically to minimize delay of processing of payments for the PO.

The expenditures of the PO on the other hand were based on the actual need of the organization. They allocate budget as the need arises.

4. Maintenance Method

The maintenance method being applied by the SUSIMO on major facilities are the usual or common like change of oil/tires and tuning up for vehicles and cleaning of hard disk for the computer.

MAINTENANCE FACILITIES FREQUENCY METHOD 1. KIA Ceres Change brake fluid/oil/tires, tune Twice a year up, 2. Motorcycle change oil, change tire Twice a year 3. Power Generator tune up, cleaning Twice a year 4. Computer Hard disk cleaning Once a month

The PO has no major facilities that need regular maintenance except for the office and water system that are renovated/repaired as the need arises.

V. Benefits derived from Subproject

Indirect Effects

Please choose and check the item(s) which are dealt with this Article by you.

 Technological transfer (e.g. application of technology used in the Subproject to other similar projects and subprojects)  Employment creating (e.g. during construction, contribution to the sector(s) after completion)  Income-raising (e.g. income of the residents in the region)  Other intended or unintended effects on the relevant sector(s) and/or the region concerned

35

B. Please give details for each of the item(s) you checked.

Technology Transfer

The PO members are now knowledgeable about nursery practices and operations which they could apply to similar development projects in the future and for further maintenance and protection of the whole CBFMA area awarded to MAWAFAS.

The group tasked on nursery operation now has the basic knowledge on seed propagation and grafting. During plantation establishment and development, the PO learned proper ways to handle, transport, and out-plant tree plantation and agro forestry species. Use of mychorrizza for better growth of planting materials was also introduced. They now have the capability to determine different species’ suitability to specific areas.

Employment creating

The project not only increased awareness of the community residents on environmental conservation, but also generated employment opportunities through direct involvement in the CSD activities, livelihood operations, and day-to-day activities of the organization. A total of 93,090 man days was generated during the implementation of the five-year CSD and 450-day infrastructure contracts.

Income-raising

There was a significant increase in the annual income during the project. During appraisal, a total of 126 households were engaged in off-farm activities have an average annual gross income of PHP 5,000.00. As a result of the subproject activities, the average annual gross income of 94 households increased to PHP 37,631.98.

Improvement of financial condition enabled about 25% of the participants to send their children to school. It was also noted that majority of their houses improved with the increase in income as these structures underwent various stages of renovation.

36

VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 The end of the Mariveles Watershed Rehabilitation Subproject signaled the start of putting into action role of MAWAFAS as Community-based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA) holder.

 The training, technical know-how, and lessons learned during the implementation period will serve as tools for the sustainable resource use and further development of the watershed.

 Weaknesses still exist; the management capability of MAWAFAS needs further strengthening.

 It is recommended that PO conduct continuous intensification of protection and maintenance activities in areas with low survival rate, prone to fire, and those that are likely to be intruded and subjected to illegal activities.

 The PO must ensure budgetary allocation for continuous IEC as well as funds for capability building activities for officers and members, and the development of second liners as future leaders.

 Funds should also be set aside for plantation development and management.

 Strictly follow rules and regulations governing the distribution of the CFDF.

 The PO should adopt the following measures to improve livelihood operations: instill among officers and members the importance and need to sustain IGPs; conduct of trainings and workshops; formulation and implementation of Benefit Sharing Scheme (BSS); and review/ revision of existing policies and guidelines pertaining to proper recording, reporting, supervision, and monitoring.

 The DENR field offices should conduct regular visits in plantations to supervise and monitor the PO, evaluate the progress of PO activities and make necessary recommendations.

37  The DENR should provide continuous assistance to the PO in terms of networking and linkage of members to non-members and other neighboring community to gather support, particularly in the protection of plantations against fires, illegal occupants, among others.

 Members must be encouraged to participate actively in all activities in order to achieve a transparent, participatory, and democratic leadership and minimize, if not eliminate conflicts within the association.

 DENR central and regional offices should be involved regularly in monitoring and supervision to boost the morale and inspire field personnel to perform well.

 Policies and guidelines must be followed accordingly to avoid misinterpretations and confusion among DENR offices that may adversely affect field operations.

 There should be proper selection of NGO/AO for the conduct community organizing work as well as regular evaluation of its performance.

 The DENR should set realistic targets for plantation management to enable POs to accomplish these within the specified period.

 There should be constant provision of enterprise development trainings, seminars, field trips and cross visits to upgrade management skills of PO.

 The Multi-Sectoral Forest Protection Committee (MFPC) must be revived to address the need for collaborative efforts in forest resources protection and management.

38 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 1. TRAININGS ATTENDED BY PEOPLES ORGANIZATION TRAINING TRAINORS NO. OF INCLUSIVES PARTICIPANT DATES S 1. Officers Training and Value FDFI/DENR 19 27-Mar-00 Clarification 2. Orientation on Forest Protection FDFI/DENR 19 4-May-00 and Law Enforcement

3. Follow-up training on Livelihood FDFI/DENR 26-May-00 Projects 4. Training on Community-Based FDFI/DENR 11 2-Jun-00 Forest Management Program 5. Seminar on Organization, FDFI/DENR 11 10-Jun-00 Monitoring and Evaluation 6. Bookkeeping and Accounting AP, in coordination with SUSIMO February 13, Staffs 2 001 7. Organizational Development and SUSIMO and AP 27-Feb-01 Strengthening PO Committee

8. CBFM Program and SUSIMO SUSIMO and AP 17-Mar-01 Orientation 9. Forest Protection and For. Eduardo C. KabigtingSEMS- 23 March 29, Management (Fire Prevention PENRO/SUSIMO 2001 Detection & Suppresion Training)

10. Techno Transfer on the use of Dr. Evangeline Castillo, for. Maria 19 August 27- Mychorrhiza for Plantation Theresa delos Reyes, Larry Rueda 28, 2002 Establishment and DENR-ERDB 11. Training on Leadership Team APs of OIDCI from diff. subprojects 25 June 19-20, Building/Group Building and 2002 William Bill Astor Ganipis Emily Soriano Edna Padio Jaime Avedaño

12. Entrefarm Game Workshop Mrs. Nelin Cabahug 24 September (Best Game Seminar) 24, 2002 DTI Representative Mrs. Ma. Concepcion Sanico DTI Representative Gerardo Santos DTI Representative

13. Livelihood Development Ms. Anita Ambrocio 24 October 8-11, Workshop 2002 TA Livelihood Specialist Mr. Yoji Mizuguchi TA Agro

14. Training on Tilapia Production Mr. Rodolfo Tabing 24 April 02, 2003 DA Mariveles Mr. Diego Resubal, Jr. Ms. Gladys T. Resubal Prov'l Agriculture-Balanga Office

15. Workshop on Livelihood Project Ms. Anita Ambrocio 25 August 28- Monitoring and Evaluation 29, 2003 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 2. Subproject Performance Component/Species Year Planted Area Planted Survival WASR Planted REFORESTATION 1998 Narra 13.56 76.14 86.62 Mahogany 53.25 89.29 Gmelina

1999 Magium 1.53 100.00 64.75 Teak 10.80 66.61 Eucalyptus 8.83 54.39 5.25 59.62 2.56 78.52 11.79 65.18 Subtotal 107.57 78.33 REFORESTATION 1998 Narra 34.86 46.41 46.41 Mahogany 5.49 Gmelina 4.92 Magium 46.57

1999 Teak 1.68 100.00 100.00 Eucalyptus Subtotal 93.52 47.37 REFORESTATION 1998 Narra 26.82 22.84 22.84 Mahogany 9.37 Gmelina 12.75 Magium 4.25

1999 Teak 10.99 45.07 45.31 Eucalyptus Subtotal 64.18 26.65 REFORESTATION 1998 Narra 5.06 20.70 20.70 Mahogany 1999 Gmelina 19.64 49.57 49.57 Magium Teak Eucalyptus Subtotal 24.70 43.66 TOTAL 289.97 53.86 AGROFORESTRY 1998 Mango 4.35 100.00 100.00 Cashew

1999 Nangka 27.91 88.12 88.12 Caimito Sineguelas Duhat Santol Subtotal 32.26 89.72 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 2. Subproject Performance Component/Species Year Planted Area Planted Survival WASR Planted AGROFORESTRY 1998 Mango 18.34 89.24 89.24 Cashew 77.35

2001 Nangka 25.08 97.56 97.56 Caimito Sineguelas Duhat Santol Subtotal 120.77 90.97 AGROFORESTRY 1998 Mango 363.29 91.98 91.98

1999 Cashew 2.54 - Nangka Caimito Sineguelas Duhat Santol Subtotal 365.83 91.33 AGROFORESTRY 1998 Mango 21.37 83.81 83.81

1999 Cashew 17.55 22.67 22.67 Subtotal 38.92 56.25 TOTAL 557.78 88.71 ENRICHMENT PLANTING 1998 Narra 14.72 100.00 100.00 1999 Mahogany 64.62 84.07 84.07 6.84 42.50 18.55 Subtotal 147.23 85.66 ENRICHMENT PLANTING 1999 Narra 128.71 76.52 76.52

2001 Mahogany 12.28 95.00 95.00 Gmelina A. auriculiformis Subtotal 140.99 78.13 ENRICHMENT PLANTING 1998 Narra 52.93 82.01 82.01 Mahogany 83.96

1999 Gmelina 182.76 85.60 85.60 A. auriculiformis Subtotal 319.65 83.28 ENRICHMENT PLANTING 1998 Narra 14.68 100.00 100.00

1999 Mahogany 67.60 85.84 85.84 Gmelina A. auriculiformis Subtotal 82.28 88.36 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 2. Subproject Performance Component/Species Year Planted Area Planted Survival WASR Planted TOTAL 690.15 83.34 RATTAN 1999 Palasan 109.39 89.20 89.20 2000 Palasan 10.24 80.40 80.40 Subtotal 119.63 88.44 RATTAN 1998 Palasan 71.91 91.20 91.20 1999 Palasan 22.26 91.00 91.00 2000 Palasan 5.63 81.66 81.66 Subtotal 99.80 90.63 RATTAN 1998 Palasan 57.92 82.80 82.80 2000 Palasan 77.79 84.20 84.20 Subtotal 135.71 83.60 TOTAL 355.14 87.20 GRAND TOTAL 1,893.04 81.14 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 3. Subproject Site Management Office Equipment Procured ITEM Specifications Qty Cost (PhP) Date/year procured 1. KIA Ceres Pick-up 1 5/5/2002 680,000.00 2. Power generator Engine, gasoline, 1 5/15/2001 44,096.00 GS 280, 3.5 KVA

3. Computer w/ HP Brio PC Intel 1 5/15/2001 70,850.00 software Pentium III 733 mhg 4. Printer Hp Deskjet 1 5/15/2001 5,811.52 model 840 C 5. UPS 500 VA Gamatronic 1 5/15/2001 5,720.00 Compact Model 520VA 6. GIS Software Comb software & 1 5/23/2001 44,460.00 (maptitude) geographic data

7. GPS Global positioning 2 5/23/2001 210,000.00 Promark X

8. Handheld Radio VHF, FM COM 1 2/28/2001 14,966.64 Transceiver Model IC-F3GT 9. Foresters Surveying 1 11/21/2001 34,840.00 transit compass, Ushikata, model S-27 10. Brunton Kataoke br., 1 5/15/2001 4,888.00 compass Model BCD-90 11. Steel/Nylon Tajima Br. 1 5/15/2001 1,350.00 Tape/Chain 12. Abney hand Model:OSK 17251 1 11/17/2001 2,392.00 level 13. Rain gauge Digital rainwise 1 5/31/2001 6,300.00 14. Lettering set Linemaster 2000 1 6/15/2001 4,992.00 (Leroy Set) 15. Desk & chairs Wood & 12 12/20/2001 36,000.00 monoblock 16. Camera Canon Zoom 85 & 2 12/20/2001 18,000.00 65 17. Petromax Super Gasul 2 12/20/2001 6,000.00 18. Steel cabinet Basteel 4 12/20/2001 24,000.00 19. Brushcutter Gasoline kawasaki 3 12/20/2001 24,000.00

20. Binocular 7X50 Diastone 2 6/15/2001 8,112.00 made in Japan 21. Calculator Casio 12 digits 4 12/1/2001 2,000.00 22. Motorcycle XL 125 3 2/8/2002 252,825.84 23. Base Radio 1 12/20/2001 24. Medical Kit 1 12/20/2001 25. Fire Fighting 1 12/20/2001 Equipment TOTAL 1,248,778.16 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 4. TRAININGS ATTENDED BY SUSIMO TRAINING TRAINORS NO. OF INCLUSIVES PARTICIPANT DATES S

1. Cross Visitation of JBIC-Funded DENR R-3, FRDD 16 May 22-27, 2000 projects in Region 1 and CAR

2. Orientation Course of SUSIMO JBIC 16 October 18-20, Staff for Watershed Subproject SitesNFDO-FSP 2000

3. Pre-Year-End Assessment and DENR R-3, FRDD- 22 November 15-17, Workshop on FSP Loan II USAID 2000 Implementation

4. Orientation/Re-orientation on FSP JBIC-NFDO 16 January 25-26, for POs cum Action Planning 2001 workshop

5. Re-echo Training on Geo-Based NFDO-FSP 25 July 24-27, 2001 Information System (GIS) for Subproject Site Management Office Staff

6. Forestry Sector Project NFDO-FSP 16 January 15-18, 2002 Year-End Assessment and Planning Workshop

7. Re-orientation Course of Project JBIC-NFDO 39 February 27-March Implementers of Watershed 2, 2002 Subproject sites

8. FSP Phase-out/Phase-in Planning JBIC-NFDO 42 October 14-18, Workshop 2002

9. Forestry Sector Project NFDO-FSP 39 May 14-16, 2003 Assessment & Planning Workshop

10. Cross Visitation of Forestry DENR R-3, FRDD 39 July 7-11, 2003 Sector Project at DENR Region V NFDO-FSP

11. Workshop on Project Completion DENR R-3, FRDD 37 September 3-7, Report (PCR) 2003 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

Table 5a. Livelihood Project Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Backyard Poultry

Implementor : MAWAFAS, Inc.

No. of Beneficiaries : 5

Amount of investment : PhP 21,603.50

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date started : Jun-99

Status : Suspended

Net Income : none

CFDF : none

Linkages Developed : none yet FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

Table 5b. Livelihood Project Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Hog Fattening

Implementor : MAWAFAS, Inc.

No. of Beneficiaries : 7

Amount of investment : PhP 42,044.75

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date started : Jun-99

Status : Suspended

Net Income none

CFDF : none

Linkages Developed : none yet FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

Table 5c. Livelihood Project Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Handicraft Making

Implementor : MAWAFAS, Inc.

No. of Beneficiaries : 10

Amount of investment : PhP 29,728.50

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date started : Sep-99

Status : Suspended

Net Income : none

CFDF : none

Linkages Developed : none yet FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

Table 5d. Livelihood Project Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Tilapia Production

Implementor : MAWAFAS, Inc.

No. of Beneficiaries : 20

Amount of investment : PhP 90,000.00

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date started : Sep-02

Status : On-going

Net Income : none yet

CFDF : PhP 230,000.00

Linkages Developed : none yet FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

Table 5e. Livelihood Project Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Micro-lending

Implementor : MAWAFAS, Inc.

No. of Beneficiaries : 7

Amount of investment : PhP 32,000.00

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date started : Feb-03

Status : On-going

Net Income : none yet

CFDF : PhP 230,000.00

Linkages Developed : none yet FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

Table 5f. Livelihood Project Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Camote Production

Implementor : MAWAFAS, Inc.

No. of Beneficiaries : 15

Amount of investment : PhP 40,000.00

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date started : May-03

Status : On-going

Net Income : PhP 16,950.00

CFDF : PhP 230,000.00

Linkages Developed : none yet FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 6. Subproject Status Report NAME/LOCATION STATUS OF PROGRESS PROJECT PROJECT COST Region OF THE (O:on going C: Completion) AREA (ha) (Mil peso) SUBPROJECT SMP CO CSD M & E INFRA

Mariveles Watershed Rehabilitation Subproject (So. Ginakan of Brgy. Biaan, Sos. Biaan and III Gabunyayay of Brgy. 1,893.00 39.069226 C C C C C Balon-Anito and Sos. Lilimbin and Palanas of Brgy. Camaya, Municipality of Mariveles, Bataan)

TOTAL 1,893.00 39.069226 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 7. SMP Cost Estimate Per Activity

TARGET UNIT OF UNIT ACTIVITY TOTAL COST OUTPUT MEASURE COST

I. SURVEY AND MAPPING

a. Perimeter survey, area 2000 ha 100 200,000.00 computation, site characterization and map preparation

b. Field Section and Blocking 2000 ha 75 150,000.00

c. Present Land Use Survey and 2000 ha 75 150,000.00 Mapping

d. Topographic Survey & Mapping 2000 ha 75 150,000.00

e. Soil/Land Capability Survey and 2000 ha 175 350,000.00 Mapping

f. Agro-socio economic studies 2000 ha 50 100,000.00 (ave. 3 household/ha.)

g. Climate, geology and water 2000 ha 50 100,000.00 resourced survey

SUB-TOTAL

II. PLANNING 2000 ha 75 150,000.00

a. Data synthesis and analysis

b. Report Writing

SUB-TOTAL GRAND TOTAL 2000 ha 675 1,350,000.00 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 8. Community Organizing Cost Estimate Per Activity UNIT ACTIVITIES TARGET of UNIT COST TOTAL COST MEASURE 1. Social Investigation 2,000.00 hectare 1,468.82 2,937,632.20

2. Information and Education 2,000.00 hectare 82.98 165,965.00 Campaign

3. Others (Identification of 2,000.00 hectare 198.20 396,402.80 possible CBFMA, Organizing and Community Activities)

TOTAL 2,000.00 hectare 1,750.00 3,500,000.00 Note: The Phase I and Phase II activities of CO was not followed under CO-FSP/JBIC. The cost ceiling for CO was based on MC 97-01 known as Implementing Guidelines on the conduct of Community Organizing under the FSP wherein the cost of CO contract is P1,800.00/ha. The cost for each CO activity was provided by the contractor. FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 9a. Cost Estimate For Agroforestry Per Activity TARGET UNIT OF UNIT TOTAL MAJOR ACTIVITY/ACTIVITY OUTPUT MEASURE COST COST 1. SEEDLING PRODUCTION a. Nursery Site Preparation 4,092.72 sq.m 49.82 203,909.72 b. Seeds/Planting Stock 66,507.00 sdlg 11.00 731,577.00 c. Soil Collection 66,507.00 sdlg 0.30 19,952.10 d. Bagging 66,507.00 sdlg 1.00 66,507.00 e. Maintenance & Fertilizer 66,507.00 sdlg 1.03 68,331.90 SUB-TOTAL 1,090,277.72 2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT a. Strip brushing/clearing 51,159.00 sdlg 0.41 20,967.44 b. Staking /hole digging 51,159.00 sdlg 0.18 9,200.87 c. Hauling/transport 56,275.00 sdlg 0.17 12,077.07 d. Planting 51,159.00 sdlg 1.16 59,336.69 SUB-TOTAL 101,582.07 3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer 51,159.00 sdlg 8.63 441,656.88 b. Replanting (including transport) 10,231.80 sdlg 5.20 53,205.36 c. Patrol Works 511.59 hectare 200.00 102,318.00 SUB-TOTAL 597,180.24 4. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION a. First and Second Year 83,848.42 b. Third Year 0.00 c. Fourth Year 51,459.49 d. Fifth Year 20,657.60 e. Sixth Year 31,885.23 SUB-TOTAL 187,850.73 TOTAL 511.59 hectare 3,864.21 1,976,890.76 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 9b. Cost Estimate for Enrichment Planting Per Activity

UNIT OF TARGET MAJOR ACTIVITY / ACTIVITY Unit Cost TOTAL COST MEASURE OUTPUT

1. SEEDLING PRODUCTION hectare 722.31 304.72 220,102.41 a. Nursery Site Preparation b. Planting Stock c. Soil Collection d. Bagging of soil & seedling e. Maintenance & Fertilizer SUB-TOTAL 220,102.41 2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT hectare 722.31 491.37 354,918.89 a. Strip brushing/clearing b. Staking /hole digging c. Hauling d. Planting e. Tools and materials SUB-TOTAL 354,918.89 3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION hectare 722.31 2,501.28 1,806,699.65 a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer b. Replanting c. Patrol Works d. Tools and materials SUB-TOTAL 1,806,699.65 4. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION a. First and Second Year 48,050.22 b. Third Year 10,687.95 c. Fourth Year 115,659.82 d. Fifth Year 44,220.10 e. Sixth Year 70,870.33 SUB-TOTAL 289,488.43 TOTAL hectare 722.31 3,698.15 2,671,209.38 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 9c. Cost Estimate For Rattan Per Activity

UNIT OF TARGET MAJOR ACTIVITY / ACTIVITY Unit Cost TOTAL COST MEASURE OUTPUT

1. SEEDLING PRODUCTION hectare 347.77 8,257.03 2,871,545.80 a. Nursery Site Preparation b. Planting Stock c. Soil Collection d. Bagging of soil & seedling e. Maintenance & Fertilizer SUB-TOTAL 2,871,545.80 2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT hectare 347.77 2,064.91 718,114.81 a. Strip brushing/clearing b. Staking /hole digging c. Hauling d. Planting SUB-TOTAL 718,114.81 3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION hectare 347.77 4,592.12 1,597,001.82 a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer b. Replanting c. Patrol Works d. Tools and materials SUB-TOTAL 1,597,001.82 4. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION a. First and Second Year 292,553.83 b. Third Year 4,606.00 c. Fourth Year 71,310.42 d. Fifth Year 84,127.62 e. Sixth Year 59,289.10 SUB-TOTAL 511,886.97 TOTAL ha 347.77 16,385.97 5,698,549.40 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 9d. Cost Estimate For Plantation Species/Reforestation Per Activity

UNIT OF TARGET MAJOR ACTIVITY / ACTIVITY Unit Cost TOTAL COST MEASURE OUTPUT 1. SEEDLING PRODUCTION hectare 311.33 6,586.20 2,050,481.50 a. Nursery Site Preparation b. Seeds/Planting Stock c. Soil Collection d. Bagging e. Maintenance & Fertilizer SUB-TOTAL 2,050,481.50 2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT hectare 311.33 4,536.01 1,412,196.03 a. Strip brushing/clearing b. Staking /hole digging c. Hauling/transport c. Planting SUB-TOTAL 1,412,196.03 3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION hectare 311.33 7,219.77 2,247,731.95 a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer b. Replanting(including transport) c. Patrol Works d. Tools & materials SUB-TOTAL 2,247,731.95 4. CSD Infrastructure a. Bunkhouse unit 3.00 105,876.57 317,629.70 b. Lookout Tower unit 6.00 11,824.32 70,945.94 c. Footpath sqm 10.00 3,697.30 36,973.03 d. Graded trail sqm 20.00 7,394.61 147,892.10 e. Fireline/firebreak sqm 24,073.00 1.05 25,243.72 SUB-TOTAL 598,684.49 5. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION a. First and Second Year 316,292.92 b. Third Year 31,542.25 c. Fourth Year 91,711.19 d. Fifth Year 156,791.71 e. Sixth Year 34,763.03 SUB-TOTAL 631,101.10 TOTAL hectare 311.33 22,292.09 6,940,195.06 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 MONITORING and EVALUATION Table 10. Cost Estimate Per Activity Unit Target ACTIVITIES of Unit Cost Total Cost Output Measure Physical Validation Component 1. Verification of Boundaries, UTM monuments and block 1,893.00 corner post ha 60.36 114,255.00

2. Seedling Production/Inventory Analysis 1,893.00 ha 77.54 146,780.00

3. Height and diameter measurement 1,893.00 59.29 112,230.00

4. Other activities - e.g. 1,893.00 ha 460.95 872,576.67 Inspection of Infrastructures & other support activities (organization of validation team, preparation of needed instrument, equipment and materials, levelling- off meeting with PO, AP, and DENR/SUSIMO, preparation of draft report, summary tables documentation, presentation/discussion of draft report to PO, DENR, LGU and AP, finalization and submission of report) II. Systematic Sampling (10%) 1,893.00 ha 790.49 1,496,400.00

5. Mobilization Fund 1,893.00 ha 114.44 216,628.50

S U B T O T A L 2,958,870.17

Institutional and Project Benefit Assessment 1. Data Collection and preliminary assessment 148,250.00

2. Formulation of findings and recommendation 1,893.00 ha 92.18 174,500.00

3. Other activities (e.g. organization of the 1,893.00 ha 56.66 107,250.00 team, leveling-off/meeting with PO ,SUSIMO, integration, preparation, presentation , finalization and submission of report to the DENR, LGU, PO) S U B T O T A L 430,000.00

III. Project Management Cost

S U B T O T A L G R A N D T O T A L 1,893.00 hectare 1,790.21 3,388,870.17 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

Table 11. Infrastructure Component

Infrastructure Project : Rehabilitation of farm-to-market road

Location : Barangay Biaan and Barangay Balon-Anito

Contractor : ABESCO, Inc.

Contract Cost : Php 12,980,720.87

Contract Duration : 450 calendar days

Effectivity of Notice to proceed : 15-Jan-02

Expected Completion date : Apr-02

Revised Completion date : Apr-02

Date of MOA with LGU :

Description of the Infrastructure Project

The project comprised two (2) sections, Balon-Anito with a net length of 3.908 km and Biaan-Camaya with a length of 3.571 km. Overall project length: 7.479 km (gravel pavement, side drainage and cross drain) FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 12. Annual Work and Financial Plan Planned Actual 1997 1998 ACTIVITIES Planned Actual Planned Actual Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Cost Total Cost Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

I. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM A. SMP 675.00 1,350,000.00 675.00 1,350,000.00 2,000.00 1,350,000.00 2,000.00 1,350,000.00 B. CO (Phase 1 & 2) 1,800.00 3,600,000.00 1,750.00 3,500,000.00 - - 2,000.00 1,779,120.00 2,000.00 1,636,893.70 1. Old Sites - - - Year 1 - - -Year 2 - - 2. New Sites 1,800.00 3,600,000.00 1,750.00 3,500,000.00 - - 2,000.00 1,779,120.00 2,000.00 1,636,893.70 - Year 1 1,779,120.00 1,636,893.70 2,000.00 1,779,120.00 2,000.00 1,636,893.70 -Year 2 1,820,880.00 1,863,106.30 C. CSD 9,663.09 19,326,187.15 9,429.28 17,849,635.23 - - - 8,357,496.00 3,758,293.32 1. Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping 281.83 563,664.77 281.40 562,790.64 2,000.00 563,664.77 2. Soil Erosion Control/SWC 1,135,462.19 - - - ###### 1,135,462.19 - a. Infrastructure - - b. Trails and footpath - - c. Plantation 1.10 1,135,462.19 - - - ###### 1,135,462.19 - c.1. Hedgerows/Firebreaks 1.10 1,135,462.19 - 1,031,250 spots 1,135,462.19 3. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment) 8,813.53 17,627,060.18 9,131.98 17,286,844.59 - - 1,603.00 6,658,369.03 1,124.00 3,758,293.32 a. Agroforestry 2,126.91 542,362.39 3,864.21 1,976,890.76 255.00 354,262.40 255.00 321,083.12 b. Assisted Natural Regeneration - - c. Enrichment Planting 5,911.34 461,084.79 3,698.15 2,671,209.38 78.00 275,353.03 63.00 155,231.32 d. Tree Plantation 9,972.17 16,623,613.00 19,175.76 12,638,744.46 - - 1,270.00 6,028,753.61 806.00 3,281,978.88 d.1. Bamboo - - d.2. Rattan 13,340.75 7,297,388.30 16,385.97 5,698,549.40 150.00 694,208.88 150.00 d.3. Mangrove - - d.4. Plantation Species 8,326.99 9,326,224.70 22,292.09 6,940,195.06 1,120.00 5,334,544.73 656.00 3,281,978.88 e. Timber Stand Improvement - - 4. Inventory Residual Forest - - 5. Income Enhancement Project - - fireline - 1.20 28,981.87 graded trail - 8,019.61 160,392.10 D. Major Infrastructure 9,589,131.49 12,980,720.87 E. Monitoring & Evaluation 1,045.00 1,444,190.00 1,790.21 3,388,870.17 - - - - -Year 1 1,045.00 1,444,190.00 292.45 553,606.17 -Year 2 - 741.29 1,403,264.00 -Year 3 - 756.47 1,432,000.00

2. SUSIMO 1,852,248.07 1,468,381.78 Equipment provided to the Office Researches conducted Trainings Others

GRAND TOTAL 37,161,756.71 40,537,608.05 1,350,000.00 1,350,000.00 10,136,616.00 5,395,187.02 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 12. Annual Work and Financial Plan 1999 2000 2001 ACTIVITIES Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

I. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM A. SMP B. CO (Phase 1 & 2) 2,000.00 1,820,880.00 2,000.00 1,408,152.20 - 2,000.00 454,954.10 - - - - 1. Old Sites - Year 1 -Year 2 2. New Sites 2,000.00 1,820,880.00 2,000.00 1,408,152.20 - 2,000.00 454,954.10 - - - Year 1 -Year 2 2,000.00 1,820,880.00 2,000.00 1,408,152.20 2,000.00 454,954.10 C. CSD 2,000.00 6,561,046.90 2,000.00 6,766,944.20 2,000.00 3,471,883.35 600,972.53 935,760.90 1,893.00 2,690,393.57 1. Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping 562,790.64 2. Soil Erosion Control/SWC ------a. Infrastructure b. Trails and footpath c. Plantation ------c.1. Hedgerows/Firebreaks 3. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment) 2,000.00 6,561,046.90 2,000.00 6,204,153.56 2,000.00 3,471,883.35 1,745.00 600,972.53 547.00 935,760.90 1,893.00 2,690,393.57 a. Agroforestry 255.00 94,050.00 255.00 804,505.99 255.00 94,050.00 511.59 419,355.08 b. Assisted Natural Regeneration c. Enrichment Planting 78.00 92,865.88 78.00 489,218.59 78.00 92,865.88 78.00 137,141.02 722.31 942,538.25 d. Tree Plantation 1,667.00 6,374,131.02 1,667.00 4,910,428.98 1,667.00 3,284,967.47 1,667.00 463,831.51 547.00 935,760.90 659.10 1,328,500.24 d.1. Bamboo d.2. Rattan 547.00 4,378,291.01 547.00 3,904,651.09 547.00 1,289,127.51 547.00 59,101.28 547.00 935,760.90 347.77 581,124.86 d.3. Mangrove d.4. Plantation Species 1,120.00 1,995,840.00 1,120.00 1,005,777.89 1,120.00 1,995,839.96 1,120.00 404,730.23 311.33 747,375.38 e. Timber Stand Improvement 4. Inventory Residual Forest 5. Income Enhancement Project fireline 22,500 sqm 5,450.03 graded trail 20 sqm 160,392.10 D. Major Infrastructure E. Monitoring & Evaluation 216,628.50 - 1,227,561.50 553,606.17 - - -Year 1 1,382.00 216,628.50 1,382.00 1,227,561.50 2,000.00 553,606.17 -Year 2 -Year 3

2. SUSIMO 772,773.67 773,968.38 Equipment provided to the Office Researches conducted Trainings Others

GRAND TOTAL 8,598,555.40 8,175,096.40 4,699,444.85 1,609,532.80 1,708,534.57 3,464,361.95 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 Table 12. Annual Work and Financial Plan 2002 2003 Planned (TOTAL) Actual (TOTAL) ACTIVITIES Planned Actual Planned Actual Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

I. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM - A. SMP 2,000.00 1,350,000.00 2,000.00 1,350,000.00 B. CO (Phase 1 & 2) - - - - 2,000.00 3,600,000.00 2,000.00 3,500,000.00 1. Old Sites - - - Year 1 - - -Year 2 - - 2. New Sites - - - 2,000.00 3,600,000.00 2,000.00 3,500,000.00 - Year 1 2,000.00 1,779,120.00 2,000.00 1,636,893.70 -Year 2 2,000.00 1,820,880.00 2,000.00 1,863,106.30 C. CSD - - 1,893.00 2,344,443.93 - - 1,893.00 1,688,587.68 2,000.00 19,326,187.15 1,893.00 17,849,635.23 1. Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping 2,000.00 563,664.77 2,000.00 562,790.64 2. Soil Erosion Control/SWC - - - - 1,031,250.00 1,135,462.19 - - a. Infrastructure - - - - b. Trails and footpath - - - - c. Plantation - - - - 1,031,250.00 1,135,462.19 - - c.1. Hedgerows/Firebreaks 1,031,250.00 1,135,462.19 - - 3. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment) - 1,893.00 2,344,443.93 - 1,893.00 1,688,587.68 2,000.00 17,627,060.18 1,893.00 17,286,844.59 a. Agroforestry 511.59 158,374.92 511.59 273,571.65 255.00 542,362.39 511.59 1,976,890.76 b. Assisted Natural Regeneration - - - - c. Enrichment Planting 722.31 339,020.78 722.31 608,059.42 78.00 461,084.79 722.31 2,671,209.38 d. Tree Plantation - 659.10 1,847,048.23 - 659.10 806,956.61 1,667.00 16,623,613.00 659.10 12,638,744.46 d.1. Bamboo - - - - d.2. Rattan 347.77 644,978.41 347.77 508,693.76 547.00 7,297,388.30 347.77 5,698,549.40 d.3. Mangrove - - - - d.4. Plantation Species 311.33 1,202,069.82 311.33 298,262.85 1,120.00 9,326,224.70 311.33 6,940,195.06 e. Timber Stand Improvement - - - - 4. Inventory Residual Forest - - - - 5. Income Enhancement Project - - - - fireline 24,073 sqm 23,531.84 - - 24,073.00 28,981.87 graded trail - - 20.00 160,392.10 D. Major Infrastructure 9,589,131.49 12,980,720.87 9,589,131.49 12,980,720.87 E. Monitoring & Evaluation - 1,403,264.00 - 1,432,000.00 1,382.00 1,444,190.00 1,893.00 3,388,870.17 -Year 1 1,382.00 1,444,190.00 1,893.00 553,606.17 -Year 2 1,893.00 1,403,264.00 - 1,893.00 1,403,264.00 -Year 3 1,893.00 1,432,000.00 - 1,893.00 1,432,000.00

2. SUSIMO 477,671.16 254,796.90 601,803.24 439,616.50 1,852,248.07 1,468,381.78 Equipment provided to the Office Researches conducted Trainings Others

GRAND TOTAL 10,066,802.65 16,983,225.70 601,803.24 3,560,204.18 37,161,756.71 40,537,608.05 Annex 1a

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF CO CONTRACTOR (Forest Development Foundation Inc.)

FDFI Executive Director/President

Advisory Group

Proj. A Proj. B CAMWRS Project

Project Coordinator/ Project Manager

Social Work Forestry Livelihood Forest Bookkeeping/ Rural Dev’t Extension Marketing Resource Accounting & Training / Networking Management Documentation IEC Linkaging

Annex 1b

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF MAWAFAS, Inc.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

EXECOM

Project Manager

Livelihood IEC/Membership Finance Forest Grievance Committee Committee Committee Protection Mediation

CSD

Area Manager Nursery in Charge

A1 A2 A3 A4 N1 N2 N3 N4

Annex 1c

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF M & E CONTRACTOR (UPLB Foundation, Inc.)

Project Leader & Watershed Management Expert

Socio- Community Forester Financial Agrofores political Development Analyst try Analyst Specialist Specialist

Project Technical Support Staff

Annex 1d

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF SUSIMO-MARIVELES WATERSHED SUBPROJECT

Site Management Officer

Administrative Support Unit

Community Site Development & Validation & Organizing & Management Unit Billing Unit Strengthening Unit

Annex 1e

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF INFRA CONTRACTOR ABESCO CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

PROJECT MANAGER

Project Engineer Environmental Engineer Material Engineer

Technician Site Supervisor Admin. Officer Operator Helper Driver Mechanic Helper Surveyor Draftsman Helper Payroll Purchaser / Clerk Canvasser Checker Typist Skilled Worker Laborer

Portion of plantation PO’s Nursery

Agro forestry Plantation

Farm-to-market road Monitoring & Protection

Inspection by DENR People’s Organization meeting evaluation team

Community Organizing Livelihood project – Tilapia Culture TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Mariveles Watershed Subproject

Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 1-2 N 14 ° 47 ' W 1,727.54 2-3 N 26 ° 4 ' W 829.98 3-4 N 78 ° 51 ' E 528.18 4-5 N 26 ° 50 ' W 32.40 5-6 N 68 ° 38 ' E 57.78 6-7 S 48 ° 59 ' E 53.86 7-8 N 78 ° 31 ' E 123.43 8-9 N 40 ° 35 ' W 136.53 9-10 N 83 ° 46 ' E 775.84 10-11 S 69 ° 22 ' E 774.51 11-12 N 87 ° 10 ' E 1,043.36 12-13 S 79 ° 23 ' E 526.85 13-14 N 89 ° 58 ' E 859.03 14-15 S 27 ° 43 ' E 280.29 15-16 S 49 ° 21 ' E 339.63 16-17 S 16 ° 20 ' E 565.25 17-18 S 81 ° 8 ' E 127.97 18-19 S 18 ° 28 ' E 171.21 19-20 S 87 ° 36 ' E 89.13 20-21 S 29 ° 37 ' E 163.87 21-22 S 67 ° 3 ' W 59.54 22-23 S 37 ° 41 ' E 86.72 23-24 S 15 ° 20 ' E 524.73 24-25 S 27 ° 31 ' E 958.56 25-26 S 74 ° 55 ' E 417.19 26-27 S 47 ° 12 ' E 484.43 27-28 S 25 ° 16 ' E 97.14 28-29 S 38 ° 55 ' E 311.29 29-30 S 1 ° 3 ' E 108.40 30-31 S 83 ° 8 ' W 1,587.90 31-32 N 89 ° 55 ' W 584.02 32-33 S 14 ° 50 ' W 402.13 33-34 S 44 ° 50 ' W 1,719.49 34-35 S 90 ° 0 ' W 71.02 TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Mariveles Watershed Subproject

Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 35-36 N 4 ° 48 ' W 58.92 36-37 N 56 ° 43 ' W 1,119.54 37-38 N 30 ° 42 ' W 54.23 38-39 N 60 ° 3 ' W 173.23 39-40 N 11 ° 24 ' W 232.91 40-41 N 11 ° 31 ' W 5,007.67 41-1 S 9 ° 49 ' W 2,950.76 Reference point: Corner 1: long-X 120 ° 26 ' 55 " lat-Y 14 28 ' 31 "

This Subproject Completed Report was produced by the National Forestation Development Office (NFDO) through the valuable assistance and contribution from the DENR, Region III PENRO, Bataan CENRO, Bataan and staff of the Subproject Site Management Office (SUSIMO)-MARIVELES