Final Report Annexes: Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

Submitted to the UN World Food Programme – Philippines May 1, 2011 www.emimegacities.org

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission. Requests for permission to reproduce for noncommercial distribution should be addressed to the Partnerships and Communications Unit of the WFP in the Philippines. This publication or any part thereof may be only be used without prior permission from EMI and WFP, provided that it is for educational or personal use only and that any reproduction of this publication or extract therefrom reproduced is attributed to EMI and WFP and the title of this publication is stated in any publication and that a copy thereof is sent to WFP.

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of EMI nor of WFP. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of EMI and WFP concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. All reasonable precautions have been taken by EMI and WFP to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall EMI or WFP be liable for damages arising from its use.

About the project This project is funded by the United Nations World Food Programme (UNWFP), Philippines and implemented by EMI. The main objective of the project is to map existing capacity development activities for disaster risk reduction, identify key gaps in capacity and recommend specific areas of intervention at the national level and in four (4) highly disaster‐prone provinces in Luzon.

United Nations World Food Programme, Philippines 5/F GC Corporate Plaza, 150 Legazpi St., Legazpi Village, Makati City 1229 Philippines Telephone: +63‐2‐7502561, 7519166, 8942730; Fax: +63‐2‐7502562 E‐mail: [email protected]; URL: www.wfp.org/countries/philippines

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative 2/F Puno Bldg., 47 Kalayaan Ave., Diliman, Quezon City 1101 Philippines Telefax: +63‐2‐9279643, +63‐2‐4334074; E‐mail: info@emi‐megacities.org; URL: www.emi‐megacities.org

Contributors Dr. Fouad Bendimerad, Chairman and Executive Director Mr. Jerome Zayas, Technical Manager Mr. Jose Mari Daclan, Project Manager Atty. Violeta Seva, Legal and Institutional Expert (Local) Dr. Asteya Santiago, Legal and Institutional Expert (National) Dr. Antonio Fernandez, Capacity Needs Assessment Expert (National) Mr. Marino Deocariza, Capacity Needs Assessment Expert (Local) Mr. James Buika, Disaster Preparedness and Response Trainer Mr. Leigh Lingad, Provincial Coordinator, Laguna Mr. Moses Kent Borinaga, Provincial Coordinator, Cagayan Mr. Jerome Cruz, Provincial Coordinator, Benguet Ms. Joyce Lyn Salunat, Provincial Coordinator, Sorsogon Mr. Jesus Dominic Dizon, Support Staff, Sorsogon

Table of Contents

I. Short Report on the Findings and Observations from the Disaster Preparedness and Response Trainer Field Investigation ...... 1 II. DRRI Indicators ...... 20 III. Disaster risk profiles of the 4 provinces ...... 33 IV. Field Investigation Reports ...... 68 V. List of Participants ...... 165 VI. Local DRM Related Documents ...... 199 VII. Summary of CNA Activities ...... 259 VIII. Capacity‐building Activities of WFP’s Collaborating Partners with Foreign Funding ...... 262 IX. Characterizing WFP’s Partner National Government Agencies ...... 264 X. DRR Capacity Building Activities of Non‐governmental Organizations ...... 268 XI. Mainstreaming Projects Implemented by the National Economic and Development Authority ...... 270

I. Short Report on the Findings and Observations from the Disaster Preparedness and Response Trainer Field Investigation

By James Buika, Disaster Preparedness and Response Trainer

Rationale for Training Program Partnerships

1. During 2011 and 2012, as mandated under the new law, Republic Act No. 10121, the Philippines will be moving towards a new paradigm of comprehensive disaster management, emphasizing preparedness and disaster risk reduction to compliment the nation’s strong emergency management operational organization. A key mandate under the new law is the requirement for all Local Government Units to establish and staff physical Disaster Risk Reduction Offices, with preparedness, training, and operations as three professional components for each office.

2. Although these organizational changes are still underway for all Local Government Units (LGUs), no clear guidance or professional training has been developed to assist LGUs with this mandated new task. The WFP‐EMI‐Philippines Partnership Training Program is designed to fill this immediate gap to build LGUs’ capacity in order to become compliant with the new disaster risk management law. The WFP‐EMI vision is that these local government changes will mimic state‐of‐the‐art disaster risk management systems throughout the world, developed and perfected over the past 20 years by the United Nations, the United States, and other advanced nations. Responsibilities for Disaster Risk Reduction at all levels of government within the Philippines is a new concept requiring a concerted training programme to move local governments towards fully implementing the intent of the new Disaster Risk Reduction and Management law.

3. UNWFP’s mandate is to reduce disaster risks by supporting governments and partners. Specifically, WFP’s Strategic Objective 2 from its Strategic Plan (2008‐2011) includes investing in disaster prevention, preparedness and mitigation measures. The objective of the Philippines Country Office is to design and build a disaster risk reduction programme based on understanding 1) risk, 2) prevention, and 3) preparedness. (Policy No. 5, 2009, WFP Policy on Disaster Risk Reduction).

4. UNWFP can benefit from EMI’s worldwide experience in disaster risk management, leadership in scientific knowledge, and its disaster management training capabilities.

5. This Capacity Needs Assessment provides a comprehensive understanding of gaps and needs from which a WFP‐specific training strategy and methodology are proposed.

6. Focused on improving WFP’s disaster risk reduction strategies in the Philippines, the common goal of the WFP‐EMI‐Philippines partnership is to integrate disaster risk reduction into local government programs, through a targeted training program, in order to prevent

acute hunger through investments in disaster preparedness and disaster risk reduction measures.

Analysis of Training Program Gaps and Suggested Support Requirements for Key National Level Agencies and Selected Provinces

Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)

DILG’s responsibility with local government units is far reaching at the regional, provincial, and local levels. DILG provides budgets for LGUs as well as dictates LGU policies regarding plans and preparedness role for disasters. DILG also coordinates training programmes at the LGU level across the nation. The DILG also oversees implementation and monitoring of required Comprehensive Development Plans and Comprehensive Land‐use Plans.

Under the new laws, LGUs are required to complete a plan for DRR and another plan for climate change, incorporating these new important elements into their CLUP and CDP. DILG, being the national agency most closely associated with LGUs in various aspects of governance, can potentially set the tone with respect to actual implementation of plans and a formal planning process. The EMI‐ WFP Programme can fill a gap by providing DILG and LGUs with guidance on DRR Plan Development and the principles of the Planning Process.

The DILG recognizes gaps in the existing DRRM system:

1. Of note, the DILG recognizes the difficulty faced by LGUs to create and operate a disaster risk management office that can operate with its own staff, budget and logistics. Certain provisions of the Local Government Code limits the capacity of the mayor and/or the local to immediately create the offices in terms of allocating physical space, ensuring salaried positions and the like, in the current fiscal year. LGUs had already done budgets when the law came out, this is taken into account in current financial planning. This indicates that some LGUs (especially the lower class municipalities) may not be able implement the law particularly for this fiscal year. Thus, training to fill a gap focused on creating local DRM offices would be of critical value to initiating implementation of the DRRM law at the LGU level.

2. The NDRRM Act requires an emergency operations plan at the regional/local level. LGUs also must have a contingency plan for worst‐case scenario. Such plans are still to be formulated in many LGUs with no guidance. Development of guidelines to help standardize LGU Emergency Operations Plans, based on International Standards, is warranted and would be an important beneficial contribution of the WFP‐EMI training programme that would fill a gap.

3. During emergency situations, DILG are tasked with monitoring the progression of events. This suggests a need to strengthen DILG’s capacity to monitor emergency situations, including damage assessment and needs assessment capabilities. OCD does assist with templates for data collection. Additional coordination and training on damage assessment

capabilities is warranted at all levels to fill apparent gaps in the Damage Assessment and Needs Assessment process. This focus would ultimately benefit the WFP mission.

4. The DRRM law requires that a disaster risk reduction and management council be set up from the national, provincial, municipal/city to barangay level. However, the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (Disaster Council) has not set forth guidelines that will enable the councils to function. The Disaster Council has not met to discuss how to operationalize the law. Thus, a gap of critical guidance at the national level still exists and must be addressed. The EMI‐WFP Training Programme can be at the forefront and anticipate some of the lacking guidance and fill in critical gaps, based on International Best Practices.

Department of Social Work and Development (DSWD)

The DSWD mandate and function is critical in areas of humanitarian assistance, including family assistance, shelter assistance, and disaster response operations monitoring. WFP works most closely with the DSWD to implement its disaster programmes.

The DSWD division has been reorganized as the Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Division, consisting of 3 units: (1) response and preparedness unit, (2) early recovery and rehabilitation unit and (3) special concerns unit. The altered structure organization was finalized in February 2011; however it is not fully implemented yet. DSWD Implementing Guidelines are under development. Each Department will draft their own implementing rules.

On the whole, DSWD is applying provisions of the NDRRRM Act despite the limitations of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the NDRRM Act. The DSWD has a close linkage with the WFP through Cash for Work and Food For Work projects. Within the new DRRM system, an added dimension is how to work together with a disaster risk management office within the LGU.

To promote and augment these mandates and responsibilities, DSWD has implemented a series of training programmes, via its training arm the Social Welfare and Institutional Development Bureau, at the local level, to include topics under Pre‐Disaster Response Services and Disaster Response Services. The Family and Community Preparedness training materials are being revised and enhanced as an add‐on to a two‐year UNDP Bicol Recovery Project grant. The revision was began in December 2010 incorporating best practices on DRR as well as the new National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act (NDRRMA). The training courses are being rolled out in May 2011 to other regions in to other regions. A major conference is being planned. The completed draft has several modules which include: (a) Planning process, (b) Basic laws and policies, (c) Identification participatory hazard mapping, d) Tabletop exercises, and (e) Installing an early warning system, to which new modules are being added. Topics not limited to prevention or DRR. EMI and WFP should look at these training enhancements in consideration of its own training DRR programmes.

DSWD recognizes key gaps in the DRRM system:

1. DSWD recognizes that gaps exist in the national damage assessment process, which at the moment is basically collection of damage information, i.e. without relating the data to cost of rehabilitation and recovery. DSWD coordinates with the Social Welfare Office at the regional level while OCD coordinates with Planning Office. The original source of data used by both OCD and DSWD is the same however – the Planning Office of the LGU. In some instances, interagency coordination at regional level may not work well. The files are in Excel and can be shared rather easily. The reason for gaps according to the interviewees is there little time to coordinate. It appears that the main reason is that each agency trusts its own data sources (planning, for OCD and Social Welfare Offices, for DSWD). Parallel damage assessment and situation reporting by DSWD and OCD need to be investigated further. Coordination and documentation of the National damage assessment process is an area for potential improvement via the EMI‐WFP Training Programme.

2. DSWD has no Emergency Operations Plan, which are essential to establishing regional response operations. In addition, few, if any, LGUs currently have the capability to respond to disasters in a timely manner through a coordinated emergency response operations plan. The EMI‐WFP Training Programme could fill a gap to improve response capabilities of LGUs through formulation of Emergency Operations Plans Templates and guidance on the required Planning Processes.

3. LGUs appear to be arbitrarily select evacuation sites. Schools are used as Evacuation Centers (EC) in many LGUs. In some regions, multi‐purpose halls or neighborhood centers have been constructed and used as EC. EC planning needs to be mainstreamed into the land use plan, especially as LGUs decide individually on the EC location. This identified gap of lack of planning directly reflects on WFP disaster relief and delivery programmes and can be addresses via the EMI‐WFP Training Programme.

4. DSWD expressed concerns about post‐disaster relief and response related to information and communication channels and media (such as consistency/accuracy of disaster data). This eventually translates the need to building capacity in this area, but also in the subject of post‐disaster damage and needs assessment. In the context of building capacity among the DSWD stakeholders while conducting WFP projects, training interventions in improving post‐ disaster food‐related issues may be appropriate. In connection with this, a training module concerning food and related aspects (such as health) may be designed for future training activities.

Office of Civil Defense (OCD)

The Office of Civil Defense recognizes that the country has adopted a paradigm shift from relief and response to preparedness and mitigation. As a key stakeholder in the new DRRM system, these major shifts present great challenges to the OCD organization, in terms of finances, human, logistics, and management guidelines. Four key functions of OCD under the new law are to: 1) establish national training institutes and associated training programmes and training materials; 2) conduct early recovery and post‐disaster needs assessments; 3) monitor and evaluate disaster risk reduction

components of existing plans; and 4) monitor and evaluate the progress of LGUs in meeting the provisions of the DRRM law.

OCD also formally recognizes the linkage of DRR and Climate Change Adaptation laws and has stated the need to consider actions that take the two into account in a consistent matter.

Within these new legal frameworks, OCD still has limited financial resources under both the new DRRM law and Climate Change Law and finds it desirable for international donors to provide a more comprehensive approach to assistance, including development and delivery of disaster risk reduction training programmes. OCD has consistently worked with international donors whom have developed and delivered past and available training programmes to various stakeholders, including LGUs.

The humanitarian assistance component of DRRM is a mainstay in the mandate of OCD and the DRRM law, particularly in a very disaster‐prone country. WFP’s role in this area is an expected one. However, OCD also agrees that pre‐disaster assistance is an area where WFP can help in terms of emergency preparedness and its many components (the most relevant appears to be stockpiling and contingency planning).

OCD has identified many important gaps that limits its ability to pursue a comprehensive training programme under the new laws. These gaps are identified in the WFP‐EMI Capacity Needs Assessment, to include: 1) limited funds, 2) limits on hiring additional personnel, 3) lack of sustainability of training programmes, 4) lack of guidance or tool kits to perform LGU evaluation and monitoring, 5) lack of strategic support to establish LGU DRM offices and Emergency Operations Plans (Contingency Plans), and 6) lack of training templates, tools, and guidance based on International Standards.

OCD is ready to partner with WFP and EMI, as a team player in the training programme, and encourages the partnership to bring forth Subject Matter Experts to assist with these suggested areas of training interest: 1) capacity building for the personnel of OCD in the provinces and regions, 2) technical know‐how for Disaster Risk Management office set‐up, needed equipment for response, 3) equipping the Emergency Operations Center, and 4) Emergency Operation Plan development templates. OCD is encouraged by the WFP partnership to assist OCD to pursue it training mandate. OCD also recognizes that the WFP project’s current provincial and municipal divisions can serve as pilot project areas for implementation of the new DRRM law.

Laguna Province

From the Laguna Province Focus Group Discussion, EMI recorded the following gaps and required information and training needs by this local government: a) education on the basic provisions of the new law; b) relevance and interrelatedness of other existing laws; c) proper appreciation of commonly used DRRM concepts; d) funding sources; e) organizational and structural improvements; and f) tapping other stakeholders.

1. Education on the basic provisions of the new law. LGU officials have a need for better understanding of the various concepts and terms used in DRRM law, more particularly now that there is a long list of definitions found in the law and in the Implementing Rules and Regulations, e. g. need for finer distinctions among the basic terms, as contingency plans from emergency plans or DRRM preparedness which they equate with precautionary measures. There is also the serious need for capacity building to generate resources to augment the government budgetary allocation since no LGU would ever consider themselves as having sufficient funds for their DRRM activities.

2. Relevance and interrelatedness of other existing laws. This includes, among other relevant laws, the Solid Waste Management Act where non compliance therewith, contribute to increasing hazards and risks ( ex‐land pollution resulting from improper disposal of wastes); and the Climate Change Law.

3. Proper appreciation of commonly used DRRM concepts. For example, there is a need to change the notion of local government’s heavy reliance on the government as exclusive immediate responders to include the participation of the community in response functions and all aspects of DRRM. Communities must be trained to become active participants in some simple tasks of assisting in community disaster preparedness, rescue operations, and risk reduction activities, to include their own able bodied members of their families and even of older children.

4. Fund Sourcing. There is still some misunderstanding on the use of Calamity funds. There is still no adequate and accurate knowledge of the provisions of the new law, nor any distinction between different types of funds and their utilization. Even the budget officers in the province and the towns of Pila and Mabitac still have to learn about the changed financial aspects of the law. They are still of the belief that these funds can only be utilized during actual calamity and not for other purposes that are allowed in the other stages of DRRM, under the new law.

5. Organizational and structural Improvements. Mabitac is located very close to other towns and their problem of quick response, especially where some disasters could trap their residents, (such as being a catch basin in case of floods) without immediate access to rescue operations could be solved through joint or clustered communities DRRM efforts which include developing their common plan for coping with specific disasters. This could be achieved through enactment of common ordinances which could reinforce each other. This embodies an approach of joint response and the enactment of joint tools or instruments for DRRM, which could result in complementing efforts and supplementing and augmenting available resources.

6. Tapping other stakeholders. The case of Laguna reveals the need to maximize the participation of other stakeholders such as the business sector and the academe in line with the following description that “capacity development is needed to build the ability of people, organizations and societies to manage their risks successfully.” This requires not only training and specialized technical assistance, but also the strengthening of the capacities of communities and individuals to recognize and reduce risks in their localities.

Basis for the WFPEMI Proposed Training Curriculum

1. The context of existing training materials, relevant available training programs, and the existing planning framework requirement of Local Comprehensive Development Plans and Comprehensive Land Use Plans;

2. The training needs expressed and documented for three (3) National agencies and twelve (12) targeted Local Government Units, during the WFP‐EMI Capacity Needs Assessment conducted during February and March 2011;

3. Interpretation of the Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010;

4. EMI experience in establishing emergency management systems at the local government level;

5. Known International Best Practices for emergency management systems;

6. Requirements of the UN World Food Programme to improve its delivery of food during humanitarian crises in the Philippines;

7. Requirements of the UN World Food Programme to meet its Strategic Planning Requirements, 2008‐2011, by working with strategic partners and governments, specifically, to strengthen its partnership with three key government agencies, namely, the Department of Social Welfare and Development, Department of Interior and Local Government, and the Office of Civil Defense; and

8. The World Food Programme’s desired direction to create a professional cadre of disaster managers at the local government level through a professional disaster risk reduction curriculum and eventual credentialing program.

Expected Outcomes of the Proposed Training Program

1. Clear guidance and tools for Local Governments to establish Disaster Risk Reduction Offices;

2. Improved information management and disaster response mechanisms in place for delivery of food and other assistance during disasters;

3. Guidance to Local Governments on the planning process required to understand, document, and prioritize mitigation and disaster risk reduction projects at the local level;

4. Guidance for developing Emergency Operations Plans and Disaster Risk Reduction Plans (Note that no actual plans will be produced as part of the training); and

5. A coherent curriculum for continued training of local government units in the Philippines.

Proposed Training Modules

EMI proposes development of five professional training modules that can be taught over a three‐day period, to include table top exercises and workshop‐oriented discussions. Each day would contain 4‐ to‐5 hours of training and workshop interactions.

The audience for the training will target professional staff of national agencies, regional and provincial level staff and designated LGU representatives, assumed to be competent in English.

Below is a list of five proposed training modules, with brief descriptions below:

1. Defining Roles and Responsibilities for Disaster Risk Reduction in the Philippines;

2. Establishing a LGU Emergency Management Office based on NDRRM Law and International Standards for Emergency Management Systems;

3. Guidance for Developing an Emergency Operation Plan Based on International Standards for Emergency Management Systems;

4. Damage Assessment and Situation Reporting Responsibilities and Methods at the LGU level and United Nations World Food Programme Logistical Delivery of Resources to LGUs Following Disasters; and

5. Guidance for Development of a Disaster Risk Reduction Plan as a Component of Comprehensive Land Use and Development Plans and Implementation of a Disaster Risk Reduction Planning Process.

DAY ONE, TRAINING MODULE 1: DEFINING ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN THE PHILIPPINES.

Learning objectives for Module 1 are to: 1) provide a common understanding of LGU obligations and responsibilities under Law 10121, 2) fully understand the various roles and responsibilities of local governments during and following a disaster, 3) to understand common functions that must be addressed by governments during disaster operations that are not part of daily routine responsibilities, and 4) to understand the national support mechanism for response and disaster risk reduction activities.

From the WFP‐EMI Capacity Needs Assessment document, translate the research and results into a useful training tool as a first introductory module. This assessment will become a valuable component for strategic planning for all agencies and LGUs to understand. This first training module provides a baseline of learning about the new Disaster Risk Reduction concepts in the law and corresponding LGUs responsibilities.

The WFP‐EMI Capacity Needs Assessment, 2011, represents the required baseline research for elements of future disaster‐risk‐reduction strategic planning under the Law 10121. The Capacity Needs Assessment has generated, at the minimum, the following set of information:

1) Current policy and institutional environment, particularly the structures and mechanisms of the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (NDRRM) and partner institutions in disaster risk reduction at the national level and the selected LGUs;

2) Inventory and review of the existing capacity development initiatives and practices in DRRM at the national level and the selected LGUs; and

3) Issues/concerns encountered by the sector/organization in pursuing their Disaster Risk Reduction agenda.

Develop a framework for LGUs regarding the current capacity of existing disaster risk reduction and management capabilities at the national, provincial, and local government levels. The Module will include presentation of the new law and proposed Disaster Risk Reduction and Emergency Management systems.

Define Disaster Risk Reduction organizational roles and responsibilities for National, Provincial, and LGU participants, as well as key United Nations Programmes with DRR responsibilities. Define how the system will function organizationally.

The module will include an effective “icebreaker” table top exercise that will be based on a disaster scenario crafted for each Province in order to: 1) review sections of the NDRRM law for LGU’s to “self‐discover” their responsibilities; 2) concur upon the proposed organizational relationships required; and 3) define the organization and construct of a local government unit Disaster Risk Reduction Office, and define its roles and operational responsibilities within the new law.

An interactive workshop will be conducted as part of the training to complete a Local Government Matrix defining specific local government responsibilities to manage defined disaster functions, to include Disaster Risk Reduction functions.

Length of Training Module 1: This module is envisioned as a three‐hour training, emphasizing a one‐ hour table‐top interactive session.

Modules 1 and 2 are envisioned as comprising a complete Day‐One Training Curriculum.

Day One, Training Module 2: Establishing a LGU Emergency Management Office based on NDRRM Law and International Standards for Emergency Management Systems.

Learning Objectives for Training Module 2 are to: 1) understand how to establish a local Disaster Risk Reduction Office and 2) understand the basic concepts of the Incident Command System organizational structure required to support a local Disaster Risk Reduction Office.

This second module will build on the NDRRM Law and defined roles and responsibilities in Module 1, to introduce and describe the necessary planning processes as well as steps required to establish an Emergency Management and Disaster Risk Reduction Organizational structure and local institutional improvements.

This module will include a suggested consultation for the LGU operational office on the following topics: a. Suggested local risk reduction ordinance based on the NDRRM Law;

b. Suggested office organization chart;

c. Suggested Mission Statement;

d. Suggested Position Descriptions and Job Duties based on International Standards, to include both operational and disaster risk reduction functions; and

e. Suggested Emergency Operations procedures and protocols for a local LGU office based on Incident Command System standards, as set forth for the Philippines.

Flexible guidelines will be developed on each of the above topics for operationalizing a local Disaster Risk Reduction Office. This guidance will be set forth as a curriculum and manual that can be trained in a group setting as well as discussed individually with each LGU, depending on its circumstances.

Length of Training Module 2: This module is envisioned as a two‐hour training, emphasizing interactive discussions, to include a table top exercise designed to reinforce the efficiency and importance of the Incident Command System organizational structure.

Modules 1 and 2 are envisioned as comprising a complete Day‐One Training Curriculum.

Day Two, Training Module 3: Guidance for Developing an Emergency Operation Plan Based on International Standards for Emergency Management Systems.

Learning objectives of Module 3 are to: 1) an understanding of the essential elements of a Basic Emergency Operations Plan and 2) an understanding of international standards for the development of such plans, to include the Emergency Operations Center, Incident Command System, and Emergency Support Functions, emphasizing the United Nations Cluster Approach.

Building on Modules 1 and 2 above, this module will provide a formatted structure for development of a local Emergency Operations Plan. A formal Emergency Operations Plan will not be developed – only a proposed Table of Contents with development guidelines will be covered, due to time limitations. The module will include a suggested Planning Process for development of the Emergency Operations Plan, with a projected time line for completion.

The Emergency Operations Plan structure will be formulated based on a two‐hour lecture on Emergency Management Systems that are included as part of the Emergency Operations Plan: a) the purpose and functions of a local Emergency Operations Center, b) Incident Command System organizational concepts to be implemented in the local Emergency Operations Center, and c) the Emergency Support Function System that defines roles and responsibilities for all response personnel, to include Disaster Risk Reduction personnel.

This module is designed to provide LGUs with a) an educational model to understand modern, state‐ of‐the‐art Emergency Management Systems used around the world as the basis for b) designing a practical yet comprehensive Basic Emergency Operations Plan that will define the local Disaster Risk Reduction Office organization and function.

Length of Training Module 3: The training module will be a minimum of three hours, with one hour devoted to training on the Emergency Operations Plan structure and two hours devoted to training on Emergency Management Systems that are required to be addressed by the Emergency Operations Plan.

Modules 3 and 4 are envisioned as comprising a complete Day‐Two Training Curriculum.

Day Two, Training Module 4: Damage Assessment and Situation Reporting Responsibilities and Methods at the LGU Level and United Nations World Food Programme Logistical Delivery of Resources to LGUs Following Disasters

Learning Objectives for Training Module 4 are to: 1) document a common understanding at the LGU level of the damage assessment process as a critical component of response operations; 2) understand damage assessment and situation reporting roles and responsibilities at all vertical levels, including the LGU role; 3) understand that documentation of the initial damage and needs assessment in a disaster leads to positive relief and recovery efforts at the local level; and 4) understand how to systematically collect required information and report this information in order to gain critical resources locally, including resources and assets from the UN World Food Programme.

As part of any significant disaster operation, damage assessment, needs assessment, and situation assessment reporting must be performed and thus, understood, at the local level. Damage assessment, documentation, and reporting is the key to critically understanding vulnerabilities and priorities of risk reduction. Thus, risk reduction activities begin at the onset of a disaster through damage assessment, documentation and reporting. Local risk reduction activities will be fully addressed as a component of Module 5, below.

These systems and reporting procedures are in place in the Philippines, have been exercised, and some training exists as part of this disaster function. However, according to EMI findings, even national level government personnel are not clear on reporting and documentation procedures. The objective of this training module is to document a common understanding at the LGU level of these critical assessment and response operations. Along with Search and Rescue and life saving priorities, activities associated with damage assessment become parallel priority response operations. The training module, designed for a provincial and LGU audience, will focus on documenting established and existing damage assessment techniques, processes, and protocols as well as established situation assessment reporting. Physical, social, environmental and economic data collection required by National and Provincial governments will be documented and described in the training module. The training will include an understanding and documentation of DSWD’s and WFP’s damage assessment data requirements in order to refine situation reports for improved delivery of critical relief supplies.

As part of this module, a table top exercise will be conducted for the four targeted provinces to formalize the damage assessment and reporting process with the national government, with the WFP, and other critical relief organizations. The exercise will help to define damage assessment and situation reporting roles and responsibilities at all vertical levels, including the LGU reporting role.

Research and documentation for this training module by EMI and WFP will improve capacity to create a more integrated damage assessment reporting process, to be documented and verified at the provincial, regional, and national levels for three national organizations that integrate with WFP ‐ ‐‐ DILG, DSWD and OCD. The module will define the LGU role in the damage assessment and situation assessment/needs assessment reporting process. The module will specify delivery of food and related resources from the WFP via WFP’s roles with DSWD, DILG, and OCD.

This module will require background research and documentation by EMI Local Investigators with identified National, LGU, and WFP representatives.

Modules 3 and 4 are envisioned as comprising a complete Day‐Two Training Curriculum.

Day Three, Training Module 5: Guidance for Development of a Disaster Risk Reduction Plan as a Component of Comprehensive Land Use and Development Plans and Implementation of a Disaster Risk Reduction Planning Process.

Learning Objectives for Training Module 5 are to: 1) understand how to structure a local Disaster Risk Reduction Plan as part of the required LGU Comprehensive Plans; 2) understand types of risk reduction projects that can be funded; 3) understand what funds are available and how to access these funds for disaster risk reduction activities; and 4) understand the Planning Process involved in developing a local Disaster Risk Reduction Plan as part of the NDRRM law as well as part of the disaster recovery process.

Training Module 5 is a logical follow‐on to Module 4, which pertains to disaster assessment and needs assessment, and will train LGUs to produce a Disaster Risk Reduction Plan as part of its

Comprehensive Plans and to update Disaster Risk Reduction Plans following significant local disasters.

As noted in Module 4, disaster damage assessment, documentation, and reporting is the key to understanding vulnerabilities and priorities for risk reduction. Thus, risk reduction activities begin at the onset of a disaster through damage assessment, documentation and reporting. Module 5 training will provide a proposed outline for a Disaster Risk Reduction Plan for LGUs as well as describe the required risk reduction planning process. The risk reduction planning process focuses on identifying and documenting local vulnerabilities and risks in a report format in order gain consensus on prioritizing risk reduction projects for identified vulnerabilities at the community level.

The risk reduction planning process should be put in place to document and understand the social, physical, environmental, and economic impacts from specific disasters and scenario disasters. This documentation process leads to lessons learned, resulting in improved processes, and identification of vulnerabilities, listing of vulnerabilities, and consensus priority for minimizing identified risks with systematic lessening of risk over time. Types of mitigation practices include land use, building codes, flood control, strengthening of structures, avoidance, and movement of communities out of harms way – these topics become chapters in a LGU Disaster Risk Reduction Plan. The Planning Process will emphasize the importance of forming a Disaster Risk Reduction Council and deliberation and decisions of this council. The module will emphasize integration of a DRR team into the recovery process in order to extend disaster risk reduction as part of the recovery process. A Table Top Exercise is envisioned to highlight the required Planning Process in order to formulate a local Disaster Risk Reduction Planning Council, technical planning team, and implementation process.

The module will provide several examples of Best Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction Plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans and from around the world (focused on local level). Examples of state‐of‐ the‐art US Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team Reports and Mitigation strategies will be provided (note that hazard mitigation planning process is a mature process in the United States and updated hazard mitigation plans are required to receive future disaster funds at local government levels). This module will also provide references to Sound Practice examples from the Philippines and from other similar local governments from around the world.

Module 5 will require initial research and coordination with DILG to examine and document the structure and content of existing LGU Comprehensive Plans and Land‐use Plans. With concurrence from DILG, the module will suggest how to integrate a logical disaster risk reduction component into these mandatory plans. The module will present a suggested Table of Contents for a Disaster Risk Reduction Plan, as well as guidelines to develop each section. Financial opportunities and constraints of the Disaster Risk Reduction implementation process will be researched and presented.

A second short table top exercise can be devised to identify specific local projects as part of the Disaster Risk Reduction Plan and to undertake an examination of local financial policies for directed use of the Calamity fund for risk reduction projects.

This module will require research into available LGU Plans and financial management schemes allowed under the NDRRM law by EMI Local Investigators with cooperation of identified National and LGU representatives.

Length of Training Module 5: This module is envisioned as a three‐hour training session with one or two short table‐top exercises built into it.

Module 5 is envisioned as comprising the Day‐Three Training Curriculum as a standalone module, completed in a morning session followed by concluding ceremonies, presentation of training certificates, and lunch. Module 5 is envisioned as a joint presentation with DILG and other subject matter expert trainers.

Preliminary Training Development and Delivery Strategy

The Training Development and Delivery Strategy is summarized as seven phases, in Figure 1, below, with further details provided by the timeline following Figure 1.

•Creation of Project Implementation Team and Project Advisory Group, explained below, & definition of roles; assign Subject Matter Experts and Local Investigators. •Discuss and finalize details for the training workshops; and determine the expectation Phase I: for the final product, reporting protocols, requirements and points of contact May 2011 •Gain feedback from WFP of proposed SOW and resource commitments. Kick Off Meeting

•Determine the composition of TDT, the individual assignments, contracts, resource requirements, and conduct the Project Initiation Meeting and assemble research mats. Phase II: •Develop training modules, outreach strategy, media strategy; produce draft format June 2011 product development w/ corresponding guidelines; Finalize Project Roll-Out strategy. Assemble Dev't Team

•EMI-WFP to present proposed Training Programme to PIT and PAG. •Assemble and distribute typical research materials for all researchers to study. Phase III: •SME to determine research topics for EMI research staff to complete; EMI LI will July 2011 interview and assemble data for modules 1-5 under the guidance by SMEs. Data Collection •SMEs and LIs to track progress, references, and National-LGU Points of Contact. for Training Materials

•Produce final format for product development with product development guidelines. •SMEs to begin development of Training Module content. Phase III: •Finalize Training Programme with draft detailed Table of Contents per module by end Aug. 2011 of July. Gain approval by WFP by end of August. Data Collection •Organize an Informational and Outreach Workshop for participants. for Training Materials

•Continue developing training module, develop sample Slide Cast and sample products for internal and WFP review. Phase IV: •Conduct Outreach Workshop for defined audience. Sep. 2011 Content Development

•Provide mid-term feedback to PAG and gain for final enhancements. Phase IV: •PAG to plan for dates, venues and training program. Oct. 2011 Content Development

•Finalize content development by combined team. •WFP to review and gain feedback on Draft Content. Phase V: •Format and finalize product development. Nov. 2011 Finalize Product Development

•Develop logistics for training workshops. Identify targeted audience. Phase V: Dec. 2011 Finalize Product Development

•WFP Final Review Phase VI: •EMI final content revisions, Training Manual compilation (final product delivery). Jan. 2011 WFP Approval & Completion

•Complete training program logistics. Phase VI: Feb. 2011 WFP Approval & Completion

•EMI to complete training. Phase VII: •Finalize all product deliverables by end of March, 2012. Mar. 2011 Conduct of Training

•Submission of other relevant documents (e.g. Financial Report) Phase VII: Apr. 2011 Completion of Project

Figure 1: Summary of Training Development and Delivery Strategy. The Training Development and Delivery Strategy is summarized as seven phases, in Figure 1, above, with further details provided by the timeline provided below.

I. Month 1, May 2011: Conduct Kick‐Off Meeting with WFP, EMI and Government representatives. Define Project Scope of Work and key project parameters.

1. Define a Project Implementation Team (PIT), Subject Matter Experts, and Local Investigators. Define a National Government Training Programme Advisory Group (PAG) to include representatives from key Philippines agencies and define PIT and PAG roles, to include advisement, product review, education, and project outreach.

2. Discuss final envisioned training workshops. Identify targeted audiences. Define the final product.

3. Determine expectations on final product delivery. Define format for final product delivery. Discuss and agree to timelines, delivery steps, and schedule.

4. Define and concur on production resources and budget limitations.

5. Gain feedback from WFP on proposed Scope of Work and resource commitment. Accomplish changes to scope. Agree to Scope of Work on Training topics – add to content.

6. Define reporting protocols, requirements, and Points of Contact.

II. Month 2, June: Assemble Development Team, Support Resources, and Assign Tasks. Further define training content, Outreach Strategy, Media Strategy, and Project Roll‐ Out Strategy. Finalize contracts.

1. Define Technical Development Team and support resources.

2. Develop Training Module Topics and Outlines.

3. Produce draft format for product development with product development guidelines.

4. Develop specific tasking for each project member. Assign Research Project Tasks and Training Development Tasks.

5. Complete contracts and assignments with all researchers (Local Investigators) and curriculum developers.

6. Develop an initial Outreach Strategy and Media Strategy.

7. Conduct a Project Initiation Meeting with the development team.

8. Finalize Project Roll‐Out Strategy for WFP comment and concurrence, to include all items above.

9. Begin an assembly of a common body of research materials for all researchers and trainers to study.

10. Provide each training curriculum developer with appropriate background and research materials. Allow time to complete background reading and questions.

III. Months 3 – 4, July – August: Complete background research, Philippine interviews and data collection for defined training manuals. Note: Content development begins with Local Expert focus.

1. EMI‐WFP to present proposed Training Programme to Project Implementation Team and National Government Training Programme Advisory Group.

2. Assemble and distribute a common body of research materials for all researchers to study.

3. Each SME will define on‐the‐ground research to be conducted and assign EMI research staff to complete data collection. EMI Local Investigators will be tasked to interview and assemble key data collection components for Training Modules 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, guided by Subject Matter Experts.

4. Subject Matter Experts and Local Investigators to track progress with assignments.

5. Subject Matter Experts and Local Investigators to track a bibliography of resources, defining primary and secondary resources.

6. Subject Matter Experts and Local Investigators to track National, Provincial, and LGU Points of Contact.

7. Produce final format for product development with product development guidelines, with input from all team members.

8. Subject Matter Experts to begin development of Training Module content with monthly updates to WFP.

9. Finalize Training Programme with draft detailed Table of Contents per module by end of July. Gain approval by WFP by end of August.

10. Organize an Informational and Outreach Workshop for participants. Define preliminary targeted training persons, by organization, then by name.

IV. Months 5‐6, September ‐ October: Focus on Content Development for all Training Modules. Gain Feedback from key constituents. Note, content development shifts to Curriculum Developers.

1. Continue development of Training Module content with monthly updates to WFP. Content development will shift to SMEs for each module.

2. EMI technical team to develop sample Slide Cast sample products for internal and WFP review.

3. Conduct above Informational and Outreach Workshop for a defined audience.

4. Provide Mid‐term feedback to PAG. Brief out on product progress and gain feedback for final enhancements. With PAG, develop dates and venues for training programme.

V. Months 7‐8, November ‐ December: Finalize product development and translate into desired training medium.

1. Finalize content development by combined team.

2. WFP to review and gain feedback on Draft Content.

3. Format and finalize product development.

4. Develop logistics for training workshops. Identify targeted audience.

VI. Months 9‐10, January ‐ February 2012: WFP Review and Approval and Final Product Completion.

1. WFP Final Review.

2. EMI final content revisions, Training Manual compilation (final product delivery).

3. Complete training programme logistics.

VII. Months 11‐12, March‐April, 2012: Training Conduct and Administrative completion of project.

1. EMI to complete training.

2. Finalize all product deliverables by end of March, 2012.

II. DRRI Indicators

Introduction

The Disaster Risk Reduction Indicators (DRRI) tool was developed by Dr. Bijan Khazai and Dr. Fouad Bendimerad to capture the potential for achieving risk resiliency in each of the different sectors analyzed in the Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP) of EMI based on pre‐defined benchmarks and performance targets. The DRRI has been designed to be simple at an initial stage to implement the vision that the indicators be adopted and used by the stakeholders. As a tool, DRRI relies on the moderator’s grasp on the concepts of mainstreaming and resiliency.

Resiliency has been given various definitions depending on the context to which it is applied. One can define resiliency of physical, social and institutional systems, and in all cases it indicates the commonly understood and accepted goal of being able to adapt to and cope with adverse conditions. The concept of resiliency has found its way into disaster risk management. It is mentioned in the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), which establishes for itself a goal of "building resilience in nations and communities", and more recently in the United Nations campaign for urban disaster reduction, which has been undertaken under the banner “Making Cities Resilient”1. The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UN‐ISDR) defines resiliency as: “Capacity of an individual, community, organization, city and nation to respond, cope and recover from disaster”. The DRMMP is built around EMI’s concept of mainstreaming, and thus resiliency is linked to the mainstreaming recommendations of the DRMMP as explained below.

Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) means that local governments need to develop or modify laws, policies, institutional arrangements and capacities, as well as plans and projects to integrate disaster risk reduction within their governance, operational, functional and developmental processes. In the context of the DRMMP, effectiveness in mainstreaming DRR, and achieving resiliency, at the local level can be seen as a function of the organizational ability of its key institutions as well as their capacity and level of preparedness and planning to protect lives and property in the city or municipality following a disaster.

Descriptions of indicators

The rationale for selecting the 10 DRRRI indicators can be traced in the Figure below by following the information from top to bottom of the chart. The main aim of the DRRRI indicators is to track progress on the mainstreaming of risk reduction approaches in the city’s organizational, functional, operational and development systems and processes. The mainstreaming goal is further divided into three strategic goals shown in the chart. Each of the strategic goals corresponds to one or more key areas analyzed in the DRMMP where these goals are to be implemented. Finally, two indicators corresponding to each of the five key areas of mainstreaming are shown. Mainstreaming risk reduction and achieving risk resiliency cuts across all the key areas and all the 10 indicators shown below. Thus, the stakeholders using and scoring the indicators should look at all 10 indicators

1 UN‐ISDR World Disaster Reduction Campaign 2010‐2011, Making Cities Resilient: "My city is getting ready" http://www.unisdr.org/english/campaigns/campaign2010‐2011/

together from the perspective of their institutions, and not only the indicators that relate most closely to their activities.

The following are descriptions of the 10 Indicators: Areas Indicators Description

Indicator 1: Effectiveness This indicator measures the effectiveness of laws, policies, of Legislative Framework ordinances and regulations pertaining to the Local Government Unit and affiliated institutions for achieving risk reduction.

Institutional Indicator 2: Effectiveness This indicator measures the effectiveness of the organizational and

of Institutional structures and institutional arrangements and their ability to Arrangements coordinate their activities to support the processes and policies Legal outlined in the DRMMP. Indicator 3: Training and This indicator measures the capacity of the various institutions at

Capacity Building the provincial or municipal level and the extent to which systematic and coordinated training and capacity building Building

programs are implemented. Indicator 4: Advocacy, This indicator measures the capacity of the various institutions at Communication, the provincial or municipal level to efficiently advocate for disaster Capacity Education and Public risk reduction, manage knowledge, and facilitate research and Awareness activities as well as efforts to reach out and inform the public of the various threats facing Mumbai and promote its mitigation. This indicator also measures the extent to which public awareness has been operationalized as the ‘awareness of the need for risk Awareness reduction’. Indicator 5: Resiliency of This indicator measures the resiliency of infrastructure, healthcare

Critical Services and shelter on issues ranging from emergency shelter and healthcare services to living and livelihood conditions of slums to deteriorated urban areas at risk for improvement. Services, Indicator 6: Resiliency of This indicator measures the resiliency in the water, storm Infrastructure drainage, waste water and transportation systems within the LGU Infrastructure

Critical in terms of the extent of service disruptions and recovery time of these systems. Indicator 7: Emergency This indicator measures the effectiveness of pre‐disaster planning

Management for emergency response and the capacities of the Municipality in post‐disaster response. Indicator 8: Resource This indicator measures the extent of resource management and

Emergency Management, Logistics logistical support for emergency response and the systematic Preparedness, and Contingency Planning identification of resource requirements, shortfalls and inventories.

Indicator 9: Hazard, This indicator measures the effectiveness of how hazard,

Vulnerability and Risk vulnerability and risks are understood and action is taken to assess Assessment their risk and to guide DRR policy. Regulation

Indicator 10: Risk‐ This indicator measures the effectiveness in implementing various Sensitive Urban risk reduction measures ranging from reinforcing and retrofitting

Development Development and of public and private assets to risk consideration in land use urban planning, urban development, and slum rehabilitation projects. Planning, Mitigation

Ranking tool The following are the indicators, formatted and utilized during the DRRI Workshops.

Indicator 1: Effectiveness of Legislative Framework INDICATOR 1: Effectiveness of Legislative Framework Group The aim of this indicator is to measure the effectiveness of laws, policies, ordinances and regulations for achieving risk reduction.

GUIDE QUESTIONS Round • How are DRR policies articulated?

• How well are the DRR policies complied with? How well is

accountability practiced?

• Are there sufficient resources (financial, human) allocated for DRR

• ? How are they sustained?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ Little or no ‐ Local laws and ‐ Recognition of the ‐ Existing legislative ‐ Existing DRR understanding of policies do not need to coordinate framework for laws and relevance or reflect relevant legislation and disaster policies on disaster risk importance of DRR national or policies to reduce management with realistic, provincial disaster risks achievable legislation on DRR goals for mainstreaming

‐ Compliance and accountability measures are effective and operational with policy and practice strictly following the law Explanation/Comments:

Indicator 2: Effectiveness of Institutional Arrangements INDICATOR 2: Effectiveness of Institutional Arrangements Group The aim of this indicator is to measure the effectiveness of the organizational structures and institutional arrangements and their ability to coordinate their activities to support DRR processes and policies. Round GUIDE QUESTIONS • Are roles and responsibilities well defined among the relevant organizations? How well are the arrangements working? • How are institutional processes assessed (reviewed), updated, enforced, monitored and reported? • What partnerships exist among civil society, communities and the government? How well are these working?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ Non‐functioning ‐ Limited ‐ Generally ‐ Institutional ‐ Functional and institutional cooperation for functional strategy for DRR operational arrangements DRR among institutional exists with institutional arrangements to successful arrangements institutions deal with disaster implementation in ‐ No viable strategy issues some areas ‐ Clearly defined for DRR, ‐ Recognition of need roles and institutions reactive for greater inter‐ ‐ Participation in ‐ Adoption is responsibilities in disaster planning institutional many DRR disjointed in other regarding coordination for initiatives areas because of preparedness, DRR lack of ownership, mitigation, ‐ Moving towards capacity or political response and pro‐active disaster will recovery issues planning of disaster management.

Explanation/Comments:

INDICATOR 3: Training and Capacity Building INDICATOR 3: Training and Capacity Building The aim of this indicator is to measure the capacity of the various institutions at Group MCGM and the extent to which systematic and coordinated training and capacity building programs are implemented.

Round GUIDE QUESTIONS • Are resources programmed for training and capacity building? Are these activities evaluated? How appropriate are these activities to the requirements? • Are there appropriate means to build, store and diffuse knowledge (e.g., lessons learned)? How well is knowledge packaged for specific target groups?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ Little or no capacity ‐ Importance of ‐ Existing plans to ‐ Institutional ‐ High level of to understand disaster reduction allocate human and capacity for risk institutional disaster risk issues training and financial resources reduction is being capacity to and put in place capacity building is to develop strengthened in all support all DRR DRR mainstreaming approaches recognized institutional sectors processes capacities for ‐ Training programs ‐ Some training mainstreaming DRR ‐ Strategy to offer ‐ Strong are offered but not programs are training and competency in well attended offered, but there is ‐ DRR training and capacity building many still a lack of capacity building programs in a departments institutional programs are under systematic and training vision development and coordinated some are offered in manner is in place various sectors

Explanation/Comments:

INDICATOR 4: Advocacy, Communication, Education and Public Awareness INDICATOR 4: Advocacy, Communication, Education and Public Awareness Group

The aim of this indicator is to measure capacity to efficiently advocate for disaster risk reduction, manage knowledge, facilitate research activities, as well as efforts to reach out and inform the public of the various threats facing the LGU and Round promote its mitigation.

GUIDE QUESTIONS • Are there advocacy and public awareness and education programs that engage all relevant audiences and stakeholders including civil society and community organizations? • What participatory processes are in place? How do you involve the community? • What means are used to disseminate information (e.g., Information Technology and Communication (ITC)?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ No efforts ‐ Public education ‐ There is a ‐ Existing policy ‐ Advocacy undertaken in and communication structured recognizes campaigns public education efforts are advocacy program importance of risk reach deeply and communication infrequent and the value of communication and into institutions of disaster risk risk communication public education and among the ‐ Involvement in is understood and population disaster risk supported ‐ Effective advocacy including those management is institutionally and strategic most at risk based on individual communication efforts rather than ‐ Process is still system involving a ‐ Many people as part of under development broad range of and institutional policy and not matured stakeholders organizations involved in DRM of the LGU and participate in the decision‐ making process

Explanation/Comments:

INDICATOR 5: Resiliency of Critical Services INDICATOR 5: Resiliency of Critical Services The aim of this indicator is to measure the resiliency of infrastructure, healthcare Group and shelter.

GUIDE QUESTIONS Round • How inclusive, participatory and transparent are policies and programs for marginalized groups and/or people living in hazard‐ prone areas?

• How safe are living (i.e. shelter) conditions against disasters? Are there safety nets such as options for shelter and livelihood (i.e. access to and availability critical services including opportunities for livelihood)? • How resilient are health services during a disaster? Can health services be rendered even during a disaster?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ Very few ‐ Some protocols and ‐ Institution has ‐ The institution has ‐ Investments institutional plans have been developed operational plans have been programs and adopted for operational plans and coordination allocated based policies for building ensuring resiliency and made some mechanisms for on assessment resilience in the of shelter and investment to developing greater of impacts to critical service healthcare system, increase resiliency resiliency of health upgrade the providing facilities but these plans are of critical services and housing infrastructure such as healthcare not coordinated services based on and incorporate centers and shelter with different ‐ This process is an assessment of more resiliency actors and ongoing and has impact in the provision stakeholders not yet matured of shelter and healthcare services.

Explanation/Comments:

INDICATOR 6: Resiliency of Infrastructure INDICATOR 6: Resiliency of Infrastructure The aim of this indicator is to measure the resiliency in the water, storm drainage, Group waste water and transportation systems of the LGU in terms of the extent of service disruptions and recovery time of these systems.

GUIDE QUESTIONS Round • How resilient are the water, sewer and storm drainage systems? • How resilient are transportation systems? • Are there provisions for contingency in the delivery of essential

services? • How resilient are food storage and distribution systems? • Is risk built into the design of flood mitigation structures and others such measures?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ No studies of ‐ Particular ‐ The institution has ‐ LGU invests in ‐ Detailed impacts to departments may carried out some upgrading and studies infrastructure have detailed studies of impact to strengthening its conducted to systems information about its infrastructure infrastructure assess the different against the most magnitude of ‐ No investment in infrastructure ‐ Investments made immediate threats infrastructure increasing systems. to update and losses and resiliency of strengthen some of ‐ In most barangays, recovery times infrastructure ‐ No institutional its most vulnerable infrastructure can for multiple systems knowledge of the networks be restored at an hazards resiliency of adequate rate and infrastructure the magnitude of ‐ Infrastructure systems in terms of losses is reduced services in all service disruptions significantly parts of the and recovery time LGU can be after a disaster quickly restored to pre‐ disaster levels to minimize impacts to society and businesses.

Explanation/Comments:

INDICATOR 7: Emergency Management INDICATOR 7: Emergency Management This indicator measures the effectiveness of pre‐disaster planning for emergency Group response and the capacities of the LGU in post‐disaster response.

GUIDE QUESTIONS Round • Is there a functioning Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) with Basic Plan and Emergency Support Functions (ESF) system? • Does response planning take place the whole year round? How well are the SOP’s functioning? • Are drills and simulation involving relevant stakeholders including civil society and communities regularly done? • Are there preparedness programs for first responders and leaders and representatives of communities at risk? • What is the status of stockpiling, especially of food?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ No local framework ‐ Some institutions ‐ Emergency ‐ EOPs and ‐ EOP is for establishing a have organizational management coordination compliant with process for plans for EM and protocols and mechanisms are international emergency undertake sporadic operational well practiced and standards planning simulation procedures are well understood. exercises defined ‐ Response ‐ Operational ‐ Planning preparedness is organizations have ‐ Operational ‐ Coordination mechanisms enable based on all developed some organizations have mechanisms are stakeholders’ probable mechanisms for developed and put in place but not participation scenarios institutional coordinated some necessarily well response, but lack mechanisms for practiced for major ‐ Contingency plans ‐ EM is coordination institutional disasters. are complete integrated in all response. LGU Departments and other relevant organizations

Explanation/Comments:

INDICATOR 8: Resource Management, Logistics and Contingency Planning INDICATOR 8: Resource Management, Logistics and Group Contingency Planning This indicator measures the extent of resource management and logistical support for emergency response and the systematic identification of resource requirements,

shortfalls and inventories. Round

GUIDE QUESTIONS • How is self analysis of resource management and logistics being

done? • Is contingency planning for key institutions being done for pre‐ defined scenario analysis and planning parameters? • How good is the ability to manage delivery of resources to most vulnerable populations? • How well are food stocks and food security issues embedded into contingency plans?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ Little ‐ Some inventories of ‐ EM policies and ‐ Comprehensive ‐ Advanced understanding of resources exist, but procedures in place understanding of levels of inter‐ available resources the mobilization to mobilize the existing institutional and mobilization process is not resources resources, including organization process understood missing resources. between ‐ Good inventory and public, private ‐ Reliance on ad‐hoc ‐ A few critical understanding of ‐ Plan to mobilize the and community initiatives and top institutions have resources and their resources and to based bodies down decision contingency plans use in allocate them exists have been making during an communications, and is typically tested and event, instead of search and rescue, understood created. pro‐active planning etc.

Explanation/Comments:

INDICATOR 9: Hazard, Vulnerability and Risk Assessment INDICATOR 9: Hazard, Vulnerability and Risk Assessment The aim of this indicator is to measure the effectiveness of how hazard, Group vulnerability and risks are understood and action is taken to assess their risk and to guide DRR policy.

Round GUIDE QUESTIONS • What is the level of awareness of hazards and vulnerabilities (natural and man‐made) among stakeholders? • Are risk identification and assessment, vulnerability and capacity analysis, impact assessments (loss analysis) being done by relevant sectors and segments of populations at risk? • How well are forecasting and early warning used in preparedness and response planning? How good is the drought warning system? Are there feedback and improvement mechanisms involving relevant stakeholders? • How well are food security issues taken into account into assessment processes?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ No institutional ‐ Particular ‐ Institution ‐ Policy recognizes ‐ HVRAs are an understanding or departments may generally aware of the relevance and integral part of competency for have information the importance of importance the day‐to‐day hazard, about hazards, HVRA. assessing HVRs functions and vulnerability or risk vulnerability or decision‐ assessment risks. ‐ Some investment ‐ Investments in making process to assess frequent assessing HVRs and of the hazards has competency to institution. understand outputs

Explanation/Comments:

INDICATOR 10: Risk‐Sensitive Urban (and Rural) Development and Mitigation INDICATOR 10: Risk‐Sensitive Urban (and Rural) Development Group and Mitigation The aim of this indicator is to measure the effectiveness in implementing various risk reduction measures ranging from reinforcing and retrofitting of public and

private assets to risk consideration in land use urban planning, urban Round development, and slum rehabilitation projects.

GUIDE QUESTIONS • Does land use planning and urban re‐development take disasters

risk into account? Are risks considered in addressing agricultural land? • Are codes and standards enforced, particularly in slum upgrading programs? What is the status of implementation of quality control norms in construction? • At what level are capital investments in disaster risk reduction? Are there sufficient investments on flood control measures? • Are critical assets and infrastructure being reinforced and retrofitted?

Level of Attainment Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High ‐ Little or no ‐ Growing ‐ Land use zones & ‐ Land use zones and ‐ Risk mitigation recognition for recognition of risk‐ development development is practicing risk‐ driven land‐use control regulations controls from all mainstreamed sensitive urban planning, but not are risk sensitive; hazards are in the day‐to‐ planning and urban systematically used but not systematically day functions, (re)development as in formulation of systematically used considered as city risk reduction tools risk sensitive urban nor consistently factors in urban development planning or site enforced in development and decision‐ planning planning and planning and making process project project of the implementation. institution. implementation. Explanation/Comments:

III. Disaster risk profiles of the 4 provinces

Province of Benguet and Municipalities of Atok and Tublay

Physical Characteristics

The Province of Benguet is located at the southern end of the Cordillera Mountain Range. It is bound on the south by Pangasinan province, on the west by the provinces of La Union and Ilocos Sur, on the north by Mountain Province and on the east by Ifugao. It is a 2nd Class Province with an annual budget of Php 643,657,177 (2009).

Benguet is one of the six provinces that compose the Cordillera Administrative Region in Northern Luzon. The Province has mountainous terrain of peaks, ridges and canyons, many of which are 2,400 meters above sea level (MASL). At least 60% of the province is considered as having a very steep slope (>50%), while 20% of the terrain is characterized simply as steep (30‐50%). The province has a land area of approximately 290,000 hectares.

The province has two distinct climates: dry from November to April and wet from May to October, with the average monthly rainfall for the province at approximately 3,836.9 mm. based on 2006 data from PAGASA and Benguet State University. The province also enjoys cool average temperatures ranging from a low of 11 degrees Celsius to a high of 26 degrees Celsius.

Being a landlocked province, Benguet is accessible by land and air through Pangasinan via Kennon Road, La Union via Marcos Highway, Abra and Ilocos via Naguilian Road, Mountain Province via Halsema Highway, and from Nueva Viscaya and Region II Provinces via the Benguet‐Nueva Viscaya Road. By air, Benguet is accessible through the Loakan Airport in Baguio City.

Demography Benguet’s population is around 370,000 (2007) with a growth rate of 1.86% per annum. It is comprised of three main ethnolinguistic groups, namely the Ibaloi, Kankana‐ey, and Kalangoya, and minor ethnolinguistic groups such as the Karao, Iowak, Kalahan, and Kataban. Benguet is home to several indigenous people collectively known as Igorots. Aside from their own languages, the people of Benguet also speak Ilocano, Tagalog and English. Male to female ratio is at 1:1, where 52% are male and 48% are female. Employment rate is at 89.3% while unemployment is at 10.7%.

Political Benguet is divided into 13 municipalities and is composed of 140 barangays, with its capital in the town of La Trinidad. Table 1 below shows the Municipalities, their population and population density. The province is a sole congressional district and has two provincial board districts. Baguio City used to be part of the province until the city’s charter was enacted in 1909 making Baguio an independent city.

Table 1. List of Municipalities and their population and density (2007)

Municipality Population Population Density (persons/km2) Atok 19253 90 Bakun 12137 43 Bokod 12913 47 Buguias 34507 196 Itogon 48778 109 Kabayan 12657 51 Kapangan 18221 111 Kibungan 15700 62 La Trinidad 97810 1397 Mankayan 34563 265 Sablan 10890 103 Tuba 40008 135 Tublay 15096 147

Economy The Benguet economy is still largely dependent on agriculture, producing 86% of domestic consumption for temperate vegetables for the whole Philippines. Crops such as potatoes, carrots, cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, garden peas, chayote, cucumber, snap beans, and other salad greens are grown in Benguet. Decorative flowers such as roses, chrysanthemums, gladiolas, callalilies, etc. are also produced in the province. Other distinctive agricultural products include strawberries, Arabica coffee, and tiger grass brooms. The majority of the labor force are farmers and farm workers and a significant portion of the province’s trade and agricultural transactions are agriculture‐based.

Mining (large scale and small scale) is still second in providing employment to 30% of the province’s residents, as well as those from nearby provinces. There are three large scale mining operations in Benguet, namely: Lepanto Mine Division in Lepanto, Mankayan, the Philex Mining Corporation in Padcal, Tuba, and the Benguet Coporation in Balatoc, Itogon.

Manufacturing, such as weaving, knitting, fruit processing, bamboo craft, woodcarving and tiger grass craft, is likewise a major activity in the province. Based on resources, the province holds great potential for ore processing, silk fibercraft, root crops, white potato, mushroom and strawberry processing.

Tourism as an industry is a resource and means for economic growth in the province and is now being recognized and manifested in the present day policies and programs. Tourism development in Benguet is sustainable as it focuses on ecotourism.

SocioEconomic Profile of Tublay, Benguet

Physical Characteristics The Municpality of Tublay is one of the thirteen municipalities comprising the Province of Benguet. It is bound on the north and northwest by Kapangan, on the north and northeast by Atok, on the east by Bokod, on the southeast by Itogon, on the south by La Trinidad, and on the west by Sablan. It is a fifth‐class municipality with a total annual budget of Php 31,462,552 (2008).

The municipality has a total land area of 10,255 hectares, and is composed of eight barangays, namely: Ambassador, Ambongdolan, Ba‐ayan, Basil, Caponga, Daclan, Tublay Central, and Tuel. Tublay is dominated by steep to hilly mountainous terrain with slope ranging from 25 degrees and above, covering about 45% of the municipality. Another 38% of its land area is moderately sloping and undulating with slopes ranging from 8 to 25 degrees, while 10% of the municipality has slopes of 3 to 8 degrees. The remaining areas have slope ranging from 15‐25 degrees.

Tublay has two distinct seasons, a dry season which lasts from December until April and a wet season during the rest of the year.

Demography (2007 Figures) The population of Tublay according to the 2007 NSO Survey is at 15,096, the population density is at 161 persons/km2, and a growth rate of 0.65%. The male to female ratio is 107.5 males for every 100 females. The number of households is at 2,819 households, and the average household size is at 5.2 persons.

Economy Agriculture is the main source of livelihood for the population of Tublay. Agricultural activities include crop production and livestock/poultry production. The main products of the municipality are commercial temperate vegetables, rice, cutflowers, and other plantation crops.

There are also manufacturing businesses such as broom making, food processing, furniture and cabinet making, loom weaving, and blacksmithing. Small scale mining is still present in some barangays.

Several tourist attractions are also in Tublay, such as caves for spelunking and hot springs. Scenic views of rice terraces are also available.

SocioEconomic Profile of Atok, Benguet

Physical Characteristics The Municipality of Atok is located at the middle portion of the Province of Benguet. It is bound on the north by the municipalities of Kibungan and Buguias, on the east by Kabayan and Bokod, on the west by Kapangan, and on the south by Tublay and Bokod. It is a fourth class municipality.

The total land area of Atok is approximately 21,912 hectares and is divided into eight barangays, namely: Abiang, Caliking, Cattubo, Naguey, Paoay, Pasdong, Poblacion, and Topdac.

Atok has an elevation of 2,400 MASL, and the highest point of the Philippine Highway system is located here at 2,256 MASL in Barangay Cattubo. 63% of the terrain of Atok is considered very steep and mountainous, while the remaining areas are classified as steep and hilly.

Atok has two distinct seasons, a wet season which starts from May and lasts until October and a dry season from November until April. Temperatures in some parts of Atok can reach below zero degrees Celsius, especially during the months of December and early part of February where vegetables are subject to frost. Highs of 25 degrees Celsius are experienced in lower parts of the municipality.

Demography (2007 Figures) The population of Atok according to a 2009 Municipal Health Office Survey is at 17,570. The number of households is at 3,588.

Economy Atok’s main economic activity is agriculture, with the production of crops such as rice, potatoes, cabbages, carrots, beans, chayote, etc. being the main source of livelihood for the population of the municipality.

Hazard Environment

Geo‐Hazards Active fault‐lines along the branches of the northern segment of the Philippine Fault Zone which trigger seismic activity are spread out within the province. The mountainous and steep terrain, rugged topography, unstable land workings and farming practices, geologic composition and extreme rainfall contribute to geologic hazards such as landslides, erosion, and earthquakes.

The major faults in Benguet can be found in the southern parts along the Agno River while another fault is located in the northern part of the province. Benguet is considered part of the Philippine Fault Zone. The figure below shows the location of the fault lines that are found in Benguet.

Figure 2. Map showing location of fault lines in Benguet

Flooding Heavy rains brought by typhoons have caused flooding and landslides in parts of Benguet, the most recent being Typhoon Pepeng (Parma) which caused massive flooding and landslides in parts of the province.

Landslides Due to its steep slopes Benguet is vulnerable to landslides caused by heavy rainfall and seismic activity. The following maps show the Landslide and Flood Susceptibility Map of Benguet and nearby provinces. It can be seen that majority of the areas are in red, which illustrates high susceptibility to landslides, with the green and yellow areas indicating moderate and low susceptibility respectively.

Impacts of Recent Disasters

1990 Luzon Quake The most recent seismic disaster to hit the Province of Benguet was the 7.8 Magnitude Luzon Quake with epicenter at the town of Rizal, Nueva Ecija along the Philippine Fault in July 16, 1990. Baguio City, located in the heart of Benguet, was the one of the most hard hit areas and was cut‐off from outside help due to landslides in the major roads leading up to the city and downed communication lines. Estimates placed casualties at more than 1,600, including children who died inside collapsed school and college buildings.

The following photos show the devastation caused by the earthquake (source: http://cityofpines.com/baguioquake/quake.html).

Typhoon Pepeng (Parma) Typhoon Pepeng (international name Parma) first made landfall on October 3, 2009 on the eastern coast of Cagayan Province, it weakened into a tropical depression and was almost stationary over Northern Luzon moving in a north‐western direction, only to come back and make landfall two more times. The typhoon affected areas of Regions I, II, and CAR in Northern Luzon and poured heavy rains on the Province of Benguet.

In Benguet alone, a total of 5,799 persons were affected by the Typhoon in 53 barangays. 213 individuals were from Atok and 159 from Tublay. More than 250 persons were killed in Benguet as a result of landslides, 128 injured, and 37 were missing. In terms of properties, 173 houses were totally destroyed, while 160 were partially damaged.

In terms of road infrastructure losses, the damage to Benguet amounted to Php 62,000,000. Agricultural damage was estimated at more than Php 5 million in rice and corn, and around Php 8 million in other high value commercial crops (HVCC). Another Php 12 million were lost in terms of agricultural facilities, infrastructure and equipment.

The following pictures illustrate the damage caused by Typhoon Pepeng (source: http://cordilleraonline.com and http://cordilleranews.multiply.com – Art Tibaldo)

Province of Cagayan and the Municipalities of Amulung and Enrile

Socioeconomic Profile

With an area of 900.2 square kilometers, Cagayan Province has a population of 1,191,000 as of 2010 with an estimated 13% residing in its capital, Tuguegarao City. It is comprised of 28 municipalities including the third class municipalities of Amulung and Enrile. The two municipalities have population of 44,367 and 29,719 respectively as of 2007.

Cagayan relies heavily on its agricultural sector, which accounts for 73.5% of the total employment in the province. The agricultural products are mostly corn, tobacco, rice and vegetables that are water intensive and are visible near river banks. Prominent also are fishery products, as the province has a significant coastline. Accounting for the remaining workforce of 22.3% is the service sector, which includes the tourism sector, and 4.2% from the industrial sector. (Department of Agrarian Reform‐ Cagayan Provincial Office, 2011)

Hazard Environment

In the Municipality of Enrile alone, the region’s major supplier of maize, there are hectares of corn planted on low lying areas near the Cagayan River. This agricultural practice is prevalent in other municipalities that are within the passageway of the rivers such as Amulung. The river flows from the nearby Province of Nueva Vizcaya in the south and the bordering mountains, traversing Cagayan going northwards to the Pacific Ocean. For this reason,

Amulung and Enrile encounters extreme Figure 3: Cagayan River and its Tributaries. Source: PSWDO flooding during typhoons. The Cagayan River and its tributaries, namely, Pinacanauan Zinundungan, Chico, Pata, Abulug, Buquey, Cabicungan and Matalag are subject to extensive flooding during monsoon season. To add to the predicament, the province is a potential pathway of powerful typhoons such as Juan and Pepeng. The province also has five active volcanoes located in the municipalities of Gonzaga and Calayan Island in the north. Eruption from any of these volcanoes might trigger earthquakes and tsunamis that will affect the coastal municipalities.

Impact of Recent Disasters

Volcanic eruption has not occurred in recent times in Cagayan, leaving floods as the worst hazard to hit the province and the two municipalities. In October 2009, Typhoon Pepeng wreaked havoc, causing Php 1,848,496,378.00 in damages, with the agricultural sector taking most of the blow. It also affected 181,213 persons or 15% of the population. Fortunately, there were no fatalities and persons missing. Typhoon Juan, which occurred in October 2010, did not provide similar statistics with only 6 fatalities and 1 missing. However, 25% of the population was affected but registered only Php 771 million in damages, again mostly to its agricultural sector. The Inter‐tropical Convergence Zone that followed a month after, caused widespread flooding that rendered large portions of agricultural lands under water. During the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Fukushima Japan, waves between 0.3 to 0.7 meters reached the coastal areas of the province.

References 1) Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cagayan. Accessed: February 17, 2011 2) Tripod: http://cagayano.tripod.com/geotopo.html. Accessed: February 17, 2011 3) Cagayan Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council: http://www.cagayanpdcc.110mb.com/index22.htm. Accessed 18, 2011 4) Provincial Social Welfare and Development Office in Cagayan, DRR Strategies PowerPoint Presentation. 5) Department of Agrarian Reform‐Cagayan Provincial Office: http://www.dar.gov.ph/cagayan/prov_profile.html. Accessed: April 11, 2011 2011

Province of Laguna

General Profile of Laguna

The Province of Laguna is located directly southeast of Metro Manila, surrounding the south and eastern parts of Laguna de Bay. It is bordered to the north by Rizal province, to the east and southeast by Quezon province, to the south and south west by Batangas, and to the west by Cavite. Its total land area is 1,823.6 square kilometers. The capital city is Sta. Cruz.

The southern and eastern municipalities are largely agricultural‐based economies, while the northern municipalities and cities, due to proximity to Metro Manila, are industrialized.

Figure 4: Political map of Laguna

SocioEconomic Profile of Laguna

Laguna is currently governed by the Hon. Emilio Ramon P. Ejercito. There are four congressional districts in Laguna. There are four cities and one special city zone (Los Baños) in the province. There are 26 municipalities.

Table 2 summarizes the list of municipalities and cities in Laguna.

Table 2: Cities and Municipalities in Laguna

Municipality Income Class Population (2007) Alaminos 3rd class 40,380 Bay 3rd class 50,756 Cabuyao 1st class 205,367 Calauan 3rd class 54,248 Cavinti 4th class 20,469 Famy 5th class 13,577 Kalayaan 5th class 21,203 Liliw 4th class 32,727 Los Baños 1st class 98,631 Luisiana 4th class 19,255 Lumban 3rd class 28,443 Mabitac 5th class 17,608 Magdalena 5th class 20,204 Majayjay 4th class 23,681 Nagcarlan 3rd class 57,070 Paete 4th class 24,696 Pagsanjan 2nd class 35,944 Pakil 5th class 20,242 Pangil 4th class 23,421 Pila 4th class 44,227 Rizal 5th class 15,459 San Pedro 1st class 281,808 Santa Cruz 1st class 101,914 Santa Maria 4th class 26,267 Siniloan 3rd class 34,877 Victoria 4th class 33,829 Biñan City 1st class city 262,735 Calamba City 1st class city 360,281 San Pablo City 1st class city 237,259 Santa Rosa City 1st class city 266,943 Source: NSO2

2http://www.census.gov.ph/data/census2007/index.html

The following maps show the spatial distribution of the Laguna census.

Figure 5: Municipal income classes in Laguna

Figure 6: Population distribution in 2007

Figure 7: Population density in Laguna

Figure 8: Population density and income class in Laguna

Municipality of Mabitac

The Municipality of Mabitac is a fifth class municipality3. In 2007, it had a population of 17,608, distributed in 15 barangays. The population density of Mabitac is approximately 293.14 persons per square kilometer. Table 3 summarizes the barangays and their respective population in 2007.4

Table 3: Barangays and Population (2007) in Mabitac, Laguna

Barangay Population Amuyong 531 Lambac (Poblacion) 1,518 Lucong 1,100 Matalatala 2,571 Nanguma 2,321 Paagahan 3,229 Bayanihan (Poblacion) 505 LibisngNayon (Poblacion) 771 Maligaya (Poblacion) 270 Masikap (Poblacion) 535 Pag‐Asa (Poblacion) 953 Sinagtala (Poblacion) 779 San Antonio 1,216 San Miguel 771 MABITAC 17, 608

The Commission on Audit (COA) reports that in 20085, the income of Mabitac is PhP 32, 437, 946.45. It spent PhP 30, 958, 666.05, giving it a net income of PhP 1, 479, 280.40.

Municipality of Pila

The Municipality of Pila is a fourth class municipality. In 2007 it has 44, 227 people6 in 17 barangays. The population density of Pila is approximately 1, 537.07 persons per square kilometer. Table 4 summarizes the barangay and population.

Table 4: Barangays and Population (2007) in Pila, Laguna

Barangay Population Aplaya 3,253 BagongPook 2,752 Bukal 591 Bulilan Norte (Poblacion) 2,112 Bulilan Sur (Poblacion) 3,271 Concepcion 931 Labuin 3,767

3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabitac,_Laguna 4http://www.census.gov.ph/data/census2007/index.html 5Commission on Audit Annual Financial Report: Local Governments (Volume III) 6http://www.census.gov.ph/data/census2007/index.html

Barangay Population Linga 3,542 Masico 1,994 Mojon 714 Pansol 1,993 Pinagbayanan 5,011 San Antonio 3,315 San Miguel 866 Santa Clara Norte (Poblacion) 2,491 Santa Clara Sur (Poblacion) 5,691 Tubuan 1,933 PILA 44,227

The Commission on Audit (COA) reports that in 20087, the income of Pila is PhP 11, 661, 854.60. It spent PhP 47, 281, 384.63, giving it a net loss of PhP 35, 619, 530.03.

Hazard Environments of Laguna

The province of Laguna is exposed to several hazards: flooding, volcanism, liquefaction and landslides.

Figure 9: Physical Map of Laguna

7Commission on Audit Annual Financial Report: Local Governments (Volume III)

Figure 9 shows the physical map of Laguna. From the map it can be seen that the municipalities adjacent to Laguna de Bay have low elevation, making them susceptible to floods.

Figure 10: Volcanoes in the Philippines (inset added by author)

Figure 10 shows the distribution of volcanoes in the Philippines8. It can be seen that there are two active volcanoes near the province: the San Pablo Volcanic Field9and Mount Banahaw10.

Figure 11 below shows a liquefaction map of the Philippines11. The inset shows the Laguna province area where there is a possibility of liquefaction.

8http://www.observatory.ph/vm/images/Geophys_hires/volcano_distribution.jpg 9http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/volcano.cfm?vnum=0703‐06= 10http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=57:active‐ volcanoes&catid=55:volcanoes‐of‐the‐philippines 11http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/images/liquefaction/liqn_phils.pdf

Figure 11: Areas susceptible to liquefaction (inset added by author)

The northeastern area of Laguna is susceptible to earthquake induced landslides, as shown by Figure 1212.

12http://www.observatory.ph/vm/images/Geophys_hires/eq_induced_landslides.jpg

Figure 12: Landslide susceptibility map (inset added by author)

Municipality of Mabitac

Figure 13 shows the topography of the Municipality of Mabitac. It can be seen that the central region of the municipality is a low‐lying valley. The western region is high relief. The low lying areas make it exposed to flood hazards. From Figure 12 above it can be seen that the region is exposed to liquefaction as well as earthquake induced landslides.

Figure 13: Mabitac Physical Map

Municipality of Pila

Figure 14: Physical map of Pila

Figure 14 shows the physical terrain of Pila. It can be seen from the above figure that the entire town has low elevation, and coupled with its proximity to Laguna de Bay, it is exposed to flood hazards. It is also susceptible to liquefaction (figure 11).

Impacts of Recent Disasters of Laguna

The most recent disaster that affected the Province of Laguna is flooding due to the Typhoons Ondoy and Santi. Figure 15 below shows the flood levels in the cities and municipalities surrounding Laguna de Bay13.

Figure 15: Flood levels during Typhoon Ondoy and Pepeng

It can be seen from the map that most of the barangays affected by flood were submerged at knee level water.

Due to flood waters, more than one thousand families were evacuated14. According to the Laguna Provincial DRRMP final report the flood water lasted almost four months.

13http://ph.one.un.org/response/maps/latestmaps/13‐Oct‐09%20Flood%20Water%20Levels%20‐ %202%20of%203%20‐%20A3.pdf 14http://www.abs‐cbnnews.com/nation/regions/09/26/09/1000‐families‐evacuated‐laguna

Province of Sorsogon

Socioeconomic Profile of Sorsogon Sorsogon is a second class province and has a total land area of 214,144.86 hectares comprising 12.1 percent of the total land area of the region. According to COA 2008 report, the province has an average annual income of 740,771,830.77.

The province of Sorsogon has 15 municipalities and 1 city namely:

Municipalities 1. Barcelona 6. Gubat 11. Prieto Diaz 2. Bulan 7. Irosin 12. Santa Magdalena 3. Bulusan 8. Juban 13. Casiguran 4. Castilla 9. Matnog 14. Magallanes 5. Donsol 10. Pilar 15. Bacon

City Sorsogon City

Demography As of the 2007 census, the province had a total population of 709,673. In terms of distribution of the municipal population, Bulan has the biggest population followed by Pilar. The municipality of Barcelona has the smallest population.

Economy Sorsogon is set to participate in the developing growth corridor of Bicol and take advantage of its position as Luzon’s link to the Visayas. The fertile earth produces rice, coconuts, abaca, and coffee. The hills and mountains are also sources of limestone, coal, pumice, pumicite, and white clay. Sorsogon’s location on the tail of the southern Luzon and skirting the deep waters of the Pacific Ocean gives the province a bounty of aquamarine resources. The province also has an abundance of technically skilled, highly trainable labor force.

The province is easily accessed through the Maharlika Highway System, and buses plying the Manila‐ Tacloban or Manila‐Davao route carry commuters all the way up to Matnog and are ferried across to Allen in Northern Samar. A network of secondary roads also links the other municipalities together.

There are two airstrips in Sorsogon although nearby Legaspi City Airport is the usual air link to the province. There are 3 major ports and 6 municipal ports that provide sea borne access to the province. Matnog is a major link between Luzon and Samar Islands, while the port in Bulan moves cargo and passengers between Sorsogon and Masbate. Reliable telecommunications link the province to the rest of the country and to the world. The province is a major source of geothermal power to the Luzon Grid and is amply supplied with electricity while local water districts supply water for domestic and industrial use. Nineteen private and government banks provide the province with a vibrant banking industry.

Resource‐based industries are the most promising prospects for potential investors. Gifts and handicraft manufacture, food processing, brick making and pottery, seaweed production and fiber

processing are the most encouraging industries in the province. The province also holds a big potential for tourist development. Natural wonders, such as Mount Bulusan and Bulusan Lake, and Rizal Beach have traditionally attracted visitors to the province. However, the province also offers pristine beaches, cold and hot springs, isolated island getaways, caves and waterfalls. Droves of tourists are now pouring into the province attracted by the gentle whale sharks or the butandings that feed off the coast of Donsol. The local government is promoting the development of tourist facilities in destinations such as Pinaculan Island, the Bulusan National Park, the Rizal Beach Tourism Estate, and, of course, the Donsol Whale Shark Watching area.

The province reputedly produces the best abaca hemp in the entire region, a matter of great importance in a province that supports a number of abaca based industries. Sinamay cloth weaving and abaca fiber slippers are chief household industries.

Socio‐cultural The people of Sorsogon are Bicolanos and generally speak the Bicol language. However, close proximity to the Visayan island of Samar has given the dialects spoken in the province a peculiarly Visayan tone and vocabulary, which probably indicates a mixture of the Waray and Bicol languages. Most Sorsogon Bicols can speak English and Filipino fluently.

Sorsogon’s people are mostly farmers and fishermen engaged in the cultivation of coconut, abaca and rice. Sorsogon Bay is one of the great prides of the Bicol region. It is blessed with mangrove areas rich with a variety of shrubs, vines and palms. The bay abounds with fin fishes, crabs and shellfishes. Because of the bay’s natural abundance, it has continuously attracted migration of fishers from other fishing villages and merchant capitalists who invest in aquaculture and export of shellfish.

Festivals are also celebrated in the province to showcase the cultural and historical activities of the region. Kasanggayaan, Pili festival, Padaraw, Butanding Arribada, Ginubat and Hin‐ay Festival are some of the festivals.

Municipality of Juban

Juban is a 4th class municipality in the province of Sorsogon, Philippines. Based on the 2000 census, it has a population of 26,848 people in 4,957 households. According to COA 2008 report, the municipality has an average annual income of 44,888,343.59.

Juban is politically subdivided into 25 barangays namely:

1. Anog 9. Carohayon 17. North Poblacion 25. Tublijon 2. Aroroy 10. Catan‐agan 18. South Poblacion 3. Bacolod 11. Catanusan 19. Puting Sapa 4. Binanuahan 12. Cogon 20. Rangas 5. Biriran 13. Embarcadero 21. Sablayan 6. Buraburan 14. Guruyan 22. Sipaya 7. Calateo 15. Lajong 23. Taboc 8. Calmayon 16. Maalo 24. Tinago

The municipality is predominantly engaged in agricultural activities. Their major crops include rice, coconut and banana.

There are two (2) private secondary schools and (4) public secondary schools in Juban. Elementary schools are greater in number; there are 25 public schools and 1 private.

Health facilities are also present in the municipality, 25 barangay heath centers and 28 barangay day care centers. There is a total of 16 health personnel.

Municipality of Irosin

Irosin is a 3rd class municipality in the province of Sorsogon, Philippines. It is the only land‐locked municipality of the province. According to the 2000 census, it has a population of 45,507 people in 8,639 households. According to COA 2008 report, the municipality has an average annual income of 58,405,168.27.

Irosin is politically subdivided into 28 barangays namely:

1. Bagsangan 9. Cawayan 17. Mapaso 25. San Pedro 2. Bacolod 10. Cogon 18. Monbon 26. Tabon‐Tabon 3. Batang 11. Gabao 19. Patag 27. Tinampo 4. Bolos 12. Gulang‐Gulang 20. Salvacion 28. Tongdol 5. Buenavista 13. Gumapia 21. San Agustin (Pob) 6. Bulawan 14. Santo Domingo 22. San Isidro 7. Carriedo 15. Liang 23. San Juan (Pob) 8. Casini 16. Macawayan 24. San Julian (Pob)

The municipality is primarily engaged in agricultural activities.

Hazard Environment The Province of Sorsogon lies between 124 <> and 1250 east longitude and from 120 to 130 north latitude. It is the southernmost province in the island of Luzon. Except for its overland link with the province of Albay to the north, it is completely surrounded by water. To the east lies the vast Pacific Ocean; the turbulent San Bernardino Strait separates it from the Samar provinces in the south; and it is bounded on the west by the Burias and Ticao Passes of the South China Sea.

The province is divided into two (2) congressional districts, composed of 14 municipalities, one component city which is the provincial capital, and 541 barangays. Except for lrosin, all the municipalities including the City of Sorsogon are located along coastal zones, sites of beautiful beaches, with great tourism potential.

Topography Sorsogon province is characterized by an irregular topography mountains sprawl over the northeast, southeast and west portions of the province. These mountains slope down to small valleys and plains. Mount Bulusan is its tallest peak as it towers 1,560 meters above sea level. It is an active volcano located at the southeastern part of the province.

Major water bodies include Sorsogon Bay, Bulusan Lake, and the rivers of Cawayan in Sorsogon; Putiao in Pilar; and Cadac‐an in Irosin and Juban.

Climate The province is well within the country's typhoon belt, influenced by the northeast and southeast monsoons, ten months a year. The northeast monsoon occurs from October to March while the southeast monsoon prevails from June to September.

Summer lasts for only two months when favorable North Pacific Trade winds come during April and May.

Under the corona climate classification system, the province falls under type II; a type of climate with no dry season but with very pronounced maximum rain period from November to January.

Rainfall

Barometer readings on annual rainfall give an average of 2,811.0 mm. The wettest month is November at 406.5 mm and May has the least rainfall at 126.5 mm.

Temperature

Mean annual temperature stands at 26.4°C to a high of 30°C. February is the coolest month and May is the warmest.

Drainage Natural basins in mountain ranges collect water which then flow to major river channels and their tributaries downstream, empty into surrounding water bodies such as the Pacific Ocean, San Bernardino Straitl Burias and Ticao Passesl and Sorsogon Bay.

Serving as a natural drainage system of the area are 55 rivers and 31 major creeks and streams, with Cawayan River yielding the highest daily discharge of 3,040 cubic meters. Man‐made dikes, however, are found in the Irosin‐Juban valley. which serve as irrigation, drainage, and river control facilities.

Existing Land Use The province is predominantly agricultural, owing to its rugged terrain; coconut trees dominate the provincial landscape in virtually all of its component municipalities. Lowland areas are irrigated and irrigable areas, which are largely found in the Juban‐Irosin Valley alongside the Cadac‐an River, the Donsol‐Pilar boundary, and, along rivers and tributaries in the towns of Bulan, Matnog and Gubat. Rice lands are, likewise, located in coastal areas next to mangroves, brackish water fishponds and some urban centers. There are a few areas devoted to cultivated annual crops, such as corn and cassava, including upland rice and these are mostly found near the Pilar‐Castiila boundary. In coastal

zones, mangroves are being utilized as brackish water fishponds. Forest lands are still found in the northern portion of the province surrounding the BACON‐MANITO Geothermal Production Field in the southern part of Castilla, around Mt. Bulusan National Park, and the Mt. Bintacan Watershed area. Areas for water sources are abundant, but entail huge costs for bringing the water to communities.

Quality of Physical Environment The physical environment plays an important factor in the development of the province. Like other provinces of the Bicol Region, Sorsogon lies along the typhoon belt, getting the "wrath" of these howlers at least six times a year. Another is the existence of Bulusan Volcano, which greatly affects the province, particularly the neighboring towns of Bulusan, lrosin,,Juban and Casiguran. Twenty‐six (26) barangays lie along the volcano's danger zones. During the occurence of these natural calamities, the most affected are the vulnerable groups, especially women and children which are found mostly in the rural areas.

Bulusan Vocano Profile

Source: PowerPoint Presentation of Mayor Jimmy J. Fragata, April 5, 2011

Location and Accessibility Bulusan Volcano is the southernmost volcano in the northwest trending volcanic belt known as the Bicol Volcanic Chain. It lies near the central part of Sorsogon province at the southern portion of Bicol Peninsula. It is located about 70 km BE of Mayon Volcano and approximately 250 SE of Metro Manila. Bounded on the East by San Bernardino Strait, on the North by Sor80gon Bay and on the

West and South by intermediate zones of fairly flat terrain punctuated by highly dissected volcano mountains.

The main access to Bulusan is via Daang Maharlika, a national highway traversing the Bicol Peninsula.

Geologic Features The volcanic deposits that comprise Bulusan Volcano, Sharp Peak, Mt. Jormajan and the encompassing Caldera deposits were included in the Polangui Volcanics classified in geologic mapping.

Bulusan is a stratavolcano and dome complex located at the NE floor of the caldera. The dominant rocks are two‐pyroxene andesite in Bulusan and dacite associated with caldera. Based on evidence and preliminary data, a calderagenic eruption occurred about 40,000 Y.B.P. this eruption reated a volcanic depression which now measures about 200 m in depth an 11 km in diameter.

The strongest eruption recorded was in 1912 but no data available as to the extent of damage. In March 2006 the Bulusan Volcano was reactivated, followed by an alert level 1 volcanic eruption in May 2006. Then, an alert level 2 volcanic eruption the following month, June 2006. There were series of volcanic ashfalls and eruptions up to the present, 2011. The most recent was on March 21, 2011.

Hazard Environment of Juban and Irosin

The Municipality of Juban is a town centrally located in the province of Sorsogon with a distance of 23 kilometers from Sorsogon City. Like other towns of the province it is not spared from the wide range disaster like typhoons, quakes, the danger of volcanic eruptions and flashfloods.

Irosin is considered to be one of the most high risk municipalities in the Bicol Region with combined weather, volcanic and earthquake‐related risks. The municipality is usually affected by tropical storms that pass through the region. Irosin is also listed among the 48 municipalities in the region which are considered to be in a geologically hazardous area ‐ highly prone to landslides and flooding. And from March 2006 up to October of 2007, Mount Bulusan’s volcanic activities threatened the lives of people in Irosin and other municipalities in Sorsogon. Numerous explosions deposited undetermined volume of ash and volcanic debris at the slopes of the volcano. At the same period, flash floods and mudflows affected 18 barangays in Irosin distressing a total of 894 families or 3,991 individuals.

Bulusan Volcano again had ten episodes of ash explosion from November to December last year which caused ash fall and lahar flows in many barangays of Irosin. These volcanic activities resulted to the temporary displacement of 231 families or 1,014 individuals last November.

Impact of Recent Disasters

Sorsogon The recent Honshu Japan Earthquake last 11th March 2011 (Philippine time) affected the provinces facing the Pacific Ocean and Sorsogon province was one of these. The first tsunami was expected to arrive between 5:00PM to 7:00 PM and may not always be the largest and these waves may continue for hours. The concerned public was advised to be on alert for unusual waves. They were also advised to stay away from the shoreline during this period and should not go to the coast to watch the tsunami.

Also, the recent lahar flow which transpired on the 15th March 2011 was brought about by heavy rains and directly affected the five (5) municipalities of Sorsogon namely Juban, Casiguran, Bulusan, Irosin and Barcelona. In addition, these towns are within the Bulusan Permanent Danger Zones set by PHIVOLCS. This phenomenon resulted to great economic losses in the province since Sorsogon is predominantly agriculture.

Bulusan Volcano Danger Zones

Figure 16: Major Volcanic Eruptions in 2010 and 2011

Table 5: Record of Mt. Bulusan eruptions (2010‐2011)

Source: PowerPoint Presentation of Mayor Jimmy J. Fragata, April 5, 2011

Figure 17: Photos of Major Eruptions of Mt. Bulusan

Source: PowerPoint Presentation of Mayor Jimmy J. Fragata, April 5, 2011

Municipality of Junab and Irosin The recent lahar flow was observed in municipalities of Juban and Irosin last 15thMarch 2011 brought about by heavy rains that transpired the night before. According to NDRRMC report, three (3) houses were partially damaged and covered by mudflow. Fifty (50) houses were reached and affected by mudflow.

Table 6: Affected Population as of 12:00 NN

Municipality Barangay Evacuated Remarks Families Persons IROSIN Patag 56 171 Relief goods distributed Bagsangan 30 43 Relief goods distributed Tabon‐Tabon 54 100 Relief goods distributed Monbon 20 100 Moved to neighboring houses, bridge in Bliss coved in lahar Bolos 1 3 Flooding of access toad to Guruyan, Juban. Houses collapsed/washed out. Relief goods distributed (sponsored by Louis de Marillac Sorsogon & Irosin Macawayan 45 245 Rice field flooded Gulang‐gulang 10 40 Damaged to water pipe reported Subtotal 216 702 JUBAN Anog 37 185 Evacuated last night. Decamped in Guruyan 7 35 the afternoon due to improved Sipaya 59 295 weather condition Catanusan 50 250 Calateo 34 170 Subtotal 187 935 403 1637 GRAND TOTAL Source: NDRRMC Report. http://www.ndcc.gov.ph/attachments/article/170/NDRRMC. Accessed on March 15, 2011

Prior to lahar flow that transpired last March 15, 2011, there was a Bulusan volcano ash ejection on February 21, 2011 at 9:12 AM. The event was recorded as explosion type earthquake lasting for about nineteen (19) minutes and was accompanied by a rumbling sound which was heard up to ten (10) kilometers away in the town of Juban, Sorsogon.

Figure 18: Bulusan Volcano February 21, 2011 9:12 AM ash ejection

Photo courtesy of Joel Alarcon The explosion produced a greyish ash column that rose to a height of about three (3) kilometers above the summit before drifting to the southwest. Field investigations and reports confirmed the presence of ash deposits in the following areas:

1) Municipality of Irosin, Sorsogon: Barangays Casini, Salvacion, Buenavista, Monbon, 2) Tinampo, Cogon, Gulang‐Gulang and Bolos. 3) Municipality of Juban, Sorsogon: Barangays Sankayon and Puting Sapa 4) Municipality of Magallanes, Sorsogon: Barangay Lapining 5) Masbate: Masbate City and Malinta 6) Municipality of Bulan, Sorsogon: Barangays Cadandan, Palali, Quirino, San Francisco, 7) Sumagongsong, Aquino, Bulan Proper, Fabrica, Del Pilar, San Roque, San Isidro, Gate and 8) Trece.

According to PHIVOLCS, the source of activity of Bulusan Volcano is hydrothermal and shallow. PHIVOLCS also prohibits entry to the 4‐kilometer radius Permanent Danger Zone (PDZ) since the area is at risk to sudden steam and ash explosions. Residents in the northwest and southwest sectors of the volcano are reminded to take precautions against ashfalls due to the prevailing wind direction. Civil aviation authorities is advised to warn pilots to avoid flying close to the volcano’s summit as ejected ash and volcanic fragments from sudden explosions may be hazardous to aircraft. If possible aircraft should avoid flying on the western side of the volcano as volcanic debris are likely to be carried in this direction by the prevailing winds. Furthermore, people living near valleys and river/stream channels were advised to be vigilant against sediment‐laden stream flows and lahars in the event of heavy and prolonged rainfall. Alert status of Bulusan.

REFERENCES

Draft Provincial Physical Framework Plan, Province of Sorsogon. Provincial Development Council. June 2007. Juban Disaster Management Plan. Undated. Oplan Bulkan Bulusan. Undated. Sorsogon Provincial Disaster Protocol. 2010. Annual Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan and Proposed Programming of the Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund. 2011 http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph. Accessed on February 27, 201.1 http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Irosin%2C_Sorsogon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juban,_Sorsogon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorsogon http://www.sorsogontourism.com/festivals.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorsogon http://www.oocities.org/lppsec/pp/sorsogon.htm http://www.nscb.gov.ph/ru5/povmapping/sorsogon/2003‐2005/profile.htm http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Irosin%2C_Sorsogon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juban,_Sorsogon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorsogon

IV. Field Investigation Reports

Field Investigations (FIs) were conducted in four provinces and eight municipalities. This section provides: 1) narrative on the activities conducted, 2) the DRRI ranking results, and 3) initial findings during the FIs, in the following order:

1) Province of Benguet 2) Province of Cagayan 3) Province of Laguna 4) Province of Sorsogon

This will be followed by the List of Participants in the same order.

Field Investigation Report Province of Benguet and the Municipalities of Tublay and Atok March 9 – March 11, 2011

Submitted by:

Mr. Jose Mari Daclan, Project Manager, EMI Mr. Mariño Deocariza, LUP Expert Mr. Jerome Cruz, Provincial Coordinator

Field Investigation Team and Provincial Contacts

• The EMI Field Investigation Team was composed of Mr. Jose Mari Daclan, Mr. Mariño Deocariza, and Mr. Jerome Cruz. The team prepared Question Guides and Workshop Kits for the participants.

• Accompanying the team during the LGU visits and workshops was Mr. Joseph Alviar, the field monitor of WFP.

• The Provincial Planning and Development Office, headed by Engr. Tuho Chapdian arranged for the invitations of the participants, venue and caterer for the three workshops. He was assisted by Ms. Rose Badival, of the PPDO, who personally informed the mayors of Tublay and Atok on the CNADPR workshops. Ms. Badival and Engr. Mike Epie, of the PPDO, assisted the team during the workshops in the two other municipalities.

Field Investigation Agenda

The Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response workshop has two particular objectives:

1. To undertake an inventory and review of the existing capacity development initiatives and practices in DRRM at the provincial level down to the two selected municipalities, and; 2. To identify gaps and recommend areas for intervention

Day Time Activity March 8, 9am‐5pm Team Preparations and Travel to Baguio City 2011 5pm‐6pm Arrival; Preparatory Meeting with Benguet PPDO

March 9, 8am‐4pm Benguet Provincial DRRI Workshop and Key Informant 2011 Investigation

March 10, 8am‐9am Travel to Municipality of Tublay 2011 9am‐4:30pm Tublay Municipal DRRI Workshop and Key Informant Investigation

March 11, 7am‐9am Travel to Municipality of Atok 2011 9am‐4:30pm Atok Municipal DRRI Workshop

March 12, 8am‐4pm Travel back to Manila 2011

Summary Field Investigation Activities

Arrival and Preparatory Meeting/ Briefing o The Field Investigation Team arrived in Baguio City at around 3:30 PM in the afternoon of March 8, 2011 for a three‐day Field Investigation. o A short preparatory meeting was held at the Benguet Provincial Planning and Development Office in the Municipality of Figure 19 Benguet Provincial DRRI Workshop La Trinidad. Ms. Rose Badival and Engr. Tuho Chapdian briefed the visiting team on the arrangements made for the workshops. Also, Mr. Deocariza interviewed Engr. Figure 20 Gov. Chapdian on the Legal and Institutional Nestor Fongwan giving Arrangements on DRM in Benguet and the closing handed out forms for them to answer. remarks

Benguet Provincial Workshop o The Workshop was held in the Provincial Capitol Building March 9, 2011 o It was attended by more than 50 participants from the regional and provincial agencies headed by the provincial government. Worth noting is the presence of the Provincial Governor Hon. Nestor Fongwan, who gave the closing remarks, and Vice‐Governor Hon. Crecencio Pacalso, who also heads the Provincial Legislative Council or Sangguniang Panglalawigan. Mayor Hon. Peter Albos and Vice‐Mayor Figure 21 Participants after the workshop Hon. Marson Lay‐At of Atok Municipality also attended the Workshop o A presentation on current and past DRR/DRM related activities in the province was given by Mr. Ronald Villa of the Office of Civil Defense – Cordillera Administrative Region. o The participants were divided into three groups to grade the DRRI answer sheets.

Figure 22 (L‐R) Mr. Jom Daclan (EMI), Mayor Ruben Paoad, Mr. Joseph Alviar (UNWFP), and Mr. Mariño Deocariza (EMI) during the courtesy call to the Mayor.

Tublay Municipal Workshop o The Field Investigation Team, together with Mr. Joseph Alviar of the UNWFP, had a courtesy call with the Municipal Mayor of Tublay, Hon. Ruben Paoad to discuss the WFP Capacity Needs Assessment Project.

o The Workshop was held in the Municipal Hall Building on March 10, 2011

o It was attended by more than 45 Figure 23 Participants during the Tublay Municipal participants from the municipal offices and Workshop barangay representatives. gave the welcoming and closing remarks for the workshop o Mayor Ruben Paoad gave the welcoming and closing remarks for the workshop. o The workshop participants were again divided into three groups for the DRRI ranking. o While one of the group was still finishing answering the DRRI forms, Mr. Deocariza

and Mr. Cruz conducted Key Informant Figure 24 Atok Municipal Workshop Participants Interviews with the Municipal Social Welfare and Development Officer.

Atok Municipal Workshop o The travel to Atok Municipality took almost two hours by way of the Halsema Highway. On the way, the Field Investigation Team was able to see and pass through the sections of the highway affected by landslides and undergoing repairs. o The Vice‐Mayor of Atok Municipality Hon. Figure 25 Highway repairs due to Landslides on the Halsema Highway Marson Lay‐At was the one who welcomed the Field Investigation Team, the Mayor was unable to join the Municipal Workshop as he had an appointment with Gov. Fongwan on the same day. o The Workshop was held at the legislative hall of the municipal capitol building. It was attended by more than 40 participants from the municipal government offices and representatives from the different barangays of Atok on March 11, 2011 Figure 26 Staff from the PPDO answering the Key Informant Interview Questionnaire

o Mr. Deocariza and Mr. Cruz also conducted Key Informant Interviews and gathered pertinent documents

Challenges Encountered

• Local knowledge on DRR/DRM and related terms were limited. The Field Investigation Team had to give a brief backgrounder on terms such as Hazards, Vulnerability, and Resiliency. • There was a problem with communication as the workshop participants could not understand some of the terms used because they were more comfortable using Ilocano, English and other local dialects rather than Tagalog. • Lack of soft copies for important documents such as Executive Orders, Provincial/Municipal Ordinances, and plans meant that a lot of time was spent photocopying these documents for the Field Investigation. • The geographical distance between municipalities made travelling to some of the municipalities a long drive almost two hours and you had to pass through some landslide damaged portions of the Halsema Highway to get to the municipalities.

Data for the Initial Findings

Disaster Risk Reduction Resiliency Indicators Results

BENGUET ATOK TUBLAY PROVINCE Ave. Ave. Score Ave. Ave. Score Ave. Ave. Score Score Key Area Score Key Area Score Key Area Legal and Institutional Processes Indicator 1. Effectiveness of Legislative 3 2.4 2.5 Framework 3.2 2.3 2.5 Indicator 2. Effectiveness of 3.3 2.2 2.5 Institutional Arrangements Awareness and Capacity Building Indicator 3. Training and Capacity 2.5 2.2 2.3 Building Indicator 4. Advocacy, 2.4 2.1 2.3 Communication, Education and Public 2.3 2.0 2.2 Awareness Critical Services and Infrastructure

Resiliency Indicator 5. Resiliency of Critical 2.7 2.0 2.0 Services 2.7 2.1 2.3 Indicator 6. Resiliency of Infrastructure 2.7 2.1 2.5 Emergency Management and

Response Planning

Indicator 7. Emergency Management 2.8 2.3 2.0 Indicator 8. Resource Management, 2.7 2.0 2.1 2.7 1.8 2.2 Logistics and Contingency Planning Development Planning, Regulation and Risk Mitigation Indicator 9. Hazard, Vulnerability and 2.2 2.0 2.2 Risk Assessment 2.7 2.2 2.2 Indicator 10. Risk‐Sensitive Urban (and 2.2 2.3 2.2 Rural) Development and Mitigation

AVERAGE SCORE LGU 2.6 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.3

DRM Gaps, Recommendations and Potential WFP Intervention

Benguet Province

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas 1 3 • DRRM law has been • EO needs to be translated • Legislative briefing on • Info dissemination, Effectiveness of Moderate adopted; EO/AO to ordinances and policies DRRM seminar on DRRM / Legislative issued by Governor for other agencies and • DRRM Act needs to be DRRM Act / DRRM Framework • DRRM Council in department translated to policies and sound practices place • DRM awareness of ordinances for various • EO creating DRRM officials is adequate, but agencies and department Office signed Feb not at the 2011 community/household • Funds allocated for level DRM • Minimal funds for DRRM. • Internal budget is Insufficient to cover all augmented with DRRM activities. May not supplemental budget be enough for large when not enough magnitude disasters and • Province has the extended rescue capacity to tap operations outside resources • Not all policy requirements of DRRM Act have been complied with

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas 2 3.3 • Good coordination • No full‐time personnel to • Establish appropriate • TA from WFP Effectiveness of Moderate among different man the DRRMO. The institutional/organizational Institutional provincial and local provincial government is structures in accordance Arrangements agencies, NGOS and saddled by personnel with RA 10121 communities are budget ceiling on hiring. actively involved in • Overlapping DRR responsibilities in terms • Several agencies e.g. of info management DSWD, DOH, PNP, • No incident command etc. are well prepared system in place for disaster • No centralized disaster • Initial stages of information management transition from PDCC system to PDRRMC • Decision–making is highly centralized, should be improved with the creation of the DRRM Office • The old PDCC meets irregularly, adhoc meetings 3 2.5 • Disaster Response • Lack of comprehensive • Formulation of DRRM • TA from Training and Low Trainings undertake DRRM capacity building Capacity Building Program WFP/OCD/Provincial Capacity • Funding is readily program for Benguet. Government Building available • DRRM trainings not • Establish • Training of trainors regularly conducted and Regional/Provincial DRRM conducted sustained Training Center

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas • There are trainings for • Limited funding for DRRM the rescue team capacity building (P200,000 per year), results to limited range of DRRM trainings offered. Lack of training for other DRRM competencies like early warning, IEC, Hazard Mapping, ICS, Basic Life support for all sector and Advance Life Support (ACLS) and other special trainings • Limited nos. of manpower trained 4 2.3 • Yearly IEC programs • No IEC program / • Formulation of DRRM IEC • TA from WFP/NGOs Advocacy, Low on preparedness and awareness raising Program for the Province Communication, response. Initiatives campaign on DRRM Education and during fire/disaster • Moderate level of DDRM Public prevention months awareness for policy Awareness • Awareness on makers, managers and disasters is high due professionals to recent disasters • Low level of DRRM • Various modes used awareness among the to disseminate DRM public no formal advocacy messages (radio, strategy/program for posters, meetings, DRRM

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas community gatherings) • Initial system in place for early warning and DRM messages • Advocacy and awareness campaigns integrated into environmental programs • Coordination with specific sectors (mining and agriculture) in place, media (esp. Radio) involved in information dissemination 5 2.7 • Livelihood programs • Inadequate supply of • Install system to ensure • TA/FA from Resiliency of Moderate available from water (water shortage) that emergency services WFP/DOH/Private Critical Services national and even during normal and critical services are Hospitals/Clinics provincial conditions, water adequate, resilient in time government, NGOS, shortage during summer for emergencies. etc. • Inadequate capacity of • Strengthen medical • Presence of water provincial and district services and capacity to delivery services hospitals in terms of reach far flung areas (trucks) in 5 medical equipment,

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas municipalities manpower, resources • Volunteer nurses may • Inadequate supply of be tapped during medicine during major emergencies and disasters disasters • Several areas not • There are available accessible to critical stocks of medicine emergency services • Provincial and district hospitals may not be well‐ equipped for major emergencies. The Provincial Hospital lacks trauma unit, patients are brought to Baguio General Hospital for advance medical attention • There are stocks of medicine but may not be enough for a major disaster; 6 2.7 • Damage assessment • Poor resiliency of • Landslide Mitigation Plan • TA/FA from Resiliency of Moderate conducted by the infrastructure in Benguet. for Benguet Province WFP/Provincial Infrastructure Provincial Engineering The province sustained • Infrastructure vulnerability Government/MGB/Local Office and PPDO massive damages to assessment experts • The engineering roads, power supply, • Retrofitting program for group has the water supply, other critical structures

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas capacity to construct services in Typhoon temporary Pepeng 2009. Still 80% to infrastructure. full recovery after 2 years • Province purchased of reconstruction heavy equipment and • No retrofitting program rescue equipment for critical structures. • LGUS have capacity to • No technical capacity to restore functionality assess resiliency of key of infrastructure infrastructure systems in case of • No information available disruption. Blocked on potential impacts of roads are cleared disasters to faster by LGUS infrastructure, compared to National information/studies on Government impact of disasters on infra not readily available • No internal capacity yet for risk assessment on infrastructure • Lacks funds for rehabilitation 7 2.8 • Emergency • Lack of Emergency • Strengthening the • TA from Emergency Moderate Operations Center is Operations Plan Emergency Management WFP/OCD/National Management temporarily lodged at • Limited emergency drills capacity of the Province Government the Provincial (for earthquake only) • Improve stockpiling system Governor’s Office • First responders, rescue by increasing supply and • There are standard team are not full time including needs of

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas operations procedure (provincial employees vulnerable and special for selected frontline who are activated in time groups agencies such as of disaster) • Increase disaster social welfare, health, • Lack of preparedness preparedness of PNP and fire program for communities communities (CBDRM) • Earthquake drills and and leaders simulations • Stockpiling limited to rice, conducted canned goods, blankets • There is enough and used clothes (lacks stockpile of foods for water, food for infants disasters and elderly) • Emergency management service under BFP in place 8 2.7 • Contingency planning • No permanent evacuation • Establish permanent • TA/FA from WFP Resource Moderate conducted thru OCD centers. Schools, evacuation (multi‐ Management, (ongoing) churches and government purpose) centers Logistics and • Province conducts buildings are used as • Institutionalize Contingency logistics inventory of evacuation centers. contingency planning Planning resources There are no emergency • Acquisition of appropriate • Resources are kits in the evacuations emergency equipment generally easy to centers. Sanitation is a big mobilize when issue in temporary needed. Most evacuation centers. vulnerable are Insufficient toilets, etc. prioritized in resource • No contingency and mobilization recovery plans in place

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas (on‐going) • Inadequate resources, logistics, emergency equipment • Lack of communication systems for remote areas • Procurement of emergency supplies constrained by accounting and budgeting procedures • Need for better identification and mapping of hotspots needing relief during disasters; need for common systems for remote areas 9 2.2 • Risk identification • Lack of technical capacity • Conduct province‐wide • TA/FA/Hardware Hazard, Low conducted (hazard for HVRA HVRA support from WFP Vulnerability maps by MGB) • Limited hazard • Build appropriate capacity and Risk information/ hazard maps on HVRA Assessment (landslide susceptibility • Establish appropriate only c/o MGB) network of early warning • Province may be unaware system of other risks and vulnerabilities such as

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas faults, soft soils, subsidence, etc. • Only 4 out of 9 municipalities have early warning devices (rain gauge at Atok, Buguias, La Trinidad, Tuba)Internal capacity for HVRA still lacking; EWS system already in place, with some aspects building upon indigenous knowledge; level of awareness on HVR still low because info not readily available, risk awareness is low • No risk assessment, vulnerability and capacity analysis (VCA) impact assessment; 10 2.2 • Investment in flood • Risk parameters not fully • Promote Risk‐Sensitive • TA/FA from WFP Risk‐Sensitive Low control programs in integrated in PPFP and CLUP in all municipalities Urban (and place municipal land use and • Promote effective and safe Rural) • Enforcement of development planning. construction technologies Development building codes and Limited risks information on sloping lands. and Mitigation hazards fall on the used in previous plans, • Promote and finance

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas municipal CLUPs only includes EQ retrofitting of vulnerable governments. There parameters. infrastructure are areas where • Building codes strictly codes are strictly enforced in some LGUS enforced. There are but weak in others also areas where • Communities are aware enforcement is weak. of the risks but accept them due to spatial constraints as there is a lack of safer areas to build their houses • Inadequate capital investments on DRR due to lack of funds, very expensive projects • No plan on retrofitting and reinforcement of vulnerable infrastructure

Municipality of Tublay

INDICATOR STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas • EO issued creating the • MDRRMC has been created; but • Define roles and • TA from WFP Info MDRRM Council. Council roles and responsibilities not fully responsibilities of dissemination, seminar needs to be supported by defined MDRRMC, Legislative on DRRM / DRRM Act / committees • EO creating DRRM Council needs briefing on DRRM, DRRM sound practices • Existing DRRM ordinance to be improved to make it more DRRM Act needs to be 1 in place pro‐active communicated to Effectiveness of 2.5 • Municipal Ordinance on • Need to communicate DRRM communities Legislative Low LDRRM officer policies at community level • Resource generation Framework • P1.8M fund available for • Minimal funds for DRRM, P1.8M DRRM fund available for DRRM when • Municipal officials, damages from Pepeng estimated implementers have good at P60M knowledge of DRRM • Barangay tanods and BDC • No established DRRM Office • Creation of DRRM • TA from WFP also in place for DRRM • No personnel for DRRM Office Office with 2 • There are existing • No incident command system in appropriate Effectiveness of 2.5 committee structure for place manpower and Institutional Low disaster response; roles • Lack of clear system on decision resource allocation, Arrangements and responsibilities making • Emergency generally understood • Some confusion in terms of roles Operations Planning during actual disasters • 3 • Barangay volunteers • No formal capacity building • DRRM Capacity • TA from Training and 2.3 active during Pepeng, program or strategy for DRRM Building Plan, Allocate WFP/OCD/Provincial Capacity Low disasters • Trainings mostly on response e.g. and source out funds Government Building • Trainings on 1st aid, First Aid, Rescue and Contingency for training, Lobby

INDICATOR STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas rescue skills, and Planning. Other specialized creation of Regional contingency planning; trainings needed. /Provincial DRRM providers are PNRC, OCD, • Lack of funds for training, no Training Center PNP, BFP; incentives for trainings • There is budget allocation for DRRM trainings • Municipal and barangay • Lack of IEC program / awareness • Formulate DRRM IEC • Ta from WFP/NGOs 4 officials are aware of raising campaign on DRRM program Advocacy, DRR, PNP and BFP • Low level of DRRM awareness Communication, 2.2 provide disaster‐related among the public Education and Low IEC Public • IECS during barangay Awareness general assemblies • Water sources are • Limited medical services in the • Improve capacity of • TA/FA from springs and water Municipality. Access to medical Municipal Health WFP/Provincial delivery, treatments is hampered by road Center, Government/DOH/Priv 5 • BHCS able to cope with blockages due to landslides • Ensure food security ate Hospitals/Clinics 2.0 Resiliency of simple medical needs • Several areas not accessible to in Atok Low Critical Services • Churches and schools as critical emergency services during • Ensure resiliency of temporary evacuation typhoons and landslides emergency centers • Shortage of rice supply during operations/services disasters • Flooding is not a major • Roads annually damaged due to • Formulate a Landslide • TA/FA from 6 2.5 issue landslides Mitigation Program WFP/Provincial Resiliency of Low • All barangay halls were • Water scarce during summer, for the Municipality Government/MGB/Loc Infrastructure safe during Typhoon streams are damaged and soiled • Promote and finance al experts

INDICATOR STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas Pepeng; during typhoons and landslides, retrofitting of • Ability to restore road 2‐3 days to restore water source vulnerable schools, networks through • No retrofitting program for community centers, community effort and critical structures. structures provincial support • Rice supply good for 5‐ days • PNP and BFP plus • Lack of Emergency Operations • Formulate Emergency • TA from Mayor's office provide Plan Operations Plan; WFP/Provincial immediate action during • No EOC (Police, Fire and Mayor's source funding for Government/OCD/Nati emergencies office provide immediate proactive onal Government • EQ drills in schools; response) implementation of preparatory meetings • No contingency and recovery EOP including convened for forecasted plans community hazards • Lack of preparedness program for preparedness, 7 2.0 • Food stockpiles good for communities community and Emergency Low 5 days • institutional drills, Management No permanent evacuation centers • Brgy. Volunteers serve as • No permanent food storage creation of response rescue responders • Earthquake drills not conducted team regularly (subject to funds) • Establish permanent • Stockpiles good for 5 days only evacuation center and warehouse; improve stockpile to include supplies for people with special needs

INDICATOR STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas • Contingency planning • Inadequate emergency resources, • Establish Municipal • TA/FA from WFP training recently logistics, equipment MIS System under 8 conducted • Lack of contingency planning MPDO; Resource • Existing inventory of • Acquisition of Management, 2.2 equipment undertaken; appropriate Logistics and Low conducted initial ID of emergency Contingency resources during equipments, Planning contingency planning • Formulation and training implementation of contingency plans • MPDC, MSWD, Eng'g in • Lack of technical capacity for • Develop appropriate • TA/FA/Hardware charge of post‐disaster HVRA capacity on HVRA support from assessment; • Lack of hazard information/ • Build Municipal WFP/Provincial 9 • Community awareness of hazard maps (landslide knowledge in using Government/Local Hazard, hazards is high susceptibility only c/o DENR‐ HVRA information experts 2.2 Vulnerability • Landslide hazard map MGB) Low and Risk available Assessment • Importance of hazard mapping recognized • Post‐disaster assessment conducted 10 • CLUP updating currently • CLUP needs updating (on‐going). • Develop capacity for • TA/FA from Risk‐Sensitive ongoing, to integrate Limited risk information used in Risk‐Sensitive Land WFP/Provincial Urban (and 2.2 DRRM the old CLUP Use Plan, Promote Government/ Local Rural) Low • Building code enforced in • Difficult implementation of risk‐ effective and safe experts Development business areas sensitive land use planning in construction and Mitigation • Some investments in Tublay, lack of safe spaces to technologies on

INDICATOR STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas slope protection build houses sloping lands. • Limited enforcement of building code/building permit system, enforced only in business areas

Municipality of Atok

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas • EO organizing the • No resolution formally creating • Lobby with SB • TA from WFP Info DRRM Council in place DRRM Office formulation of dissemination, seminar • Mun. can request • Compliance with DRRM Act resolution supporting on DRRM / DRRM Act / 1 additional resources constrained by policies from the creation of DRRM DRRM sound practices Effectiveness of 2.4 from the provincial national level (budget, Office in Atok Legislative Low and national gov't and procurement, etc.) • Resource generation Framework NGOS • DRRM Fund is small. External • Volunteers augment support from national, existing manpower provincial and NGOS needed and resources • Roles and functions • No DRRM office yet • Creation of DRRM • TA from WFP defined in EO • EO defines roles and functions Office 2 of committees but not • Emergency Operations Effectiveness of 2.2 individual responsibilities, Planning Institutional Low sometimes there is confusion • Resource generation Arrangements on who should do what, may lead to lack of coordination, fingerpointing (Typhoon

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas Pepeng) • Ability to engage in other DRR activities limited by financial constraints • Basic DRM, first aid • Absence of DRRM capacity • Formulate DRRM • TA from and rescue training building program Capacity Building Plan, WFP/OCD/Provincial conducted; Equipment • Limited trainings received e.g. allocate and source out Government 3 purchased and Response, first aid, rescue funds for training, Training and 2.2 donated; • Lack of funds, no incentives, lobby/support creation Capacity Low • P30,000 allotted for not all barangays attended of Regional/Provincial Building training on Disaster • No formal process for sharing DRRM Training Center Response lessons and skills • BFP conducts training in Barangays • Use of text messaging • Lack of IEC program / • Formulate Municipal • TA from WFP/NGOs for warning; forest fire awareness raising campaign on DRRM IEC Program prevention, DRRM 4 • Earthquake and fire • Lack of knowledge and Advocacy, drills conducted awareness on DRRM Communication, 2.0 • Info drives usually • Lack of communications Education and Low during public equipment; lack of generators Public gatherings for power outages; Awareness • There are plans to • Not all sectors engaged in produce IEC materials DRRM • Media maybe used for info dissemination

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas • There is plan to • Only 1 Municipal Health • Build medical capacity • TA/FA from improve health centers Center. Limited medical of Municipal Health WFP/Provincial and increase services, staff, and equipment Center, Establish Government/DOH/Priv ambulances in the Municipality. Major MOU/agreements/link ate Hospitals/Clinics cases brought to tertiary ages with private hospitals in La Trinidad and hospitals/clinics during Baguio. Hospital services emergencies inaccessible to far‐flung • Ensure resiliency of 5 barangay; critical services 2.0 Resiliency of • Several areas inaccessible to Low Critical Services emergency services during typhoons and landslides • Health stations damaged during past typhoons • Limited supply of medicine Access to roads is critical in terms of serious casualties • High possibility of water shortage • Shortage of rice during • Road damages, power outage • Formulate a Landslide • TA/FA from disasters, resorts to and lack of communication Mitigation Plan for the WFP/Provincial camote and potatoes hampered response operations Atok Government/MGB/Loc 6 2.1 • Households stock during Typhoon Pepeng, Took • Ensure food security in al experts Resiliency of Low food and water more than 3 months to restore Atok Infrastructure • Capital investments damaged major roads, Several • Establish appropriate made on resiliency of weeks to restore water supply drainage system infrastructure and in some areas

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas utilities systems but • Rice shortage experienced not consciously for during disasters (resorted to DRR camote, potatoes) • Lack of drainage system • Planning undertaken • Emergency Operations Plan • Formulate Emergency • TA from every 3 years needs updating Operations Plan; WFP/Provincial • There is an existing • Limited emergency sops e.g. source funding for Government/OCD/Nati plan with sops and Social welfare, health, police, proactive onal Government specific roles and and fire implementation of EOP responsibilities of • First responders are including community different volunteers, not full time preparedness, offices/sectors, • Lack of preparedness program community and • First aid and rescue for communities and leaders institutional drills, training available at • Drills and simulations rarely creation of response 7 2.3 the barangay; undertaken due to limited team Emergency Low • MSWD stockpiles funds • Establish permanent Management certain amount in • No warehouse for stockpiling evacuation center and preparation for of food, stockpiling limited to warehouse; improve disasters rice, canned goods, lacks food stockpile to include • Barangay officials are for infants, elderly, etc. supplies for people designated as first • No permanent evacuation with special needs responders; centers (uses school buildings • BFP and Police have and churches) SOPs, EQ and fire drills • No regular response planning • There is a warehouse for stockpiling of food

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas • There is an existing • Absence of DRRM Resource • Establish Municipal • TA/FA from WFP inventory of Management system, MIS MIS System under equipment that can be • Inadequate resources and MPDO; used during logistics • Acquisition of emergencies • Lack of emergency equipment appropriate 8 • Plan for deployment e.g. Power generators, emergency Resource exist stretchers, rescue vehicles, equipments, Management, 1.8 reliable communications communication Logistics and Low equipment, lack of transport systems, EWS Contingency for resource mobilization • Formulation and Planning • Absence of early warning implementation of system contingency plans • Lack of contingency planning • Lack of communication systems for remote areas • Lack of training for assessment • There is awareness of • Lack of technical capacity to • Outsource experts to • TA/FA/Hardware hazards and certain conduct HVRA conduct HVRA support from vulnerabilities due to • Limited knowledge in using • Build Municipal WFP/Provincial 9 past disasters Hazard maps (HVRA results) knowledge in using Government/Local Hazard, • Information on • HVRA information experts 2.0 Vulnerability hazards Low and Risk communicated to the Assessment community; • Post‐disaster damage assessment being conducted

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas • CLUP is being updated • Municipal CLUP needs • Outsource experts to • TA/FA from to integrate DRRM updating. Limited risk info formulate Risk‐ WFP/Provincial • Zoning ordinance is used in old CLUP Sensitive Land Use Government/ Local strictly complied with • Limited safe areas to build Plan, Promote experts 10 • There is regulation on houses effective and safe Risk‐Sensitive commercial • Limited enforcement of construction Urban (and 2.3 establishments; for building code/building permit technologies on Rural) Low residential system sloping lands. Development construction before • Issuance of building permits • Promote and finance and Mitigation building permit are limited to built‐up areas retrofitting of • Schools 1‐storey and • No plan for retrofitting and vulnerable high‐school 2‐storey reinforcement of vulnerable infrastructures are mostly safe in infrastructure construction design

Field Investigation Report Cagayan Province and the Municipalities of Amulung and Enrile March 8 – March 11, 2011

Submitted by: Mr. Atty. Violeta S. Seva, LIA Expert, EMI Mr. Moses Kent B. Borinaga, Provincial Coordinator, EMI Ms. Joyce Lyn L. Salunat, Provincial Coordinator, EMI

March 21, 2011

Field Investigation Team and Provincial Contacts

• The EMI Field Investigation traveling team was composed of Atty. Violeta S. Seva as the Team Leader, Ms. Joyce Lyn L. Salunat, and Mr. Moses Kent B. Borinaga. The team prepared Question Guides and Workshop Kits for the participants.

• Accompanying the team during the LGU visits and workshops was Ms. Saripa Alangadi, the field monitor of WFP. She shared the WFP vehicle with the EMI team.

• The Provincial Social Welfare Development Office, headed by Ms. Edna T. Junio, arranged for the invitations of the participants, venue and caterer. She was assisted by Mr. Bonifacio Cuarteros, the Division Chief of PSWDO, who personally informed the mayors of Amulung and Enrile on the CNADPR workshops. Ms. Rosario B. Manrac and Mr. Restituto P. Vargas assisted the team during the workshops in the municipalities.

Field Investigation Agenda

The Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response workshop has two particular objectives:

Table 7. Field Investigation Agenda

Day Time Activity

March 8, 8am‐10am Team Preparations and Travel to Cagayan 2011 12am‐5pm Arrival; Preparatory Meeting

March 9, 8am‐12pm Preparations; Cagayan Province DRRI workshop 2011 12pm‐5.30pm Cagayan Province DRRI Workshop and Provincial KIIs

March 10, 8am‐12pm Municipality of Enrile DRRI Workshop 2011 12pm‐4.30pm Municipality of Enrile DRRI Workshop

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

Day Time Activity

March 11, 8am‐12pm Municipality of Amulung DRRI Workshop 011 12pm‐4.30pm Municipality of Amulung DRRI Workshop 5.00pm‐7pm De‐briefing

March 12, Travel back 2011

Summary of Field Activities

Courtesy Call o EMI and UNWFP representatives proceeded to Tuguegarao City to meet with officials in Cagayan province on Feb. 24, 2011. The team visited OCD Region 2 and met with representatives of Dir. Norma Talosig to brief them on the DRR capacity needs assessment to be conducted in the province. A courtesy visit was also made to Dir. Arnel Garcia of DSWD Region 2 to provide his office with the necessary background about the project and to

apprise him and his staff of the activities to Figure 27. The Core Team: (from left) Jaja Salunat, be conducted in the coming weeks. A Resty Vargas, Ms. Junio, Kent Borinaga, Atty. Seva and Bonnie Cuarteros. meeting was also held with Gov. Alvaro Antonio and Ms. Edna Junio, the Provincial Social Welfare and Development Officer.

Arrival and Preparatory Meeting/ Briefing o The visiting team arrived in Tuguegarao in the mid‐afternoon of March 8, 2011 for a five‐day Field Investigation.

o A preparatory meeting was held at the PSWD Office in the Municipality of Penablanca. Ms. Junio, Mr. Cuarteros and Mr. Vargas briefed the visiting team on the Figure 28. With the ordinance on DRRMC and DRRMO still pending at the legislature, PSWDO is currently the arrangements made for the workshops. main DRM agency in the province. Also, Atty. Seva interviewed Ms. Junio on the Legal and Institutional Arrangements on DRM in Cagayan.

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

Provincial Workshop o The Workshop was held in the Provincial Capitol Conference Hall. Due to colder winds prevalent in the Cagayan Province at that time, the venue became an ideal place for group discussions and debates.

o It was attended by more than 40 participants from the regional and provincial agencies headed by the provincial government. Worth noting was the presence of two members of the provincial Figure 29. The Panel: from left are Atty Seva, Ms. Junio, legislative branch or the Sangguniang Board Member Lauigan and Police Provincial Director Panglunsod namely, Board Member Ma. Aplasca. Olivia Pascual and Board Member Mila Catabang Lauigan.

o The event was partially covered by the local media.

o Registration of participants was the first order in the set of activities (see Annex 1 for the Attendance). For an hour, the members

of the visiting team had informal Figure 30. Atty. Violeta Seva presented the background discussions with some of the participants. of the project and the objectives of the workshop. This waiting time period became an opportunity to get acquainted with the DRR activities of some agencies in the province.

o Ms. Junio gave the opening remarks in behalf of Gov. Alvaro Trinidad Antonio. Afterwards, the participants were given the chance to introduce themselves.

o Atty. Seva provided the background of EMI and the UNWFP Capacity Needs Assessment Project. She also discussed the concept of mainstreaming and risk reduction by Figure 31. Figure 5. The participants come from different emphasizing the importance of integrating agencies and provincial government departments. DRR in the laws and institutional programs, projects and activities. In her presentation, she gave the participants an overview of the technical support the WFP will offer and the

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

objectives of the technical support. This information became helpful as the participants prepare for the capacity gaps identification activity in the latter part of the workshop.

o Mr. Cuarteros and Mr. Vargas first presented the hazard profile of Cagayan. It was then followed by an overview of strategies and activities of the province before, during and after a disaster. An inventory of material and human resources Figure 32. Figure 8. Rescue equipments of the province were also presented. See Annex 2 for the copy of the presentation was provided to the visiting team.

o After his brief discussion on the Disaster Risk Resiliency Indicators (DRRI) tool and the mechanics of the small group workshop, Mr. Borinaga then randomly divided the participants into three groups. Each group was instructed to rate all 10 indicators in 5 levels.

o The groups were constantly reminded to come up with a consensus in rating each indicator. As the groups have settled in, the members elected a facilitator and assigned someone to document the explanations. Two groups were able to finish right after lunch.

o While waiting for the third group to finish the exercise, the team conducted key informant interviews to selected respondents.

o Group reporting started at 2:00PM with Mr. Leopoldo Coronan, the facilitator for G‐1, articulated the group’s outputs.

o Mr. Coronan was followed by two other reporters namely, Leo L. Bonag of PAG‐ASA (G‐2) and Corazon Torribo, the Provincial Director of DILG (G‐1).

o The discussions between groups heated up when the rates were tabulated and the team found out that in Indicators 2‐5 two groups has rates that were two levels apart. Each group was firm with their respective rate and a debate ensued. Ultimately, one of the groups changed their rate, an amicable rate was provided. In the end, the participants were happy to provide a picture of the DRR situation in the Cagayan Province based on the DRR Indicator tool exercise.

o Realizing the deficiencies they have on DRR and in attaining resiliency from disasters through the exercise, the participants brought out the gaps, provided recommendations to address the gaps, and supplied the potential WFP interventions they need in the province.

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

o The good thing of having participants belonging to different agencies or sectors is getting a 360 degree perspective on the DRM gaps.

o With all the provincial level gaps revealed, the workshop ended at 5:30PM.

Municipal Workshop in Enrile o The Municipality of Enrile is a 20 to 30‐ minute drive from the City of Tuguegarao. Within the Municipality, one could notice hectares of maize and tobacco planted on low lying areas near the Cagayan River. During the floods, these agricultural products, unlike rice, will be damage and gone to waste.

o The Workshop was held at the Legislative Building. The edifice was not spared during the floods that reached at least a meter in the first floor.

o The Municipal Workshop followed the same agenda with the Provincial Workshop Figure 34. Atty. Violeta Seva presents the Identified gaps along with recommendations and WFP Areas of except, Administrator Arhel Isidro Luyun intervention welcome the participants in behalf of Mayor Robert Turingan. After his opening remarks, Atty. Seva provided an overview on the project, EMI and WFP support for LGUs like Enrile. Administrator Luyun then presented Enrile’s profile and the municipality’s DRR Management (see Annex 3 for his presentations). Mr. Borinaga then discussed the concepts of mainstreaming and resiliency, the DRRI tool exercise and the small group mechanics unaided by his Figure 33. Administrator Luyun discusses the DRR PowerPoint presentation. Management in Enrile.

o Unlike the Provincial Workshop, the participants were divided first according to their respective agencies role in DRR that is either line or support. Line agencies are those that make decisions and implement DRR policies, programs and activities. They can be responders, planners, technocrats and law makers. While agencies that provide supporting role such as financial and logistical in nature were considered as support agencies. After such partition, they were then evenly grouped into two with each group having members from line and support agencies.

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

o The succeeding pictures show some pictures taken during the workshop. The participants were really passionate on something that has impact on their lives, family, property and municipality.

Figure 35. Group 1 was facilitated by Atty. Violeta Seva

Figure 36. Small group discussions on DRRI facilitated by Mr. Moses Kent Borinaga

• Municipal Workshop in Enrile o The Municipality of Amulung is a 40 to an hour drive from Tuguegarao City. Similar with the workshop in Enrile, the generic agenda, presentation and corresponding activities was followed with the exception of the following: 1) Mayor Nicanor de Leon gave the opening remarks, 2) DRR or EM activities was presented by Ms. Myrna Matias, 3) an actual earthquake occurred in Japan and the province of Cagayan was under Tsunami alert.

o The three‐day LGU FI ended with a De‐briefing with dinner between the EMI visiting team headed by Atty. Seva and PSWD headed by PSWDO Junio.

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

o The following are some photographs taken during the last day:

Figure 37. Workshops are informative, interactive, lively and fun. The atmosphere of easiness was introduced by Mayor de Leon during the Amulung Workshop.

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

Figure 38. The Amulung Gym can be converted as an Evacuation Center during disasters.

Figure 39. Graduation picture during the Amulung Workshop.

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

Challenges Encountered

• Participation during the workshops for all 3 LGUs was generally remarkable. The LGUs manifested their support for the activities by providing the venue and facilities. The number of participants exceeds the original expectation; with key stakeholders were able to contribute in the small group discussions and plenary sessions. The regional office of the Office of Civil Defense was not able to send a representative during the three workshops.

• The gaps and reasons for the DRRI ratings were captured easily due to the enthusiasm shown by the key stakeholders although the prevailing mindset in tackling the indicators at that time tend towards emergency response and relief rather than DRR.

• Apart from revealing their deficiencies, the participants also reflected on the guide questions, the sample DRR activities mentioned and the workshop as a whole. However, the documents supporting some of their claims such as contingency plans and draft ordinances were scarce and were not readily available for sharing during the workshops.

• As of this writing, PSWDO are still compiling the following documents for delivery to EMI: 1) Org chart, manpower complement of PWSD during disasters 2) Budget for DRM for the Province and the Municipalities of Enrile and Amulung 3) PWSD Work and Financial Plan on DRM for 2011 4) A list of Civil Society partners of PSWD on DRM as well as MSWD offices of Amulung and Enrile 5) A list of National Government Agency Partners 6) Accomplishment reports on DRM in 2010 7) A list of trainings conducted on DRM from 2009‐2011 8) Contingency or DRM related plans from the health and agriculture provincial offices 9) Comprehensive Land Use Program Zoning Ordinance

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

Data for the Initial Findings

Disaster Risk Reduction Resiliency Indicators Results

CAGAYAN Municipality of Municipality of PROVINCE Enrile Amulung Ave. Ave. Score Ave. Ave. Score Ave. Ave. Score Score Key Area Score Key Area Score Key Area Legal and Institutional Processes Indicator 1. Effectiveness of 3.7 3.0 3.0 Legislative Framework 3.7 2.5 3.3 Indicator 2. Effectiveness of 3.7 2.0 3.5 Institutional Arrangements Awareness and Capacity Building Indicator 3. Training and Capacity 2.7 2.0 2.5 Building Indicator 4. Advocacy, 2.8 2.0 2.5 Communication, Education and 3.0 2.0 2.5 Public Awareness Critical Services and Infrastructure Resiliency Indicator 5. Resiliency of Critical 3.3 2.0 2.5 Services 3.0 2.0 2.5 Indicator 6. Resiliency of 2.7 2.0 2.5 Infrastructure Emergency Management and Response Planning Indicator 7. Emergency 3.3 2.0 2.5 Management 3.2 2.0 2.5 Indicator 8. Resource Management, 3.0 2.0 2.5 Logistics and Contingency Planning Development Planning, Regulation and Risk Mitigation Indicator 9. Hazard, Vulnerability 3.0 2.5 3.5 and Risk Assessment Indicator 10. Risk‐Sensitive Urban 2.7 2.3 2.8 (and Rural) Development and 2.3 2.0 2.0 Mitigation AVERAGE SCORE LGU 3.1 3.1 2.2 2.2 2.7 2.7

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

DRM Gaps, Recommendations and Potential WFP Intervention

Cagayan Province

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS 1 3.7 • Provincial DRRM • Pending adoption of the • Lobby with the SP for Technical training Effectiveness of High Council and DRRM ordinance creating PDRRMC immediate passage of Legislative Office to be created and PDRRMO ordinance Framework awaiting final approval • Limited research, policy • Training on policy from Sangguniang making and technical making, policy research Panlalawigan writing on DRM for and technical writing on • Municipal LGUs are legislative arm and the DRRM for provincial and already organizing their PDRMMC member municipal DRMMC DRRMCs through the issuance of Sanggunian Resolutions. 2 3.7 • Roles and • Organizational structure is • Lobby with the SP for No intervention Effectiveness of High responsibilities are well not updated in accordance immediate passage from WFP Institutional defined as far as the with RA 10121 • DRMMO to draft a policy

Arrangements old PDCC is concerned. • Lack of policy guidelines and `executive • Active partnership with policy information on relief pronouncement to be CSO and government donations signed by the Governor agencies for DRRM. • No official representation CSO, academe, church from CSOs although they and other organizations have programs on disasters. respond and assist in They leave after recovery efforts after accomplishing their mission. disasters. Most CSO are • Effectiveness of institutional not involved in arrangements for DRRM not

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS preparedness activities. regularly evaluated. • Existence of well‐ • Need to strengthen disaster organized provincial reporting system especially and municipal rescue Barangay‐level reporting. units.

3 2.7 • DILG is integrating • Lack of DRRM capacity • Formulation of capacity Technical and Training and Moderate DRRM in the conduct of development program. development for the financial Capacity training among the • Limited resources for province assistance from WFP (series of Building local Chief Executives training and capacity • Source out additional and Barangay officials. building funding workshops and • Lack of capacity to • Train/develop staff and seminars) document DRM knowledge, provide necessary IT Technical and initiatives, best practices equipments for financial documentation assistance from WFP

4 3.0 • DRRM IEC conducted • No DRRM IEC plan • Formulate a DRRM IEC WFP to assist in Advocacy, Moderate thru drills, mostly • No emergency drills for the plan formulating DRRM Communication, school‐based activities community. IEC plan Education and • DRRM information can be disseminated thru Public modern gadgets, Awareness facilities and technology. 5 3.3 • Health services are • Inadequate hospital • Train EMS staff Technical Resiliency of Moderate resilient during disaster facilities during disasters. • Acquire mobile assistance from Critical Services • Lacks sanitation in emergency response WFP in terms of

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS evacuation centers. facilities/ equipments in training and • Inadequate shelter, strategic areas acquisition of relocation program • Prepare a resettlement hardware • Inadequate livelihood plan programs • Conduct census. • GIS training; • Adopt sustainable livelihood programs (Mindanao model) 6 2.7 • Presence of reliable • Lack of vehicles for damage • Acquisition of emergency Hardware / Resiliency of Moderate water, sewer and storm assessment to affected and vehicles (4x4 rapid financial Infrastructure drainage systems inaccessible areas. damage assessment, assistance support • Lack of sewage disposal amphibian) from WFP facilities • Request for power supply • Lack of water transportation from public utility to isolated areas provider • Slow power restoration, • Acquisition of may take long due to communication facilities damage/fallen electric post; • Provide mobile and poor drainage system. stationary warehouses in • Lack of communication strategic locations device/equipment • Implementation of flood • Lack of food storage control master plan facilities • Difficulty in implementing flood control management plan in Cagayan

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS 7 3.3 • Contingency plans in • Lack of an updated • Provide training on EM Technical and Emergency Moderate place contingency plan based on plan preparation based hardware support Management • Presence of emergency international standards on IAEMS. responders with basic (IAEMS) • Establish state of the art equipments • No permanent Emergency EOC • IEC for DRRM Operations Center • Draw up a conducted in schools • Insufficient training on comprehensive • Emergency drills are emergency management emergency management conducted every • Emergency operations plan training program quarter. needs updating 8 3.0 • Disaster preparedness • Lack of disaster‐proof, child, • Establish safe evacuation Technical, Resource Moderate activities conducted. gender, elderly, physically centers in strategic financial, Management, • Frontline agencies have challenged friendly locations in each of hardware food support Logistics and emergency SOPs evacuation centers Cagayan’s 3 districts • Can request additional • Lack of EM equipment (for • Acquisition of basic Contingency resources from national fire fighting, water rescue, emergency equipments Planning agencies life saving kits, etc.) • Stockpiling and provision • Logistics is well • Insufficient emergency food of supplies sensitive to managed. supplies the needs of special • Prepositioning of food • Contingency plan needs groups supplies being done. updating • Procure mobile water Food stocks are ready • Lack of manpower, funding purifier for emergency relief and equipment 9 3.0 • Provincial and • Lacks HVRA capacity at • Train personnel on HVRA Technical and Hazard, Moderate municipal HVRA in Barangay level mapping hardware support Vulnerability place • Lack of HVRA Maps and • Provide community‐ and Risk • EWS devices installed in training for GIS specialist based rain gauges some areas of the • Lack of Early Warning • Institutionalize feedback,

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS Assessment province devices at the provincial monitoring and • Updating PPFP, shall level evaluation system integrate DRR/CCA • Lack of an institutionalized feedback, monitoring and evaluation system • Some areas are inaccessible. 10 2.3 • DRR initiatives • Insufficient training on risk‐ • Provide training on TA from WFP Risk‐Sensitive Low undertaken such as sensitive urban and rural mainstreaming DRR and Urban (and coco‐fiber to prevent development planning CCA in the preparation of Rural) slides and soil erosion • Limited/lax enforcement of Development Plans Building Codes Development • Small capital investments and Mitigation for DRR. Inadequate investment in flood control. • Informal settlers residing in high risk areas (ex. along river banks) • Poor physical planning in many areas of the province

Municipality of Enrile

INDICATOR RATING REASONS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP INTERVENTION 1 3.0 • EO#2 series of 2011 • No MDRRM Office. • Draft an ordinance Technical Effectiveness of Moderate issued reorganizing the • Lack of knowledge on DRRM creating the LDRRMO. Assistance from Legislative Municipal Disaster • DRRM not yet translated in Establish a permanent WFP Framework Coordinating Council local ordinances office into the Municipal • Insufficient funds for DRRM • Strengthen capacity Disaster Risk Reduction building and training and Management among municipal officials Council and members of the • Moderate awareness MDRRMC of DRRM 2 2.0 • Municipal Rescue 22 in • DRRM Office not yet • Technical assistance from Technical and Effectiveness of Low place established OCD Financial Institutional • Presence of disaster • Lack of coordination • Organize Disaster Assistance Arrangements control units mechanisms Management Office and • Lack of pre‐disaster set meetings preparedness program • Reflect the roles and • Absence of document that responsibilities in the EO defines roles and or ordinance and in responsibilities disaster risk master plan • Lack of skilled personnel for for specific types of DRRM hazard 3 2.0 • Emergency response • Lack of DRRM capacity • Look for other source of Technical and Training and Low training available for building program funding Financial Capacity volunteers • Insufficient funds for • To develop a training Assistance Hardware support Building training and capacity program

INDICATOR RATING REASONS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP INTERVENTION building • To conduct training on from WFP • Lack of volunteers to be documentation for trained municipal staff 4 2.0 • Information • No advocacy IEC plan • To develop IEC plan and TA from WFP Advocacy, Low dissemination for • Inadequate skill on production of info Communication, emergency documentation and materials Education and preparedness and packaging experiences and response takes place best practices Public down to barangay level Awareness • IEC conducted by BFP • Priority areas are alerted immediately based on flood warning/monitoring levels. 5 2.0 • There are 2 designated • Lack of safe, permanent • Establish a safe TA and Hardware Resiliency of Low evacuation centers ‐‐ evacuation centers evacuation center with from WFP Critical Services church and school. • complete equipments and facilities including food and medicine • Training of volunteers on camp management 6 2.0 • Food Storage facility • Potable water shortage of • Request for Water Hardware support Resiliency of Low being constructed potable areas in flooded low purifier with generator from National Infrastructure • Stockpiling at lying areas. set government household level mainly • Lack of water purifier • Request construction of a rice. • Lack of reliable storage flood control

INDICATOR RATING REASONS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP INTERVENTION • Roads and facility transportation system in Enrile can be easily restored after disasters. 7 2.0 • Drills are conducted for • No drills for floods • Emergency Plan needs to TA , financial or Emergency Low fire and earthquake. • Lack of emergency be drafted food stocks Management • Capable in relief equipments. Rescue • Expand the conduct of needed from WFP operations and volunteers do not have emergency drills emergency services gears • Increase the number of • Alternative method in • Insufficient number of trained responders conducting EM trained responders • Acquire 5 boats and activities practiced. • Lack of rubber boats and distribute in strategic • Presence of Rescue water recue and transport areas Unit RESCUE 22 vehicle 8 2.0 • Response from the • Lack of a Local DRRM Plan • Rescue equipment badly TA, hardware Resource Low community • Lack of rescue equipment/ needed support from WFP Management, llogistics to respond during • Establishment/Creation of

Logistics and disasters for fire fighters an EOC is sought with (list of needed equipment communications Contingency supplied) equipment. Planning • No Control/ command • Equip EOC forecasting center (EOC type) and early warning devices • There is no contingency plan • Additional Rescue and SOPs in place for multi‐ equipment needed (e.g. hazards. Existing rubber boats, water Emergency/Contingency purifier)

INDICATOR RATING REASONS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP INTERVENTION Plan is not updated

9 2.5 • Hazard maps are • Lack of technical capacity to • Training, equipment and TA from WFP Hazard, Low available conduct Hazard software needed Vulnerability • Many hazards are Vulnerability Risk and Risk already known Assessments • Vulnerable areas have Assessment been identified 10 2.0 • CLUP is being updated, • Lack of technical personnel • Organize a TWG focusing TA from WFP Risk‐Sensitive Low to integrate on risk‐ sensitive land use on the risk assessment, Urban (and DRRM/CCA planning preparation and updating Rural) of risk‐sensitive land use plan Development and Mitigation

Municipality of Amulung

INDICATOR RATING REASONS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS 1 3.0 • EO No. 35 issued • No Municipal Ordinance • Draft Municipal ordinance No WFP Effectiveness of Moderate creating the LDRRM on DRRM Office Intervention Legislative Council • Insufficient financial Framework resources • Insufficient human resources 2 3.5 • Clear understanding of • No established MDRRMO • Creation of a MDRRMO Effectiveness of Moderate the organizational • Poor coordination system through an ordinance TA from WFP Institutional structure as far as in some Barangays, takes Arrangements MDCC is concerned. 5 days to report. • Duties and • Awareness raising responsibilities of campaign on DRRM Act MDCC is well‐defined and CCA is needed • Presence of organized Rescue Unit, RESCUE 47 3 2.5 • Trainings are available • Limited training for SAR • Formulate DRRM capacity TA assistance Training and Low mainly for response and WASAR, basic life building program from PDRRMC Capacity support • Conduct regular training and WFP

Building • Inadequate personnel to on SAR, WASAR, basic life document DRRM support and first aid knowledge, practices • Conduct training on • Inadequate funds for technical writing, training and capacity photography and building documentation

4 2.5 • Safety tips flyers for • Absence of IEC materials TA from WFP Advocacy, Low fire and earthquake • Lack of DRRM IEC plan Communication, are given away to the • No information officer Education and community and seminars are being Public conducted at the Awareness schools 5 2.5 • There are 48 core • Insufficient relocation • Request water purifier TA and FA, Resiliency of Low shelter units available. areas and housing. Needs • Purchase of lots for Hardware Critical Services more core shelter units relocation sites and support from especially in high risk provision of disaster proof WFP Barangays shelter • Insufficient livelihood • Livestock (large animals) opportunities for those and seeds (rice and corn) affected by the disasters are needed • Inadequate water supply during disasters • Lack of medical staff, equipment, supplies 6 2.5 • Good road condition. • Inadequate food storage • 2 Storage Facilities are FA and Hardware Resiliency of Low facility. needed support from Infrastructure • Silted rivers and canals • Establishment of flood • Soil erosion in river bends control structure • Absence of sewer and depending on soil type storm water drainage • Resettlement of high‐risk system. communities

7 2.5 • Stockpiling conducted • No EOP in place. • Formulate emergency TA , Stocks of Emergency Low • Drills are conducted in • No Emergency Operations operations plan food needed Management schools Center • Establish EOC equipped from WFP. • EM plan to be • Limited Stockpiling of with appropriate facilities formulated commodities and trained staff • Drills are conducted • Acquisition of EM limited to schools, not at equipments for firefigting, the community level SAR, EWS such as fire hose, ladder, cutter for live wire, pistolized nozzle, breathing apparatus, search light, flash light, light marker placed on towers, sire, rescue ropes, carabiners/ harness, axe, binoculars, night vision goggles, rubber boat and ambulance • Increase stockpiling capacity in preparation for disasters

8 2.5 • There is a localized • No Local DRRM Plan • Prepare a Local DRRM Plan TA and FA from Resource Low contingency plan. • Contingency plan needs • Update Contingency Plan WFP Management, to be updated • Consider other source of Logistics and • Insufficient funding for funding, resource DRRM mobilization Contingency • Rapid assessment Planning reporting system needs improvement. Sanctions should be imposed on delayed damage assessment reports from Barangays. 9 3.5 • Awareness among • No HVRA studies • HVRA studies (flood & TA and FA from Hazard, Moderate officials on hazards, undertaken landslides) are needed WFP Vulnerability vulnerabilities and • No early warning system • Acquisition of computers and Risk risks and devices with internet connection • Need to identify families to efficiently coordinate to Assessment in high risk areas the provincial, regional and national government 10 2.0 • CLUP needs updating • Lack of an updated CLUP • Updating of CLUP/ZO to TA and FA from Risk‐Sensitive Low to integrate DRRM • Lack of technical staff to incorporate DRR/CCA WFP Urban (Rural) undertake a Risk‐Sensitive • Capacity building on Risk‐ Development Land Use Plan Sensitive land Use Plan and Mitigation

Field Investigation Report Laguna Province and the Municipalities of Mabitac and Pila March 1 – March 3, 2011

Submitted by:

Mr. Jose Mari Daclan, Project Coordinator, EMI Mr. Marino Deocariza, LUP Expert, EMI Dr. Antonio Fernandez, Consultant, EMI Dr. Asteya Santiago, LIA Expert, EMI Atty. Violeta Seva, LIA Expert, EMI

25 March 2011

Field Investigation Team and Provincial Contacts

• The Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative (EMI) Field Investigation team was composed of Mr. Jose Mari Daclan, as the Team Leader, Mr. Marino Deocariza, Dr. Antonio Fernandez, Dr. Asteya Santiago, Atty. Violeta Seva and Ms. Zenaida Tejerero. The team prepared Question Guides and Workshop Kits for the participants.

• Accompanying the team during the LGU visits and workshops was Ms. Natasha Jaro, the field monitor of World Food Programme (WFP).

• The Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office, headed by Engr. Jen Sorel Jasareno, together with Mr. Romeo Panisales Jr. from the Provincial Social Welfare and Development Office, arranged for the invitations of the participants, logistical requirements such as venue and catering services. These offices also informed the municipal mayors of Pila and Mabitac on the CNA‐DPR workshop.

Field Investigation Agenda

The Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response workshop has two particular objectives:

1. To undertake an inventory and review of the existing capacity development initiatives and practices in DRRM at the provincial level down to the two selected municipalities, and;

2. To identify gaps and recommend areas for intervention.

Table 8. Field Investigation Agenda

Day Time Activity

March 1, 2011 8am‐9:00 Team Preparations and Registration for Laguna 10:00‐5:30pm Province Provincial DRRI Workshop and KIIs

March 2, 2011 8am‐12pm Municipality of Pila DRRI Workshop 12pm‐4.30pm Municipality of Pila DRRI Workshop

March 3, 2011 8am‐12pm Municipality of Mabitac DRRI Workshop 12pm‐4.30pm Municipality of Mabitac DRRI Workshop 5.00pm‐7pm De‐briefing

March 4, 2011 Travel back

Summary of Field Investigation Activities

Courtesy Call and Preparatory Meeting/Briefing o In preparation for the province’s CNA for DPR, the field investigation team composed of Mr. Jose Mari Daclan and Mr. Leigh Lingad from Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative (EMI) together with Mr. Abraham Abatneh and Ms. Natasha Jaro from World Food Programme (WFP) conducted a field visit and courtesy call to Hon. ER Ejercito, the Governor of Laguna on the 22nd of February 2011. While the governor had prior engagement during that time, the team was introduced to the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office and Provincial Social Welfare and Development Office.

o The purpose of the meeting is to discuss and finalize prior engagements regarding the project and to identify target municipalities for the workshop.

Arrival and Field Investigation Workshop o The FI team arrived in the province of Laguna on March 1, 2011 for the 3‐day Field Investigation. The team conducted workshops in the province and municipalities of Mabitac and Pila respectively.

Provincial Workshop o The Provincial workshop was held in Laguna Provincial Hospital on March 1, 2011.

o It was attended by 23 participants from the regional and provincial agencies headed by the provincial government. (Refer to the annexes for the list of participants during the workshop) Aside from the provincial agencies, the presence and participation of non‐government organization like the Philippine National Red Cross was worth noting.

o The workshop started at 9:35 in the morning with an introduction of Field Investigation Team from EMI and WFP. The participants introduced themselves as well on the team.

o An overview of the CNA‐ DPR initiative was presented by Mr. Jose Daclan to provide the participants’ a general idea of the project. He highlighted the importance of integrating DRR in the institutional policies, project and activities of the province. The objectives and purpose of the project was also discussed along with the flow and activities of the workshop.

o Engr. Jen Sorel Jasareno, the head of the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office (PDRRMO) provided a short presentation on the existing problems and disaster risk reduction activities of the province. Some of the conducted activities were basically trainings on search and rescue operations, fire rescue, basic first aid and life support, etc. He also mentioned that the province has an inventory of hazard and risk maps of each municipality and emergency equipments and supplies for rescue and response.

o In response to the flooding problem of the province, they have set‐up and installed rain gauges that served as an early warning system for most of the low‐lying municipalities and communities.

o Having realized the potential and critical importance of DRR, the province was on their way of setting up a 24/7 operations center that will be used to house and operate disaster risk reduction projects and activities. This opened an opportunity to build satellite offices that would speed up the time of response during emergency situations and disasters.

o After the presentation, Mr. Jose Mari Daclan discussed in detail the Disaster Risk Resiliency Indicators which will be used in the workshop to assess and address the key areas of government’s functional and operational activities on disaster risk reduction and management.

o After the step‐by‐step explanation of the DRRI tool, the participants were asked to discuss among themselves the capacity development activities on disaster preparedness and response at the provincial level. The participants were assisted by facilitators for any questions and clarifications.

o While the group was in process of discussing the DRR indicators, Atty. Violeta Seva, the team’s legal and institutional expert conducted a key informant interview to selected provincial officials/department heads. The summary of the results can be viewed in the annexes.

o Each working group assigned a reporter to present the discussion points and findings of the provincial DRRI.

o The presentation of the findings on different key areas has provided the participants an understanding of the existing legislative framework, knowledge and capacities in terms of disaster preparedness and response. The summary of the results can be found in the annexes.

o The workshop ended at 5:30 in the afternoon.

Municipal Workshop o After the workshop at the provincial level, the team went to the municipalities of Mabitac and Pila respectively on March 2 and 3, 2011.

o The municipal workshops followed the same agenda with the provincial workshop. Mr. Jose Mari Daclan of EMI explained the concept and background of the project as well as the objectives of the workshop.

Challenges Encountered

• There is a lack of coordination with concerned departments prior to the start of the workshop in Mabitac, Laguna. The participants were not informed about this undertaking resulting not to engage other stakeholders.

• During the workshop, the participants mentioned available pertinent documents related to DRM, however, these documents such as contingency plan and draft ordinances were scarce and not readily available.

Data for the Initial Findings

Disaster Risk Reduction Resiliency Indicators Results

Municipality of Municipality of Key Areas Laguna Province Pila Mabitac Ave. Ave. Ave. Score Ave. Score Ave. Ave. Score Scor Score Key Area Key Area Score Key Area e Legal and Institutional Processes Indicator 1. Effectiveness of 3 3 3 Legislative Framework 3.5 3 3.25 Indicator 2. Effectiveness of 4 3 3.5 Institutional Arrangements Awareness and Capacity Building Indicator 3. Training and Capacity 3 2 2.5 Building Indicator 4. Advocacy, 2.75 2.25 2.25 Communication, Education and 2.5 2.5 2 Public Awareness Critical Services and Infrastructure Resiliency Indicator 5. Resiliency of Critical 3 1 2 Services 3 1.5 2 Indicator 6. Resiliency of 3 2 2 Infrastructure Emergency Management and

Response Planning Indicator 7. Emergency Management 2 2 2.5 Indicator 8. Resource Management, 2.25 2 2.25 2.5 2 2 Logistics and Contingency Planning Development Planning, Regulation

and Risk Mitigation

Municipality of Municipality of Key Areas Laguna Province Pila Mabitac Ave. Ave. Ave. Score Ave. Score Ave. Ave. Score Scor Score Key Area Key Area Score Key Area e Indicator 9. Hazard, Vulnerability and 3 2 2 Risk Assessment Indicator 10. Risk‐Sensitive Urban 3 2 2 (and Rural) Development and 3 2 2 Mitigation 2.1 2.3 2.9 2.9 2.15 2.35 AVERAGE SCORE OF LGU 5 5

DRM Gaps, Recommendations and Potential WFP Intervention

Laguna Province

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP 1 3 • Adequate laws and policies • Minimal funds for DRRM, • Legislative briefing on • Info dissemination, Effectiveness of Moderate • Existing DRR policies are hampers full implementation DRRM seminar on DRRM / Legislative adequate of DRRM policies • DRRM Act needs to be DRRM Act / DRRM Framework • High level of compliance with • EO needs to be translated translated to policies and sound practices these policies among relevant into special orders for ordinances for various provincial offices different units and agencies and department departments 2 4 • High level of coordination • Need to delineate roles and • Establish appropriate • TA from WFP Effectiveness of High • Good awareness of roles and responsibilities institutional/organization Institutional responsibilities • Lack of coordination and al structures in Arrangements • Good links with CSOs and oversight on DRRM activities accordance with DRRM community • Lack of Act • Participants feel that there is coordination/communication already a high level of system with all disaster‐ coordination among the related organizations departments tasked with DRM • Lack of DRRM MIS and that each of those offices • DRRM Act not well already has a good awareness disseminated at local level. of their roles and responsibilities. 3 3 • Many agencies involved in • Lack of comprehensive • Formulation of DRRM • TA from Training and Moderate training DRRM capacity building Capacity Building Program WFP/OCD/Provinci Capacity • Trainings are specific to work program for Laguna. al Government Building specialization • Limited nos. of manpower • Many provincial departments trained conduct DRR related • Lacks specialized training in [activities]. relief operations/disaster

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP • Personnel are provided training preparedness relevant to their specific fields. • Weak in response training • Municipalities are dependent on the province for capacity building 4 2.5 • Event information in place • Lack of IEC program / • Formulation of DRRM IEC • TA from Advocacy, Low • Allotted time for ROTC and awareness raising campaign Program for the Province WFP/NGOs Communication, integration on DRRM Education and • Municipal level orientation on • Lack of plan/ strategy to Public RA 10121 communicate DRRM Awareness • IEC materials information/messages • Different departments are • No communication system engaged in various advocacy with disaster‐related and communication activities organizations in place such as production and dissemination of IEC materials, municipal level orientations on RA 10121, and integration of DRR into public school and college curricula. 5 3 • Assistance to farmers • Inadequate supply of • TA/FA from Resiliency of Moderate • Hospitals have disaster SOPs in medicine for major disasters WFP/DOH/Private Critical Services place, medicines are • PHO lacks capacity to handle Hospitals/Clinics inventoried, expiry dates are epidemics noted • Lacks system to assist to • Health sector looking at the animal victims resiliency of hospitals • The provincial government is initiating a program to relocate families residing in hazard prone locations.

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP • Assistance is provided to farmers during disasters through the provision of seeds, fertilizer and some cash support from national and provincial governments. • The health sector has been active in the DOH’s Safe Hospitals campaign, and as such, health care facilities have been assessed and disaster SOPS in place, including guidelines for the handling of mass casualties. The health sector has also been divided into specific clusters (WASH, nutrition, health, medical, psychosocial) to look into the particular needs of people displaced during disasters. 6 3 • Pre‐disaster preparedness of • Lacks supplemental feeding • Infrastructure • TA/FA from Resiliency of Moderate sewer and drainage systems for children, elderly, vulnerability assessment WFP/Provincial Infrastructure • Water delivery is available pregnant, lactating, severely • Retrofitting program for Government/MGB/ • Establishment of road networks ill. critical structures Local experts • No problems in equipment and • Relief donations and manpower distribution often politicized • Stockpile on hand, can be augmented when necessary • Province has its own warehouse • Existing programs on water safety, environmental

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP sanitation and WASH • A distribution system is in place for delivering water during times when there is a disruption to the water system. • Heavy equipment is on hand to clear roads and restore the functionality of the road network. • All the capabilities have been tested during previous disasters. • The manpower and equipment are sufficient. • The province’s stockpile in the warehouse is sufficient to augment the relief operations of municipalities. 7 2 • Health sector conducts • The health sector plan has • Strengthening the • TA from Emergency Low earthquake drive twice a year only been reviewed once Emergency Management WFP/OCD/National Management • Contingency plan with sectoral • There is no ICS in the capacity of the Province Government responsibilities province • Improve stockpiling • Quarterly drills, planned every • There is no formal review system by increasing month and evaluation process for supply and including • Encourage the MDRRMCs to do monitoring the usefulness needs of vulnerable and the same and relevance of these plans. special groups • PNRC and other CSOs are • There is no existing first • Increase disaster engaged in drills responder program. preparedness of • Organization of community for • The towns are dependent on communities (CBDRM) disaster the province in building their • Establish permanent • 20 municipalities (SWDO) on EM capacity. evacuation (multi‐ purpose) centers

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP disaster preparedness • Lacks review and monitoring • DepEd, PNRC & BFP have of emergency operations quarterly and unannounced plan drills • Lacks of communications • Flood and EQ contingency plans system with sectoral responsibilities • No permanent evacuation • Regular drills are conducted for centers EQ and fire by the provincial • EWS installed in few towns government, Bureau of Fire Protection, schools, Red Cross, and other CSOs. • Personnel from different provincial departments have been organized into a rescue unit. 8 2.5 • The provincial government has • Lacks logistics management • Institutionalize • TA/FA from WFP Resource Low an inventory of its own • Lack of emergency contingency planning Management, resources, as well as the equipment audit • Acquisition of appropriate Logistics and resources of the different • Inadequate communications emergency equipment Contingency towns. equipment in some Planning • The provincial government has operations center the capacity to provide or • Need to upgrade emergency restore critical services such as equipments food, water and transportation. 9 3 • Rain gauges are existing • There is limited internal • Conduct province‐wide • TA/FA/Hardware Hazard, Moderate • There is an awareness of the capacity to carry out HVRA HVRA support from WFP Vulnerability importance of HVRA. studies. Most information • Build appropriate capacity and Risk • There is a system for on HVR comes from studies on HVRA Assessment determining and reporting on conducted by institutions • Establish appropriate damages, particularly in terms outside the provincial network of early waning of casualties and agricultural government. system losses. • Lack of hazard information/

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP • Hazard maps are available hazard maps (DENR/REDAS conducted hazard assessment provided hazard maps) • There is no system for evacuation for landslide and flooding 10 3 • Regular maintenance of roads • No assessment of buildings • Promote Risk‐Sensitive • TA/FA from WFP Risk‐Sensitive Moderate and bridges every month. • No plan on retrofitting and CLUP in all municipalities Urban (and reinforcement of vulnerable • Promote effective and Rural) infrastructure safe construction Development • Risks are not mainstreamed technologies on sloping and Mitigation in the land use plan lands. • Informal Settlers in • Promote and finance vulnerable locations do not retrofitting of vulnerable want to relocate infrastructure

Municipality of Pila

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP 1 3 • MDRRM Council established • Ordinance needs to be • Barangay level briefing • TA from WFP Effectiveness of Moderate • Municipal Ordinance passed on disseminated and adopted at orientation on DRRM seminar on DRRM / Legislative DRRM preparedness and community/barangay level DRRM Act / DRRM Framework awareness sound practices 2 3 • Municipal Disaster Action Center • Insufficient DRRM funds • Creation of DRRM Office • TA from WFP Effectiveness of Moderate in place with 3 personnel • No clear guidelines/direction • Conduct of Emergency Institutional • SOPs in place, roles and for use of DRRM funds Operations Planning Arrangements responsibilities are well‐defined • Kamag‐anak/politicking • Resource generation • Strong ties with the private • Needs to strengthen inter‐ sector agency/inter‐department • CSOs involved in disaster coordination for DRRM preparedness (Deltacom, youth, • Problems with activation of private sector, Kababaihan, Phil response personnel at Guardians, Crimewatch. barangay level • Dialogues conducted with the urban poor • Ability to request external sources for assistance 3 2 • Seminars/training on DRRM • EQ training is expensive • Formulate DRRM Capacity • TA from Training and Low regularly conducted • Irregular training for MSWDO Building Plan, allocate and WFP/OCD/Provinci Capacity • Earthquake and fire disaster • Specialized EM training needed source out funds for al Government Building preparedness conducted by BFP training, lobby/support and DepEd in schools creation of • Training conducted on Regional/Provincial DRRM forecasting and disease Training Center prevention (Agri), Basic life support, water rescue, boat handling, community fire brigade, camp management,

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP relief operations, DRM plan drafting 4 2.5 • Information campaign on • Low participation in DRRM. • Formulate Municipal • TA from WFP/NGOs Advocacy, Low particular hazards (event Some sectors/communities are DRRM IEC Program Communication dependent) not cooperative with the DRRM , Education and • Monthly information drives by programs/activities Public BFP Awareness • Disaster information drives by PNP • Waste management information drive (Engineering Office) • Outbreaks information drive (MHU) 5 1 • Resource sharing among MHUs • No relocation sites tor at‐risk • Formulate Shelter and • TA/FA from Resiliency of Very Low (inter‐local health zone) groups Relocation Plan for at risk WFP/Provincial Critical Services • Crop and livestock support for • Many informal settlers (3,000 communities. Government farmers families) • Promote alternative • Relief assistance provided for livelihood program loss of livelihood • Community mortgage program in place • 200 houses relocated (PNRC) 6 2 • Relief operations • Siltation, flooding problems • Formulate Flood • TA/FA from Resiliency of Low • Good community relations with Laguna Lake Mitigation Plan for Pila WFP/Provincial Infrastructure • System of relief distribution Government • Maintenance of irrigation canals (NIA) • De‐clogging of drainage systems • Water impounding facility 7 2 • Telephone, radio set‐up, VHF • No drills and simulations • Formulate Emergency • TA from Emergency Low used for emergency • Existing integrated disaster Operations Plan; WFP/Provincial

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS WFP Management communications, reporting reporting system • Establish permanent evac. Government/OCD/ • Radio Group (deltacom) center and warehouse; National provides communications improve stockpile to Government assistance include supplies for people • Annual updating of EDP with special needs • SOPs in place, roles and responsibilities are well‐defined • Fire protection has 24/7 operations 8 2 • Office of the mayor is in • No Local DRRM Plan • Prepare a Local DRRM Plan • TA, financial Resource Low charge/planning, 24/7 action • Acquisition of appropriate assistance, Management, center EM equipment hardware Logistics and • Inventory for EM equipments, Contingency logistics Planning • Existence of sectoral plans for emergencies

9 2 • Hazard maps available • Lack of HVRA technical capacity • Capacity building on HVRA • TA from WFP Hazard, Low Vulnerability and Risk Assessment 10 2 • Building codes, building permits • CLUP needs to integrate DRR • Formulation of Risk‐ • TA from WFP Risk‐Sensitive Low enforced • Lack of technical staff to Sensitive CLUP/ZO Urban (and undertake a Risk‐Sensitive Land • Capacity building on Risk‐ Rural) Use Plan Sensitive Land Use Plan Development and Mitigation

Municipality of Mabitac

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas 1 3 • MDRRM Council established, • Moderate awareness of DRRM • Conduct briefing‐ • TA from WFP Effectiveness Moderate conducts quarterly meetings • Awaits disasters before orientation for on DRRM of Legislative • Plans on creating DRRMO and reacting for municipality and Framework center barangays • Availability of documents • Previous use of goods and medicines, maintenance 2 3.5 • Clear roles and responsibilities • MDRRM Office has no • Hire and train competent • TA from WFP Effectiveness Moderate • Mayor commands coordination personnel yet DRRM Office personnel of Institutional mechanism • Insufficient funds for DRRM • Generate funding, clarify Arrangements • No issues with coordination with P1.7 million is not enough guidelines on hiring other agencies personnel • CSOs,private sector actively participate in relief and response • Can source assistance from national, provincial, private sector, international aid agencies, 3 2.5 • Trainings for brgy officials • Specialized EM trainings and • Formulate DRRM Capacity • TA from WFP Training and Moderate conducetd on first aid, damage capacity building needed Building Plan Capacity assessment, earthquake • Conduct Building preparedness, resource Trainings/Capacity‐ generation camp management, Building Activities relief operations, rescue 4 2 • Barangay disaster councils • No DRRM IEC Plan in place • Develop DRRM IEC Plan • Financial and Advocacy, Low • Information campaigns on avian • Low consciousness/ awareness • Produce local DRRM technical Communicatio flu and FMD of DRRM at community flyers. assistance from

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas n, Education • Regular preparedness • Regular DRRM IEC WFP. IEC and Public information drive by BFP activities in communities assistance Awareness • DRRM awareness through Barangay assemblies conducted twice a year 5 2 • Ability to provide health care • Insufficient livelihood • Promote alternative • TA and financial Resiliency of Low despite floods opportunities for those livelihood program assistance from Critical • Relocation program for highly affected by the disasters WFP Services vulnerable communities • Agri damage assistance provided 6 2 • Adequate water supply system • Open canals presents safety • Community town‐ • TA from WFP Resiliency of Low • Adequate food supply hazards watching Infrastructure 7 2.5 • Existence of contingency plans • No Emergency operations plan • Formulate emergency • TA, hardware Emergency Low • Procedures for food distribution • No Emergency Operations operations plan Management in place (mayor’s directive) Center • Establish EOC equipped • Coordination facilitated by • Lacks EM equipment with appropriate relative proximity of barangays • facilities and trained staff • Preventive evacuation conducted in the past • Post‐disaster damage assessment in place

8 2 • EM equipment includes, heavy • No Local DRRM Plan • Prepare a Local DRRM • TA, hardware Resource Low equipment, floatation devices, Plan Management, ropes and flashlights • Acquisition of Logistics and • PAGASA installed rain gauges appropriate EM Contingency • Early warning system in place equipment Planning through on‐site visits and communication

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS Potential WFP Areas • Contingency planning conducted 9 2 • Risk identification and • Lack of HVRA technical • Capacity building on • TA, hardware Hazard, Low assessment: erosion, hazard capacity HVRA Vulnerability assessment and Risk • DSWD regional office has socio‐ Assessment economic data, can identify vulnerable households and families in high risk areas

10 2 • Annual inspection of buildings • CLUP needs to integrate DRR • Formulation of Risk‐ • TA, hardware Risk‐Sensitive Low for safety • Lack of technical staff to Sensitive CLUP/ZO support from Urban (and • Flood mitigation includes tree undertake a Risk‐Sensitive • Capacity building on Risk‐ WFP Rural) planting, flood control (river Land Use Plan Sensitive Land Use Plan Development wall) and dredging • Limited implementation of and Mitigation building permit system

Field Investigation Report Sorsogon Province and the Municipalities of Juban and Irosin April 4 – April 6, 2011

Submitted by:

Atty. Violeta Seva, Team Leader Mr. Marino Deocariza, LUP Expert, EMI Ms. Joyce Lyn Salunat, Provincial Coordinator, EMI Mr. Jesus Dominic Dizon, Support Staff

April 11, 2011

Field Investigation Team and Provincial Contacts

• The Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative (EMI) Field Investigation team was composed of Atty. Violeta Seva, Mr. Marino Deocariza, Ms. Joyce Lyn Salunat and Mr. Jesus Dominic Dizon. The team prepared Question Guides and Workshop Kits for the participants.

• Accompanying the team during the LGU visits and workshops were Ms. Ruby Senin, the field monitor from WFP, Mr. Juan Blenn Huelgas and Mr. Juanito Berja, both from WFP; Dir. Patricia Luna and Ms. Amada Dimaculangan from the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) Central Office.

• The Sorsogon Provincial Disaster Risk and Management Office (SPDRMO), spearheaded by Mr. Jose Lopez together with Ms. Vivian Sincero arranged for the invitations of the participants, logistical requirements such as venue and catering services. The office also informed the municipal mayors of Juban and Irosin on the CNA‐DPR workshop.

Field Investigation Agenda

The Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response workshop has two particular objectives:

1. To undertake an inventory and review of the existing capacity development initiatives and practices in DRRM at the provincial level down to the two selected municipalities, and;

2. To identify gaps and recommend areas for intervention

Table 9. Field Investigation Agenda

Day Time Activity

April 4, 2011 8am‐9:00 Team Preparations and Registration for Sorsogon Province 10:00‐5:30pm Provincial DRRI Workshop and KIIs

April 5, 2011 8am‐12pm Municipality of Juban DRRI Workshop 12pm‐4.30pm Municipality of Juban DRRI Workshop

April 6, 2011 8am‐12pm Municipality of Irosin DRRI Workshop 12pm‐5pm Municipality of Irosin DRRI Workshop

April 7, 2011 Travel back

Summary of Field Investigation Activities

Courtesy Call o In preparation for the province’s CNA for DPR, the field investigation team composed of Mr. Jose Mari Daclan from Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative (EMI) and Mr. Abraham Abatneh together with Ms. Ruby Senin from the UN‐World Food Programme (WFP) conducted a courtesy visit with by Mr. Jose “Joe” Lopez of Mr. Jose Lopez of the Provincial Disaster Risk Management Office, Ms. Cristina Racelis of the Provincial Tourism Office, and Ms. Amy Maria Deniega of the Provincial Management Office to brief them on UNWFP’s proposed DRR initiatives and to request for their support in the capacity needs assessment to be conducted in the province.

Arrival and Preparatory Meeting/ Briefing o The FI team arrived in the province of Sorsogon on April 3, 2011 for the 3‐day Field Investigation.

o Prior to the start of the workshop, a preparatory meeting was held at the Paradise Hotel with Ms. Vivian Sincero and Mr. Von Andre Labalan from SPDRMO to discuss eon th arrangements made for the workshops.

Sorsogon Provincial Workshop o The Provincial workshop was held in Paradise Hotel Conference Hall in Sorsogon Figure 40. Ms. Sally Lee, Head of SPMO welcomed on April 4, 2011. the participants while

o More than 50 participants representing different sectors (regional and provincial offices, non‐government organizations and local media) have brought together in this event and positively contributed to the success of the workshop. The workshop was partly covered by local media.

o Ms. Sally Lee, the former governor and currently the Head of the Sorsogon Provincial Management Office welcomed the participants in behalf of Gov. Raul Lee. In her opening speech, she highlighted the importance of such workshop and Figure 41. Mr. Juan Blenn Huelgas from WFP gave a short message expressed a keen interest in the project.

She thanked the organizing team, WFP and EMI respectively, for hosting the event.

o A short message from Mr. Juan Blenn Huelgas, Senior National DRR Consultant of WFP providing an overview of the Capacity Needs Assessment Project.

Figure 42. (Above) Mr. Joe Lopez of SPDRMO and o Followed by a presentation from Ms. (Below) Mr. Florito Dapena of OCD discuss the DRR Patricia Luna, Director of Program Initiatives in the province Management Bureau of DSWD, on the disaster risk reduction initiatives of the office in the province. She reported the ongoing construction of housing and infrastructures activities in the area. She pointed out the capability and skills training on livelihood were in place providing opportunities

o Atty. Violeta Seva of EMI provided the context and background of the WFP‐EMI CNA‐DPR Project. She discussed the concept of mainstreaming and stressed out the importance of integrating DRR in institutional policies, project and activities of the province. Among other things, she discussed the flow and objectives of the workshop. She then introduced Mr. Marino Deocariza from EMI who will explain the DRRI tool that will be used in the workshop.

o Reporting on the Disaster Risk Reduction Activities in Sorsogon were Dir. Bernardo R. Alejandro from the Regional Office of the Figure 43. Focus Group Discussions on DRRI Civil Defense and Mr. Jose Lopez, the head of the SPDRMO.

o Mr. Alejandro presented the data on the activities and trainings conducted, along with the inventory of the equipments available and needed by the province. It was note taking that the province has been equipped with several trainings on disaster

risk reduction and management from different agencies, local and abroad.

o On the other hand, Mr. Jose Lopez from SPDRMO pointed out number of activities conducted from Years 2008‐2011. Activities conducted are the following: (1) Formulation of Contingency and Response Plans for multiple hazards (2) Trainings on Figure 44. Workshop Participants PCVA, Risk Mapping, Communication and Evacuation Procedures, REDAS. (3) Forums on CBDRM Planning, Geological Risks and Climate Change Adaptation, Mainstreaming DRR in Local Planning, etc.

o Mr. Marino Deocariza discussed in detail the Disaster Risk Resiliency Indicators which was used to assess and address the key areas of government’s functional and operational activities on disaster risk reduction and management. Figure 45. Workshop Participants in Juban

o After the discussion of the DRRI tool, each participant in the workshop was assigned to a working group. Each working group was asked to discuss among themselves the 10 indicators and come up with a consensus rating in their understanding of capacity development activities at the provincial level.

o Each working group assigned reporters to present the results of their rating. Col. Felix Castro Jr. presented the results of Group 1 followed by Mr. Dante Bonos for Group 2 and Engr. Plutarco Encela for Group 3.

o The presentation of the findings on different key areas has provided the participants an understanding of the existing legislative framework, knowledge and capacities of the province in terms of disaster preparedness and response.

o Ms. Joyce Lyn Salunat reported the average rating of the three groups.

o To set the stage for the workshop discussions, Atty. Violeta Seva asked the participants collectively in identifying the gaps and to provide some recommendations along with WFP interventions needed in the province

o Mr. Huelgas from WFP expressed his gratitude to the participants for a productive workshop and hoping that the collaboration in this initiative would continue in the next months.

o Hearing all thoughts and recommendations from the participants, the workshop ended at 5:30 in the afternoon.

Juban Municipal Workshop o The workshop in Juban was conducted on April 5, 2011. It was held in the Municipal Hall of Juban.

o The workshop was participated by 40 people representing municipal departments and from civil society organizations.

o Like the provincial workshop, the municipal workshop followed the same Figure 46. Mayor Jimmy Fragata welcomes the agenda. The workshop began with participants and presents the DRRI initiatives of the welcome remarks from Mr. Jimmy municipality Fragata, the Municipal Mayor of Juban followed by a presentation of disaster risk reduction activities in the area. The presentation showed how the municipality was considered highly vulnerable to hazards and disasters.

o The workshop proceeded with an explanation of the concept and background of the project along with the objectives of the workshop by Atty. Violeta Seva.

o Then, it was followed by Mr. Marino Deocariza who presented the DRRI Tool.

o Mr. Huelgas summarized observations of the workshop and offered positive hopes for future interventions.

o Closing remarks were offered by Mayor Figure 47. Workshop Participants in Irosin Jimmy Fragata.

Irosin Municipal Workshop o The workshop in Irosin was conducted on April 6, 2011. It was held in the Likas Conference Room near the municipal hall. The municipality of Irosin is a 45‐minute ride from the city proper.

o A total of 24 people from municipal agencies/departments attended the workshop.

o Mr. Edwin Garcia, the municipal Figure 48. Atty. Violeta Seva provides the background of the project and objectives of the administrator opened the program by workshop welcoming the participants in behalf of Mayor Eduardo Ong. He thanked and appreciated the organizing team, WFP and EMI for selecting Irosin for the project.

o Atty. Violeta Seva discussed the background of the CNA‐PDR Project and workshop objectives as well.

o Mr. Edilberto Elorza, the MDRRMC Action Officer enumerated the disaster risk reduction activities of the municipality. He reported that several trainings and capacity building activities were conducted to strengthen and enhance the skills of the officials in disaster risk management.

o Followed by a step‐by‐step explanation of the DRRI tool by Mr. Marino Deocariza. The participants were divided into groups to discuss among themselves and rate the operational and functional processes of the municipality in terms of disaster preparedness and response.

o The results of the ranking were presented and validated by the participants.

o The workshop ended at 5:00 in the afternoon.

Figure 49. Group Discussions on DRRI

Challenges Encountered

• In general, time management is one of the major challenges during the workshops. Some key stakeholders arrived late that delayed the start of the workshop activities.

• In the case of Irosin, the presence of Chief Local Executives somehow, hindered the participants to make an “honest to goodness” assessment unlike in the Province and municipality of Juban.

• Internal conflict among agencies concerned in disaster risk management in some way affected the assessment.

• Participation during the workshops for all 3 LGUs was generally remarkable. The LGUs manifested their full support for the activities by coordinating the venue and facilities.

• Data such as plans and ordinances relating to disaster risk management are readily available. They provided the team with hard and soft copies of these documents.

Data for the Initial Findings

Disaster Risk Reduction Resiliency Indicators Results

Municipality of Municipality of Irosin Key Areas Sorsogon Province Juban Ave. Ave. Score Ave. Ave. Score Ave. Ave. Score Score Key Area Score Key Area Score Key Area Legal and Institutional Processes Indicator 1. Effectiveness of Legislative 3 2 3.3 Framework 3.2 2.5 3.2 Indicator 2. Effectiveness of Institutional 3.3 3 3 Arrangements Awareness and Capacity Building Indicator 3. Training and Capacity 2.8 2 3 Building 2.9 2.5 2.8 Indicator 4. Advocacy, Communication, 3 3 2.5 Education and Public Awareness Critical Services and Infrastructure

Resiliency Indicator 5. Resiliency of Critical Services 3.3 2.5 3 3.2 2.5 2.8 Indicator 6. Resiliency of Infrastructure 3 2.5 2.5 Emergency Management and Response Planning

Indicator 7. Emergency Management 3.7 2 2 Indicator 8. Resource Management, 3.5 2.3 2.8 3.3 2.5 3.5 Logistics and Contingency Planning Development Planning, Regulation and

Risk Mitigation Indicator 9. Hazard, Vulnerability and 2.7 2 3 Risk Assessment 2.6 2 2.5 Indicator 10. Risk‐Sensitive Urban (and 2.5 2 2 Rural) Development and Mitigation

AVERAGE SCORE OF LGU 3.1 3.1 2.4 2.4 2.8 2.8

DRM Gaps, Recommendations and Potential WFP Intervention

Sorsogon Province

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS 1 • Established the Provincial Disaster • DPWH, PIA, DOH, NFA, NIA • There should be a review Effectiveness of 3 Risk Reduction and Management not members of PDRRMC. of the structure of the Legislative Moderate Council (Sorsogon PDRRMC). • There are insufficient PDRRMC and consider the

Framework • Created the Sorsogon Provincial funds to cover/hire inclusion of other agencies Disaster Risk Reduction and permanent personnel in the Council. Management Office (SPDRMO) • To seek clearance/guidance from National OCD. 2 3.3 • Partnerships among civil society • Need for improved inter‐ • Seek guidance from DBM • TA from WFP Effectiveness of Moderate organizations, and government institutional coordination on personnel cap. Institutional agencies are well‐established for DRR • Improve communication Arrangements • Need for greater system. Come up with participation from various mother protocol. SPRDMO stakeholders. consolidated the protocol, • Clarify cut‐off time of data to synchronize with reporting. Need to stakeholders. standardize information • Operation Center building format/reporting. and facility. 3 2.8 • Several organizations assist the • DRR capacity needs at the • Training of trainors to • TA from WFP on Training and Moderate province in capacity building (Oxfam, management/ decision‐ orient all government trainings, Capacity WV‐GVDP, Coastal Core, etc). makers’ level. employees on RA 10121. capacity building Building • Trainings/awareness • Local DRR funds are • Produce modules/IEC activities. TNA seminar/orientation of PDRRMC small/minimal, not materials on DRR. needed. members conducted. sufficient for training • Orient stakeholders down activities. to ground level (speakers’ • Training needed in gender bureau) and sensitivity, • Prepare different kinds of

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS psychosocial training, capacity building modules camp management. for different levels of stakeholders. • Regular meeting of PDRRMC to address gaps and issues. 4 3 • There are IEC materials in DRRM and • Lack of logistics, funds for • Develop local IEC Advocacy, Moderate CCA mostly for students. producing local DRRM IEC materials/DRRM primer (in Communication, • Disaster Risk Reduction is also materials. Bicol) Education and included in school curricula e.g. Sibika • Lack of DRRM IEC Plan • Develop DRRM and Science • Needs IEC materials for IEC/Advocacy Plan Public • Disaster risk management and multiple hazards. • Consult members of the Awareness Climate Change Adaptation primers • There is a need to establish PDRRMC. PDRRMC are being developed and translated a communications group in planning session. into local language. the PDRRMC • Internet through Website can be tapped to give timely information, reports and news updates. • Regular Radio program can be tapped for IEC. 5 3.3 • The province has list of identified high • Vulnerable populations, • Relocate populations in • WFP assistance Resiliency of Moderate risk barangays in the area. They are communities keep high risk zones into safer e.g. Food‐for‐ Critical Services informed by the municipality and returning in danger zones areas work / cash‐for‐ prioritized for CBDRM activities. (volcanoes, floodplains). • Request municipalities to work program • Provision of 200 housing facilities • Many houses are made of identify possible safe (Juban affected through DSWD core shelter program light materials (bamboo relocation sites for core by floods). for those living in dangerous areas. and nipa shingles) . shelter projects. • LGUs also identified relocation sites • Include livelihood • Livelihood programs are available component/comprehensiv (noodles making, others) e package in relocation site.

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS • All towns have health units (Have capacity for first aid, simple medical emergencies, birthing, lying). • Presence of big hospitals e.g. SORDOC. • Available ambulances in RHUs. 6 3 • Water Districts supplying water is in • Interrupted water supply • Report to water district. Resiliency of Moderate place, resilient in times of disasters. in some areas. • Request Bureau of Design Infrastructure • In case of water disruption, deep • Lack of funds, phased for standards on sea‐walls wells and water refilling stations are construction of sea‐wall available. • No standard design for • Resilient power supply system except sea‐walls. for extreme cases like Typhoon • Areas surrounding Cadac‐ Milenyo and Reming which took 1 an river experienced heavy month to restore the power supply. flooding during typhoons Generators are available, power and heavy rains. Some supply is limited to certain areas. communities are • Warehouses are in place and safe inaccessible during these from disasters. The food storages times. have enough supply. In case of disasters, the province has tie‐up with business establishments for food supplies. • Early Warning Systems (Rain Gauges (15)/Flood Markers/Alert System) are in place– Irosin, Bulusan, Magallanes, Donsol, Sorsogon City, Casiguran • Seawall river controls in place for flood mitigation, but not sufficient. • During light landslides, the roads are restored immediately.

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS 7 3.7 • Emergency Operations Plan is in • Need for EM equipments, • Request guidelines from • TA for trainings Emergency High place. Emergency Support Function is capacity building. NDRRMC on LDRRM for SAR, Basic Life Management established. Search and Rescue Unit is Plan/Contingency plan Support, established with 15 members. • Need for trainings on • Conduct trainings for SAR Advanced Life Personnel from PNP and AFP help on gender sensitivity, teams (from various Support, search and rescue operations. psychosocial support, agencies) for inter‐ • TA from WFP • DRRM Council meeting at least camp management, etc. operability quarterly, planning conducted • Procurement of high‐tech • Proposed tsunami drill (can evacuate equipments for EM. Night‐ in 1 hour) time SAR (vision • Ongoing CBDRM first responders goggles/thermal cameras), training (to known hazards). Modules rescue trucks and manuals for first responders are • Conduct trainings/capacity available. building. • Stockpiling – regularly replenished and inspected. There are enough stocks. There are also agreements from NFA and other businesses for food supply in case of disasters. • Infant food – Province can purchase when needed. • Province promotes “Policy of Self‐ Sufficiency” • There should be a Memorandum of Mutual Support‐ Neighbor provinces/regions should help the affected communities. 8 3.3 • Ongoing CBDRM first responders • Lack of logistics • Acquisition of logistics • Resource Moderate training (to known hazards). (communication system Management, devices, rubber boats, stretchers, medical kits,

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS Logistics and first aid kits, hand held Contingency radios, hotline, water‐ Planning filtration equipment, etc.) • Over supply of donations in some occasions due to poor coordination and communication 9 2.7 • Risk assessment was conducted with • Risk mapping for all types • Capability building for • TA and hardware Hazard, Moderate assistance from external of hazards. HVRA at Barangay level. support from Vulnerability organizations, CIRCA, APSEMO, MGB, • HVRA capacity needs • Support the province and WFP and Risk Phivolcs, PAG‐ASA for meteorological training municipalities to improve activities • Need for HVRA GIS capability. • Request Phivolcs Assessment • Towns have community hazard maps equipments (GPS, GIS, etc.) for REDAS – Paper maps • Need for re‐training for training • GIS capacity in REDAS GIS in 12 REDAS GIS. Some trained municipalities, need for human were not utilized/were resource and capacity building in GIS. replaced. Request for retraining for REDAS. • EWS – needs capacity • Concerned offices conduct damage building (training). There assessment. are less than 100 early • Training modules on CBDRM are warning systems in 541 available. Most trainings are Barangays. dependent on external funding, NGOs • Disseminate results of the • There are installed rain gauges per risk assessment municipality provided by Oxfam. • Needs livelihood • No food security issues, only during El programs. Niño and La Niña (2010 Donsol/Pilar rainfedarea) 10 2.5 • Provincial Physical Framework Plan • Ineffectiveness of old • Re‐orient/train • TA from WFP Risk‐Sensitive Low integrates risk parameters. evacuation routes. Need PPDO/MPDO DRMOs in new evacuation routes. NEDA’s DRR mainstreaming

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS Urban (and • Municipal CLUPs are being updated to • Larger and new flood risks tool for local development. Rural) incorporate disaster risks created by the river flow • Survey/mapping of Cadac‐ • Alternative Development • Building codes are implemented, “No diversion in Juban and an river. Structural and livelihood and Mitigation building permit, no construction”. Irosin. A river wall was non‐structural assistance. program. • Mostly safe buildings except for those damaged creating new • Provide alternate Structural and in hazard prone unsafe locations river channel, constantly evacuation routes. non‐structural • DPWH is doing some infra retrofitting. flooding major agri‐area. program. TA • Flood control projects in Banwang • Lacks structural from WFP. Gurang Donsol Cadac‐An River in assessment of critical Juban and Irosin facilities/schools/hospitals • Risk reduction investments insufficient, e.g. flood control mitigation in Juban‐Irosin

Municipality of Juban

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS 1 2 • Executive Order # 04‐2010 signed creating • Insufficient awareness on • Conduct briefing‐ • TA from WFP Effectiveness of Low the JMDRR Council. DRRM, CCA for orientation for Legislative Legislative • Pending council resolution (SB) for the Legislative and Executive and Executive branch on Framework creation of the MDRRM office. branch. DRRM including cluster • DRRM physical office already available. • No personnel yet. Human approach. • Special contingency plan for Bulusan Resources (insufficient • Review the functions and Volcano in place in Juban with multi‐ funds, ceiling cap). responsibilities of hazard considerations. • Insufficient financial personnel manning the • Can augment funds by outsourcing from resources for DRM evacuation camps. National, Provincial government, foreign projects. funding, etc. 2 3 • JMDRRMC organized, holds monthly • JMDRRM system needs • Institutionalization of Effectiveness of Moderate meetings to be institutionalized JMDRRM System. Institutional • Roles and functions of different agencies • Lack of budget for • Arrangements are clear and well‐defined. personnel/ constrained • Lobby to waive budget • There is a Comprehensive Juban Disaster by budget ceiling. ceiling specifically for Management Plan as of 2006 and needs DRRM Office. to be updated. • Physical structure for JMD • Active involvement of NGOs and civil Operation Center for society organizations (Green Valley, Red JMDRRM Council and Cross) People’s Organization and Office. community leaders. NGOs contributes in the formulation of Community‐based Risk Management Plan (CBRMP) 3 2 • Juban Early response Team (JERT) • No DRRM capacity • Formulate DRRM Capacity • TA from WFP Training and Low conducted training on Basic Life Support building plan. Building Plan Capacity • Risk Mapping and Assessment Training • Trainings needed in : • Conduct

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS Building c/o MDCC, Juban Advanced Basic Life Trainings/Capacity‐ • Early Warning System skills trainings have Support, Search and Building Activities been conducted among barangay officials Rescue Operations, • Mapping of • Spot mapping was administered by MPDO Training of Trainors, volunteers/Matching of prior to the conduct of HVR mapping Community‐based skills for exercise Disaster Risk operations/Training of Management, Camp volunteers Management, Cluster Approach, BHERT, Psycho‐social, Child Protection, Alternative Livelihood, Logistics Management 4 3 • Committee members are actively involved • No Advocacy plan in • Develop DRRM Advocacy Advocacy, Moderate in the IEC. place Plan Communication, • There is a knowledge/info sharing in the • Need for local brochures • Produce local DRRM flyers. Education and community. and flyers on disaster • Regular DRRM IEC • DRRM IEC through Brgy. Assembly for preparedness activities in communities Public community awareness • Insufficient resources to Awareness • Drills conducted (fires and earthquakes) in produce and disseminate schools, once a year IEC materials. • Regular radio program (DZMS) can be • Limited communication used for DRM IEC system. • Emergency hotlines (cellular phones) in barangays • 2‐way radio used by PNP, Fire, Engineering. 5 2.5 • Barangays have list of vulnerable families. • Lack of funds for • Formulate Shelter and Resiliency of Low • LGU already identified resettlement areas. relocation sites. 200+ Relocation Plan for Critical Services • Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction families in Brgy. vulnerable population. Binanuahan needs to be • Identification of ideal

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS and CCA are integrated in the programs relocated as well as relocation sites. and policies through World Bank technical Informal settlers in • Alternative livelihood assistance Poblacion area. program • In Guruyan, there are 100 core shelter • Changing channel of units and serves as a permanent Cadac‐an River relocation site under CSAP (Core Shelter endangers several Assistance Program) of DSWD. barangays. • Livelihood and skills development • Insufficient medicine, program available thru TESDA, DOLE, DTI, supplies, equipment. DSWD, etc. • Heavy flooding • MHU has Doctors, Nurses, BHW, Daycare experienced at least 6 Workers, for basic medical services. times a year. Disruption • Barangay Tabuc identified for satellite of livelihood due to stockpiling warehouse. heavy flooding in some barangays. • Several barangays are situated in flood prone and landslide prone areas. • Insufficient medicine, supplies, equipment • 13 of 25 brgys are inaccessible for relief and rescue operations (e.g. Calmayon, Maayo, Sipaya, Laong, Biriran) 6 2.5 • 9 Brgys covered by Level 3 water • 4 Brgys have no water • DPWH reinforcing some Resiliency of Low distribution supply during disasters). parts of the highway. Infrastructure • DPWH now reinforcing some parts of the Juban sustained damages Completion of Maharlika highway on water pipes during Highway Rehabilitation. • Search and Rescue activities disrupted heavy flooding. • Construction of Cut‐off

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS due to landslides and flooding. In • Maharlika Highway was Channel way. response, DPWH conducted road clearing damaged due to Construction of Diversion • Hardware support activities. scouring, may be Dam. River dredging. from WFP • Relief Operations are continuous damaged in other areas. • Conversion of an existing • Small Food Storage for Stockpiling (20 sq. • Flood control system court into an evacuation m). Enough supply 100 sacks of rice installed in Cadac‐an center with warehouse for • KALAHI projects have elevated school river was damaged stockpiling. design. Elevated health centers affecting Brgy. • Construction of satellite Binanuahan specifically stockpiling warehouse in Sitio Tampi and Barangay Tabuc. Embarcadero. • Construction of • Barangay Binanuahan toilet/sanitation facilities specifically Sitio Tampi is heavily affected by flooding, Guruyan not passable due to flooding • Lack of sanitation facilities for evacuation camps • No detailed damage assessment study, technical study needs to be undertaken 7 2 • EOP for volcanic eruption in place, with • Low Capacity for Pre‐ • Improve LGU Capacity for • TA From WFP Emergency Low designated evacuation centers, assigned Disaster and Post‐ Pre‐Disaster and Post‐ Management personnel, transportation equipments Disaster Response Disaster Response and services are well‐organized. Philippine Planning Planning Army supports evacuation and • Schools as evacuation transportation services. centers disrupts classes, • 4 Evacuation Centers identified, mostly reports of damages to schools school facilities, books,

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS • Inadequate equipments such as boat poor sanitation (material still to be resolved – stainless or • No food stock for infants. thick plywood). • Proposal to set‐up multipurpose Evacuation Center • Preparedness program for first responders (JERT) is proposed • Stockpiling‐ Food are replenished during disaster months (June ‐ December). Non‐ food items available 8 2.5 • EM policies and procedures in place to • Insufficient logistics and • Acquisition of logistical • Hardware support Resource Low mobilize resources. There is inventory of equipments / Logistical needs from WFP Management, resources and their use in the needs ‐ Megaphone, Logistics and communications, search and rescue. evacuation centers, first There is sufficient manpower for aid, vest‐uniforms, • Acquisition of rescue Contingency emergency preparedness and response personal safety vehicle, equipments, Planning but lack in skills training. equipment paraphernalia • 2 ambulance, 1 mini truck, 1 patrol boat , • Need for rescue vehicle, 2 stretchers, radio room, ropes , harness, equipments, flashlight. paraphernalia • Contingency plans for flooding and • Food supply affected volcanic eruption are in place during disasters 9 2 • PHIVOLCS conducted hazards mapping. • Lacks technical capacity • Capacity building on HVRA • TA from WFP Hazard, Low • List of vulnerable groups on HVRA • Provision of Forecasting Vulnerability available/updated regularly. • Lack of Forecasting and and EWS at Brgy. Level and Risk • Damage assessment conducted by EWS at Brgy. Level Engineering and Agriculture. Ocular and • No early warning for Assessment physical assessment conducted. flooding • PAG‐ASA warning in Juban for weather • There may be hazards in forecasting. Juban not yet known.

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS GAPS RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL WFP AREAS • Early Warning System‐ “Batingting” for volcanic eruption 10 2 • Currently developing the Risk Sensitive • No CLUP • Formulation of Risk‐ • TA from WFP Risk‐Sensitive Low Land Use Plan, • CDP needs updating Sensitive CLUP/ZO Urban (and • Development plan in place • Juban lacks funds for Rural) • Building codes and building permit system flood control and slope is in place, covers only commercial bldgs stability projects Development in the poblacion. and Mitigation • Zoning Ordinance is also in place • DPWH have flood control programs

Municipality of Irosin INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS Gaps Recommendations Potential WFP Areas 1 3.3 • Executive Order No. 10 signed creating • Need to institutionalize • Institutionalize DRRM • TA from WFP Effectiveness of Moderate IMDRRMC. DRRM office 24/7 System/Office 24/7 Legislative • The local policies and laws need to be operation. operations. Framework documented • No local DRR laws and • Coaching, seminar, IEC and • There is enough manpower based on policies in place, it is not training to Barangay ‐level the recent Bulasan incident last February spelled out in black and and all stakeholders. 21, it was well‐managed in terms of white but the need is very • More intensive training on SAR, information was efficiently well‐recognized among DRRM for municipal disseminated among the affected the officials legislative and executive populace • Insufficient funds, 3.6 M‐ branch. Training skills for • The Irosin Contingency Plan was DRRM funds policy formulation on updated in 2010 Expensive dredging DRRM. • At present, protocols are in response‐ operations and • Crafting of policies, oriented phase, however, the need and maintenance project – protocols by the SB, willingness is recognized P500,000 (P15,000‐ per executive branch, • Operations Center is temporarily day for fuel only) MDRRMC/O located at the Mayor’s office. • Lack of written policies, • DRR projects, programs and activities protocols are incorporated into the CDP 2 3 • MDRRMO to be created. • Need for permanent • Creation of DRRM Office. • TA, financial Effectiveness of Moderate • Roles and responsibilities of concerned DRRM Office. • Organize and capacitate assistance from Institutional agencies are clear & well‐defined • Non‐functional BDRRMCs BDRRMCs WFP Arrangements • To add research and development, • Lack of • Come up with their own disaster preparedness and mitigation in protocols/commitments protocols and the council to conduct technical studies. from support agencies memorandum of • Conducts post‐disaster and needs • Disaster preparedness and agreement Assessment mitigation component is • Active involvement of volunteers and yet not to be considered. agencies ‘Bayanihan’ • No technical personnel

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS Gaps Recommendations Potential WFP Areas • Emergency volunteers, organizations focusing on DRR programs provide relief goods and activities • Partnership with NGOs in evacuation operations • Private businesses provide transportation and relief goods • NGOS (e.g. KABALIKAT CIVICOM) ‐ volunteers assist/cook in evacuation centers. • DRRM Assistance from Provincial Engineering Office, DPWH, OCD 3 3 • PAGASA, Philvolcs, OCD, MGB and • Trainings needed in: • Conduct of • TA from WFP Training and Moderate DSWD facilitated the hazard mapping Advance Life Support, Training/Capacity Building Capacity activity, contingency planning last Search and Rescue, Camp program for Municipal Building December 2010 Management, First Aid, down to Purok level. • Bulusan Summit March 21‐25 – CBDRM, Gender conducted contingency planning, Sensitivity training, Relief drafting of ordinance creating the DRRM operations, HVRA, Psycho‐ office Social, Reporting on • March 29 – consultation on NDRRMC Barangay Level‐DANA, framework Protocol on reporting, • HEMS training was conducted first week Cluster approach of March – programmed for the whole year • Training conducted on REDAS‐GIS • IRDF (Integrated Rural Development Foundation) spearheaded the Hazard Mapping activity last February 17‐21, the output is 3D Map, participants include Barangay officials, academe, NGOs, civil

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS Gaps Recommendations Potential WFP Areas society • PNP recently undertaken Water Search and Rescue (WASAR) • Conducted drills on earthquakes and fires in schools (BFP) and community drills at the Barangay level) 4 2.5 • Efficient communication system, • Lack of structured DRRM • Formulation of IEC Plan • Financial and Advocacy, Low information is efficiently disseminated in IEC Plan. • Creation of IEC team, technical Communication, case of disasters (via text messaging, • Lack of dedicated IEC Speakers’ Bureau training, assistance from Education and calls). Team. production of local IEC WFP. IEC • Barangay Assemblies used for awareness • Need to produce and materials based on Equipment. Public campaign on DRRM. disseminate local IEC technical studies, conduct Awareness • 2‐way radio available PNP, DRRM materials. road shows for barangays. Council, QRT, Barangays, Kabalikat • Most Barangays are not CIVICOM reached and inadequately informed about the hazards faced in their community 5 3 • The health services are said to be • Unsafe location of houses • Relocation of houses from Resiliency of Moderate adequate, as experienced during the last / Unsafe housing flooded and lahar areas Critical Services Bulusan ash fall last February 21. structures. (Tulay, Bagsangan, BLISS, • No disruption in school classes in the • Critical infrastructures are Poblacion, Macawayan, recent disasters not resilient enough to Cogon) Approx. 700+ • Irosin critical infrastructures can withstand in worst case Families withstand an Alert level 2 EQ scenario. • Construction of permanent • Financial • Gallanosa National Highschool is used as • Lacks permanent Multi‐purpose Evacuation assistance for an evacuation center evacuation center Center/Warehouse/Trainin building • Brgy. Salvacion – identified safe • About 1/3 of Brgy Cogon g Center, etc. in Salvacion construction relocation site by NHA and Gawad should be for relocated 1,000 person capacity. Kalinga. There are 30 GK houses but only due to lahar. • Procurement of agri‐lands for relocatees.

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS Gaps Recommendations Potential WFP Areas 18 families has relocated because of • 700+ families in danger • Encourage home industries • TA on product economic considerations like livelihood zones. Evacuated in with marketing support marketing. opportunities in the relocation site schools less than a month from LGUs. • NHA assisted land development project • Lacks alternative • Revive Abaca industry in Brgy. Salvacion can accommodate livelihood program through financing, 750 houses but still seeking source of (People mostly dependent seedlings, disease‐resistant funding for building of houses on farming activities) variety. • Alternative livelihood program‐ reported • Lack of schools, health • Provision of schools, health by MAO farming program, seedlings. clinics and community clinics and community Senator Pangilinan‐ backyard piggery, facilities for relocation facilities for relocation sites artificial insemination sites • Health services‐ Irosin district hospital capable of emergency medical services, 50 bed capacity, maximum of 100 patients • RHU – 1 Doctor, nurses available, lack medicines • Barangay health centers are available but needs upgrading 6 2.5 • Flood control projects in the • Water supply problem. • Develop alternative sources • TA and financial Resiliency of Low municiaplity thru dredging operations Existing water districts are of water supply assistance from Infrastructure and construction of river wall inadequate to cater the • Formulate drainage master WFP • Warehouse/food Storage facility has entire population, deep plan. Dredging. enough space for stockpiling. well is seen as an • Repair of bridges, roads in • Stockpiling warehouse is temporarily alternative water source Tondol, Gabao, BLISS located at the Mayor’s office. • Drainage system‐ clogged • Construction flood control • Additional spring source for water due to lahar, dredging is facilities and continuous district was already identified namely needed. dredging Patag and Mapaso • Flooding. Need to construct flood control facilities and continuous

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS Gaps Recommendations Potential WFP Areas dredging • Transportation‐ affected by landslide and flooding, there are still inaccessible areas ex. Barangay Cogon, it is characterized by narrows roads and also is also located in high risk area • Impassable bridge affecting 2 Barangays (Tondol and Gabao) 7 2 • Organizing, creating, and training the • Needs to upgrade • Upgrading of EM • TA, financial Emergency Low EM team ongoing communications system. Communications system. assistance, Management • EOP for volcanic eruption in place. • Lack of EOP for all • Formulation of EOP for all hardware • SOPs in frontline agencies (PNP, hazards. hazards. MDRRMC, Fire, MSWD) • Lack of Operation Center. • Construction of Operation • Equipments are available but still • Need for more regular Center/DRRMO. insufficient drills. • Conduct of regular • Drills conducted once a year in schools, • Lack of Barangay earthquake/fire/calamities need for Barangay and purok level drills Response teams drill. • No full time first • Creation/training of Brgy. responders (BFP serves as Response teams rescuers, responders) • Insufficient EM equipment 8 3.5 • EM policies and procedures in place to • Old fire truck needs • Additional fire truck • TA, financial Resource Moderate mobilize resources. upgrading • Procurement of assistance, Management, • Detailed inventory and understanding • Need for rescue/operations vehicle hardware Logistics and of resources and their use in their rescue/operations vehicle. • Conduct of training on

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS Gaps Recommendations Potential WFP Areas Contingency communications, search and rescue. • Need for training on resource management and Planning • There is sufficient manpower for resource management mobilization emergency preparedness response. and mobilization • EM Logistics available ‐ Fire truck 1, ambulance 2, 2 stretchers, first aid, harness and ropes, communication systems, PA system, fog lights • Contingency Planning in place 9 3 • Hazard mapping was conducted in • Lack of capacity on HVRA • Training on Risk • TA, financial Hazard, Moderate Cogon and Macawayan up to household • Need for Community‐ Assessment/Risk Indicators assistance, Vulnerability level and can be replicated in other based monitoring • Creation and training of hardware and Risk Barangay. system/information community‐based • Listing of vulnerable population in collection. monitoring system. Assessment Barangay available, updated regularly • No EWS in agriculture • Establishment of EWS, • Damage assessment conducted, needs sector for CCA. Forecasting, Agro‐Met. further training on DANA • No sophisticated warning Training on Climate • EWS in place Barangay Cogon, 2 in system for volcanic Farming System Poblacion and Mapaso regular eruption (for lead time). (Dumangas). Revision of monitoring since 2008 • Inadequate number of planting calendar. • Forecasting through Phivolcs, PAG‐ASA rain gauges (only 3 • Provision of sophisticated in place available) in communities. warning system for volcanic • Needs to raise awareness eruption. and appreciation of HVRA • Provision of more rain at the Barangay gauges with training/capacity‐building. 10 2 • Building permits are implemented in • Outdated CLUP, will be • Need to update CLUP. • TA, hardware Risk‐Sensitive Low commercial establishments (only 16 updated, DRR will be Integrate DRR. support from Urban (and building permits approved last year) incorporated. • Improve GIS capacity, WFP Rural) • Unsafe schools in San personnel training, Isidro, Salvacion, Tulay hardware, software, data Development

INDICATOR RATING STRENGTHS Gaps Recommendations Potential WFP Areas and Mitigation and San Pedro‐ priority generation. Barangay for relocation • Priority schools for • Collapsed bridges‐ Gabao relocation. –Tundol and Bliss (soon to • Retrofitting of bridges collapse) • Road system needs re‐ • Road swelling (1 ft)‐ Road planning. system needs re‐planning • Insufficient capital investment in flood mitigation measures • Inadequate GIS capacity • Unsafe schools in San Isidro, Salvacion, Tulay and San Pedro. • Collapsed bridges‐ Gabao –Tundol and Bliss (soon to collapse) • Road swelling (1 ft) along the highway.

V. List of Participants

The following is the List of Participants in this order: 1) Province of Benguet and the Municipalities of Atok and Tublay 2) Province of Cagayan and the Municipalities of Amulung and Enrile 3) Province of Laguna and the Municipalities of Mabitac and Pila 4) Province of Sorsogon and the Municipalities of Irosin and Juban.

Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

VI. Local DRM Related Documents

Province of Benguet No. LGU Council Office Plans Budget

1 Benguet Executive Order No. 2011‐ The PDRRM Office has Provincial Development 5% Local DRRM Fund: (Province) 03: Constituting the not yet been Physical Framework Plan P29,106,822.75 Benguet Provincial Disaster established. The (PDPFP) currently being Risk Reduction and Provincial Planning and reviewed and revised Management Council Development Officer (PDRRMC) has been assigned as Action Officer by the Governor

2 Tublay Executive Order No. 2010‐ Municipal Ordinance Tublay Contingency Plan P13,751,000 as indicated (Municipality) 08: Creation of the No. 2011‐03: Ordinance being formulated: Land Use in Municipal Disaster Risk Municipal Disaster Risk Creating the Position of Plan being updated; Reduction Management Reduction Management Municipal Risk Municipal Disaster Risk and Preparedness Action Council (MDRRMC) Reduction and Reduction Management and Plan Management Officer Preparedness Action Plan in (MDRRMO) Salary Place Grade 11, Under the Office of the Municipal Mayor of Tublay, Benguet

Atok Administrative Order No. 5‐ Administrative Order Emergency Operations Plan 5% CF: Php 2,491,155 (Municipality) Series of 2010: An No. 5‐Series of 2010: An (updating in progress); CLUP Administrative Order Administrative Order being updated Creating the Municipal Creating the Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council and and Management the Local Disaster Risk Council and the Local Reduction Management Disaster Risk Reduction Office Management Office

Province of Laguna

No. LGU Council Office Plan Budget 1 Laguna An EO creating the Provincial There is no permanent Provincial Development P49, 363,070 (Province) Disaster Risk Reduction and physical building of Physical Framework Plan, Management Council. PDRRMO. The creation Provincial Disaster Risk Composition of the council is of the PDRRMO office is Reduction and Management based from Section 2, Rule 5 not yet established. Plan. of IRR of RA 10121

2 Pila There is an Executive Order Municipal Disaster Comprehensive Land Use P1,884,688.96 (Municipality) establishing the Municipal Action Center is in Plan and Zoning Ordinance, Disaster Risk Management place with 3 personnel. Comprehensive Council. SOPs in place Development Plan

3 Mabitac MDRRMC is established At the moment, there is CLUP/ZO, CDP P1,239,938.98 (Municipality) a plan on creating DRRMO and center

Province of Cagayan No. LGU Council Office Plan Budget

1 Cagayan Ordinance on the Pending adoption of the Lack of an updated For the PDRRM Office, the (Province) establishment of the ordinance ‐ DRM contingency plan based on budget is P4 million for Provincial Climate Change creation of PDRRMO; international standards Personnel and P1 million for and DRRM Council for final Organizational (IAEMS); Ordinance Maintenance and Operational approval by the SP. structure includes: 1) stipulates for the adoption Expenses but under the law, Climate Change and and implemention of a P56,000.00 is allotted for DRM DRR & Management coherent, comprehensive, activities Officer, 2) integrated, efficient and Administrative Officer responsive DRM program V, Planning Office III incorporated in the and Special Operations development plan in the Officer III province as well as the other local government units 2 Enrile Executive Order # 2 (series of Awareness in the Existing P716,383 (Municipality) 2011): Reorganization of passage of LDRRMO is Emergency/Contingency Municipal Disaster Risk not articulated in the Plan is not updated Reduction and Management municipal level. Not Council from the old MDCC. informed in terms of The executive order lacks crafting the municipal provisions on a laiason office ordinance. The let alone a prelude to the Municipal ordinance is DRRMO. not yet in place. There is no LDRMMO/LDRRMC

3 Amulung No Municipal Ordinance on Same with the Although the EO # 35 P1,323,713 (Municipality) DRM; (LDRRMO/C) is not Municipality of Enrile, stipultes the formulation of articulated among municipal there is an existing the disaster plan, there is officials. Executive Order (EO # no comprehensive disaster 35 Series of 2011) management plan in place contain provisions for the reorganization of the DRRMC. The EO stipulates the formulation of a disaster plan and a provision on the established MDRRMO that is under the office of the Mayor.

Province of Sorsogon

No. LGU Council Office Plan Budget 1 Sorsogon Executive Order # 006‐A Resolution No. 59‐2010 Sorsogon Provincial Disaster The Maintenance and Other (Province) Series of 2010 Organization Approving the Protocol/Contingency Plan Operating Expenses (MOOE) of the PDRRMC Renaming of Sorsogon in place; Currently updating amounting to P488,000 as Provincial Public Safety their PDPFP (1993‐2002); reflected in the 2009 Disaster Risk Oxfam Manual of Provincial Public Safety and Management Operations PDRRMO; Management Office Annual Office(SPPSDMO) to Sorsogon Health Emergency Report. Other related Sorsogon Provincial Preparedness, Response and expenses were sourced out Disaster Risk Recovery Plan from established INGO Management Office partners such as Oxfam‐ (SPDRMO) GB/GVDP/ World Vision, Christian Aid Provincial Ordinance No. 03‐2008 Creation of the Sorsogon Provincial Public Safety and Disaster Management Office

2 Juban Executive Order # 04‐2010 There is a pending Juban Disaster Management CF: P2,500,000 (Municipality) creating JMDRRMC council resolution (SB), Plan 2006; CDP; Currently Resolution no. 1 Series developing their Risk of 2011 for the Sensitive Land Use Plan creation of the MDRRM office

No. LGU Council Office Plan Budget 3 Irosin Executive Order No. 10 MDRRM Office still Bulusan Contingency Plan; DRRM fund: P3,663,165 (Municipality) Organizing the Municipal being created with Irosin Contingency Plan Disaster Risk Management proposed 4 permanent 2010; CDP; DRRM Plan Council (MDRRMC)of the staff. Temporary office 2011; Reentry Plan 2011 Municipality of Irosin, building is available, Sorsogon budget issue – PS ceiling cap.

EXECUTIVE ORDER No. 006-A Series of 2010

ORGANIZATION OF THE PROVINCIAL DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND MANAGEMENT COUNCIL

WHEREAS, Republic Act No. 10121 or the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (DRRM Act), an Act Strengthening the Philippine Disaster Lusk Reduction and Management System, Providing for the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework and Institutionalizing the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan, Appropriating Funds Therefore and For Other Purposes which was promulgated and approved on May 27, 2010, aims to transform and modernize the Philippine disaster management system, institutionalize the best practices of local communities which have been implementing effective DRRM and shifts its focus from emergency relief and response (post-disaster) to disaster prevention and risk reduction (pre-disaster);

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 11 of the abovementioned law, “The existing Provincial, City, and Municipal Disaster Coordinating Councils shall henceforth be known as the Provincial, City, and Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Councils. The Barangay Disaster Coordinating Councils shall cease to exist and its powers and functions shall henceforth be assumed by the existing Barangay Development Councils (BDCs) which shall serve as the LDRRMCs in every barangay.”;

WHEREAS, there is a need to organize the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council, which shall oversee the implementation of the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan formulated by the Provincial Disaster Risk Management Office.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, RAUL R. LEE, Provincial Governor of Sorsogon, by virtue of the power vested in me by law, do hereby direct/order the following:

Section 1. ORGANIZATION AND COMPOSITION. There is hereby created the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management, which shall be composed of but not limited to the following:

Chairman : Provincial Governor Members : SPDRMO PPDO PSWDO PHO OPA GAD Office PEO PVO PBO PENRO-LGU Sangguniang Panlalawigan The Division Head/Superintendent of Schools of the DepED The highest-ranking officer of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) assigned in the province The Provincial Director of the Philippine National Police (PNP) The Provincial Director/Fire Marshall of the Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) Philippine Coast Guard 1

Department of Environment & Natural Resources Department of Interior Local Government The Provincial Federation President League Barangay The Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) Four (4) accredited CSOs and One (1) private sector representative.

Support Members: Philippine Information Agency (PIA) PHIVOLCS PAGASA Department of Health (DOH) Department of Trade & Industry (DTI) National Food Authority (NFA) Department of Public Works & Highways (DPWH) I&II National Irrigation Authority (NIA) SORECO I & II Sorsogon Water District Energy Development Corporation

Section 2. FUNCTIONS, DUTIES AND RESPOSIBILITES. The PDRRMC shall have the following functions:

1. Approve, monitor and evaluate the implementation of the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan and regularly review and test the plan consistent with other national and local planning programs;

2. Ensure the integration of disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation into local development plans, programs and budgets as a strategy in sustainable development and poverty reduction;

3. Recommend the implementation of forced or preemptive evacuation of local residents, if necessary; and

4. Convene the Council once every three (3) months or as necessary.

Section 3. ALTERNATIVE REPRESENTATION TO THE COUNCIL.

Each regular member shall designate and submit name of a permanent alternate representative to the Council through the Secretariat. The officially designated alternate representative shall be recognized as the only official representative of each council member. Should both be unavailable, participation of another representative must be covered by proper authorization issued and signed by the head of the agency/organization.

As a general rule, a single individual can not represent more than one (1) agency/organization.

The officially designated alternate representative shall compose the PDRRMC Technical Working Group (TWG).

Section 4. TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP. A Technical Working Group (TWG) composed of representatives from member agencies/organization is hereby created to provide technical assistance to the Council. The TWG shall be headed by the SPDRMO.

Section 5. FUNCTIONS OF THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP. The Technical Working Group shall perform the following duties and functions:

a. Assist in the formulation of the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan;

2 b. Act as advisory/recommendatory to the Council on matter concerning the affairs and operations of the PDRRMC; c. Provide technical assistance and serve as advisory to the Council in the management of the PDRRMC particularly in the performance of its functions as provided for in Section 11(b) of the Act; d. Prepare plans and programs related to Disaster Risk Reduction and Management for review and approval of the Council and assist in their implementation; e. Serve as the technical arm of the Council in the conduct of IEC; f. Provide technical assistance to the Council in sourcing out funds from funding institutions/organizations; g. Assist in the enforcement of DRRM law and regulations; and h. Assist in the monitoring and evaluation of plans and programs implemented by the Council.

Section 6. COUNCIL SECRETARIAT. Pursuant to Section 12(c)(18) of the Act, the Sorsogon Provincial Disaster Risk Management Office (SPDRMO) shall officially serve as the Secretariat and Executive arm to the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council.

Section 7. FUNCTION OF THE SECRETARIAT. In addition to the functions enumerated in Section 12(c) of the Act, SPDRMO as Council Secretariat shall perform the following duties and functions: a. Prepare the minutes and agenda, records the attendance and proceedings of all meetings of the Council; b. Serve notices to all members of the Council; c. Furnishes the members of the Council certified copies of the minutes of the meetings; d. Keeps a register of the names and addresses of all members and keeps complete file of the resolutions and executive orders relevant to the reorganization of the Council and the affairs and deliberations of the Council; e. In general, performs all duties incidental to the office of the secretariat and those that may be assigned by the Chairman of/or the Council.

Section 8. NOTICE OF MEETINGS. A notice, containing the date, place, time and agenda shall be served either by mail, personal delivery, electronic mail (e-mail), short messaging system (SMS/text messaging) or through facsimile transmittal or any means approved by the Council, to every member at least seven (7) days before the date of regular meeting and at least two (2) days before the special meeting as the case maybe.

Section 9. QUORUM. All Council meetings shall require two-thirds (2/3) of all members to constitute a quorum.

Section 10. TOPIC FOR DELIBERATION. Before the start of any Council meeting, any member may recommend to the Chairman, subject to his approval, items to be included in the agenda.

Section 11. VOTING. The Council shall endeavor to reach a consensus on all issues. Where it is not possible, the issue shall be resolved through a democratic 3

process which is through the casting of votes of all duly authorized representatives present. Each agency/organization will only have one (1) vote. A majority vote of all duly authorized representatives present shall be enough to give a motion/issue due course.

Section 12. COVERAGE. This Order shall be enforced in the province of Sorsogon.

Section 13. FUNDING. Expenses to be incurred in the implementation of this Order shall be charged against the local funds.

Section 14. REPEALING CLAUSE. All Orders, rules and regulations and other issuances or parts thereof, which are inconsistent with this Order, are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

Section 15. EFFECTIVITY. This Order shall take effect immediately.

SO ORDERED this 12th day of October 2010, at Sorsogon Province.

RAUL R. LEE Governor

Republic of the Philippines MUNICIPALITY OF JUBAN Sorsogon

EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 4 Series of 2010

AN ORDER CREATING THE JUBAN MUNICIPAL DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND MANAGEMENT COUNCIL

WHEREAS, this Local Government Unit has established the Municipal Disaster Coordinating Council;

WHEREAS, the enactment of RA 10121, otherwise known as the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010, the said council was renamed and the utilization of the Calamity Fund or now Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund was modified;

WHEREAS, the power, duties and functions of this new council shall be those provided for in Sec. 11, par. b 1-4 of RA 10121;

NOW THEREFORE, I, HON. JIMMY J. FRAGATA, Municipal Mayor of Juban, Sorsogon, by virtue of the powers vested upon me by law, do hereby ordered:

Sec. 1. Title. The Juban Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council is hereby created.

Sec. 2. Composition.

Over-all Chairman : JIMMY J. FRAGATA Local Chief Executive

Co-Chairmen : PI WILFREDO ESPINELLI Chief of Police LIZPETH H. NICOLAS JMDDRM Action Officer ALWIN H. HAJAS ABC President

Task Forces:

a. Intelligence and Disaster Analysis SEGUNDO A. BANAAG, JR.-Chairman b. Plans and Operations ROMEO A. HIGUIT-Chairman c. Resource Management RAUL B. GUEVARA-Chairman d. Communication and Warning Vice-Mayor SEGUNDO A. BANAAG, JR. –Chairman e. Rescue and Recovery REY ROMEO L. GUAB-Chairman f. Transportation, Security and Fire Control SFO1 LEO GREFALDO-Chairman g. Evacuation SEGUNDINO B. GUAB, JR. - Chairman h. Relief and Supplies SUSAN A. APIN-Chairman i. Medical and Health JAMES V. APIN-Chairman j. Public Information LIZPETH H. NICOLAS-Chairman k. Rehabilitation RENATO H. ESCOTE-Chairman l. Secretariat NANY T. HABOC-Chairman m. Administrative and Support Staff ARCHIMEDES A. GRIARTE-Chairman

Sec. 3. Functions. The function of this council shall be those enumerated in par. b1-4 of Sec. 11 of RA 10121 and those that may be promulgated thereafter for the purpose of effective program implementation.

Sec. 4. Administrative Provision. The fund for the operation of this council shall be taken from the Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund.

Sec. 5. Repealing Clause. All executive orders inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed and modified accordingly.

DONE in the municipality of Juban, province of Sorsogon this 10th day of November, 2010.

JIMMY J. FRAGATA Municipal Mayor

Republic of the Philippines MUNICIPALITY OF JUBAN Sorsogon

JUBAN MUNICIPAL DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND MANAGEMENT COUNCIL (JMDRRMC)

EXCERPT from the Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council held at the Mayor’s Office Conference Room on January 12, 2011.

Present: Lt Col. Santiago I. Enginco - BatCom 49IB PI Wilfredo A. Espinelli - Juban MPS Renato H. Escote - Municipal Agriculturist Lizpeth H. Nicolas - JMDRRMC Action Officer-Designate Romeo A. Higuit - MPDC Maria Gracia G. Eulin - Asst. Mun. Treas. Allan H. Guarin - MENRO Ruel H. Escote - Principal DEPED Jocelyn G. Leaño - SB Sec Giovani G. Matociños - Mun. Engr. Erlinda G. Grencio - RIC-CBO Marivic E. Fulay - Mun. Accountant Susan A. Apin - MSWDO Lorinda L. Gapas - LAOO1 Segundino B. Guab, Jr. - PSDS, DepEd James V. Apin - MHO Archimedes A. Griarte - GSO PO3 Rosendo G. Grefaldo - Juban MPS Rey Romeo L. Guab - SB Member Jimmy J. Fragata - Municipal Mayor Nany T. Haboc - JMDRRMC Sec/MCR

Absent: Celedonio Gualvez - TEDA President Alwin H. Hajas - ABC President Asuncion H. Dolosa - MBO Ma. Luisa J. Dometita - MGOO V Raul B. Guevara - MT Segundo A. Banaag, Jr. - Municipal Vice-Mayor SFO1 Leo G. Grefaldo - BFP

RESOLUTION NO. 1 Series of 2011

RESOLUTION FAVORABLY ENDORSING TO THE SANGGUNIANG BAYAN THE CREATION OF MUNICIPAL DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND MANAGEMENT OFFICE FOR THE MUNICIPALITY OF JUBAN

WHEREAS, RA 10121, otherwise known as Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 mandated every LGU to establish/create the MDRRMO;

WHEREAS, this office shall be manned by the organic LGU Personnel by mere designation as an added function meantime that this LGU cannot meet the personnel services budgetary limitation provided for in the Local Government Code;

Page 2 JMDRRMC Res. 01, s. 2011

WHEREAS, Sec. 12, of RA 10121 has identified the basic functions to which every LDRRMO shall undertake;

WHEREFORE, on unanimous assent, this council hereby resolve as it is hereby;

RESOLVED to favorably endorsed to the Sangguniang Bayan the creation of the Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office.

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THE CORRECTNESS of the foregoing excerpt.

NANY T. HABOC JMDRRMC Secretary

Approved:

JIMMY J. FRAGATA JMDRRMC Chairman Republic of the Philippines Province of Sorsogon MUNICIPALITY OF IROSIN OFFICE OF THE MUNICIPAL MAYOR

EXECUTIVE ORDER No. 10 Series of 2010

ORGANIZING THE MUNICIPAL DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND MANAGEMENT COUNCIL (MDRRMC) OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF IROSIN, SORSOGON

Whereas, the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (RA 10121) declares that it is the State’s policy to address the root cause of vulnerability to disaster by strengthening the institutional capacity for disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM) and building resilience of communities to disasters and climate change;

Whereas, RA 10121 calls for the adoption of DRRM approach that is holistic, comprehensive, integrated and proactive in lessening the impacts of disaster and climate change, and promote the participation of all sectors at all level;

Whereas, the Act provides for the mainstreaming of DRRM in development processes and institutionalization of policies, mechanisms and programs on DRRM from the national to local level, and the strengthening of capacities of LGUs in mitigating and preparing for, responding to, and recovering from the impact of disasters;

Whereas, Section 11 of the Act renames the existing Municipal Disaster Coordinating Council (MDCC) as the Municipal DRRM Council (MDRRMC), and provides for the Council’s composition and functions;

Whereas, in a meeting of the MDCC held last July 21, 2010, the members present unanimously agreed to reorganize the MDCC into the MDRRMC pursuant to RA 10121, and assigned sectoral responsibilities to members.

NOW THEREFORE, I, EDUARDO E. ONG JR., Municipal Mayor of Irosin, Sorsogon, by virtue of powers vested in me by law do order and direct the following:

Section 1. Organization. The Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council of the Municipality of Irosin, Sorsogon is hereby organized.

Section 2. Composition. The Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council shall be composed of the following:

Chairperson: Eduardo E. Ong Jr., Mayor Members: Gilda R. Martinez, MSWDO Ma. Nerissa B. Tagum, M.D., Municipal Health Officer Jesus O. Cielo, Municipal Agriculturist Benjamin M. Gabionza, Municipal Engineer Felix G. Ortile, Municipal Budget Officer Noel D. Mercado II, MPDC Designate Eduardo B. Ambrocio, PSDS-DepEd Irosin 1Lt Alfie A. Lee, Philippine Army-AFP PINSP Gary D. Mangente, COP PNP-Irosin SINSP Prospero E. Deona, MFM BFP-Irosin Oscar B. Gilpa, ABC President Edwin F. Garcia, Municipal Administrator Jerelle J. Marquez, Municipal Information Officer Roger D. Ty, Municipal Treasurer Edilberto E. Elorza, Senior Administrative Assistant II Florencio P. Bermundo, GNHS Principal Roque U. Dorotan Jr., SB Member Merlita B. Santiago, SB Member Edwin G. Gajo, General Manager, Irosin Water District Eugene F. Galeza, KABALIKAT Jose F. Hugo, KABALIKAT Melchor O. Michelena, Knights of St. Christopher Representative Jemer G. Honra, Station Manager, Radyo Natin Roberto F. Fortes, General Manager, SORECO-I Ludovic Tan, M.D., Chief of Hospital, Irosin District Hospital Rodrigo Hecita, Business Sector Representative Religious Sector Representative Municipal Council of Elders Representative Philippine National Red Cross Representative

Section 3. Functions. The MDRRMC shall have the following functions:

1. Set the direction, development, implementation and coordination of disaster risk management programs in the municipality; 2. Approve, monitor and evaluate the implementation of the Municipal DRRM Plan and regularly review and test the plan consistent with national and local planning programs; 3. Ensure the integration of disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation into local development plans, programs and budgets as a strategy in sustainable development and poverty reduction; 4. Recommend the implementation of forced or preemptive evacuation of local residents, if necessary; and 5. Convene the local council once every three (3) months or as necessary.

Section 4. Sectoral Responsibilities. The sectoral responsibilities of the Council members are as follows:

Position/Sector Responsible Person/s MDRRMC Chairperson Mayor Eduardo E. Ong Jr. MDRRMC Coordinator Edwin F. Garcia MDRRMC Action Officer Edilberto E. Elorza MDRRMC Secretariat Benjamin M. Gabionza, Noel D. Mercado II Public Information and Media Relations Jerelle J. Marquez, Jemer G. Honra Communications Services Eugene F. Galeza, Jose F. Hugo, Roberto F. Fortes Transportation Services Melchor O. Michelena, Rodrigo Hecita Security Services PINSP Gary D. Mangente, 1Lt Alfie A. Lee Logistics and Resource Generation Felix G. Ortile, Roger D. Ty Search, Rescue and Recovery Services Roque U. Dorotan Jr., SINSP Prospero B. Deona, 1Lt Alfie A. Lee Relief, Medical and Health Services Ma. Nerissa B. Tagum, MD, Gilda R. Martinez, Ludovic Tan, MD

Section 5. Effectivity. This Order shall take effect immediately.

DONE in Irosin, Sorsogon this 21st day of December 2010.

HON. EDUARDO E. ONG JR. Municipal Mayor Final Report Annexes Capacity Needs Assessment for Disaster Preparedness and Response

VII. Summary of CNA Activities

National

Date Activity Output February 21, 2011 Stakeholder Consultation on Presentation of UNWFP’s DRR Disaster Risk Reduction project in the Philippines, introduction of EMI’s staff and consultants in the project, explain their role in the CNA and gather information on capacity development initiatives conducted by the invited organizations in the four target provinces. The consultation was attended by DSWD, DILG, OCD, LGA, UNDP, UN HABITAT, UNWFP, CARE/ACCORD, CDP, EMI and Oxfam Key Informant Interview with March 4, 2011 PDRRM Officer of Laguna on Field Investigation Report emergency management practice at the provincial level Focus Group Discussion with March 8, 2011 DSWD, Project Management Field Investigation Report Bureau on their programs and activities related to DRR Key Informant Interview with March 9, 2011 OCD, Training Division Officer, Field Investigation Report on OCD’s past and current trainings on DRR Focus Group Discussion with March 10, 2011 DILG on their programs and Field Investigation Report activities related to DRM

Focus Group Discussion with March 21, 2011 Office of Civil Defense (OCD) FGD Report Focus Group Discussion with League of Cities of the FGD Report April 11, 2011 Philippines (LCP) and Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP)

Local

Laguna Province: 22 February to 3 March 2011 Date Activity Output Courtesy call to the Provincial Selection of participating Social Work and Development municipalities, finalize 22 February 2011 Secretary and Provincial workshop dates and list of Disaster Risk Reduction and participating agencies , Management Officer acquisition of Provincial DRRMP of Laguna Laguna Provincial CNA‐PDR Field Investigation Report, workshop Photo Documentation 1 March 2011 DRRI Small Group Discussions DRRI Summary of Results and Findings Key Informant Interviews Mabitac Municipal CNA‐PDR Field Investigation Report, workshop Photo Documentation 2 March 2011 DRRI Small Group Discussions DRRI Summary of Results and Findings Key Informant Interviews Pila Municipal CNA‐PDR Field Investigation Report, workshop Photo Documentation 3 March 2011 DRRI Small Group Discussions DRRI Summary of Results and Findings Key Informant Interviews

Benguet Province: 8 March to 12 March 2011 Date Activity Output Team Preparations, travel to Pertinent document of LIA for 8 March 2011 Baguio City, and preparatory DRR and finalization of meeting with Benguet PPDO workshop arrangements Benguet Provincial CNA‐DPR DRRRI results and field workshop investigation reports 9 March 2011 DRRI Small Group Discussions

Key Informant Interviews Travel to Municipality of DRRRI results and field 10 March 2011 Tublay, Tublay Municipal CNA‐ investigation reports

Date Activity Output DPR workshop

DRRI Small Group Discussions

Key Informant Interviews Travel to Municipality of Atok, DRRRI results and field Atok Municipal CNA‐DPR investigation reports 11 March 2011 workshop

DRRI Small Group Discussions

Key Informant Interviews 12 March 2011 Travel back to Manila

Cagayan Province: 8 March to 12 March 2011 Date Activity Output Team Preparations, travel to Meet with PSWD Officers and 8 March 2011 Cagayan, and preparatory Finalized workshop meeting arrangements Cagayan Provincial CNA‐DPR DRRRI results and field 9 March 2011 workshop and Key Informant investigation reports Investigation Enrile Municipal CNA‐DPR DRRRI results and field 10 March 2011 workshop and Key Informant investigation reports Investigation Amulung Municipal CNA‐DPR DRRRI results and field 11 March 2011 workshop and Key Informant investigation reports Investigation, debriefing 12 March 2011 Travel back to Manila

Sorsogon Province: 4 April to 7 April 2011 Date Activity Output Team Preparations, and Pertinent document of LIA for 4 April 2011 Sorsogon provincial CNA‐DPR DRR and finalization of workshop and KIIs workshop arrangements Municipality of Juban CNA‐DPR DRRRI results and field 5 April 2011 Workshop investigation reports Municipality of Irosin CNA‐PDR DRRRI results and field 6 April 2011 Workshop investigation reports

7 April 2011 Travel back to Manila

VIII. Capacitybuilding Activities of WFP’s Collaborating Partners with Foreign Funding

Project/partners What Where When Deliverables/Activities Additional notes (Timeframe) 1 DILG with UN‐ Cities in Climate Change Sorsogon City To be completed by Tools and methods: VAA Demonstration Habitat and Initiative/ Interface March 2011 Vulnerability Assessment project; Replication HUDCC, LGA, LCP, between climate change, (see website); institutional in Santiago City, UNDP disaster risk reduction competency (adaptation Cauayan Ctiy (CLUP/CDP review) strategies for housing, basic Tueguegarao, services, livelihoods) 2 DILG – WB Mainstreaming of DRR/CCA 7 provinces (one of To be completed by Institutional competency: Replication in 5 in local development which is Laguna), 2 Oct/Nov 2011 CBDRM, contingency provinces (Nov planning cities, and 21 towns) planning and use of 2011) synchronized local planning and budget calendar Æ development projects 3 DILG/LGA and Strengthening LGU Nueva Ecija, Phase 1 ending in Human/institutional Spanish Government Capacities in planning and CARAGA, Region V Sept 2011; Phase 2 competency (AECID) infrastructure ending in June 2012 4 DSWD Community‐based DRM Human competency: training using the Family and training modules for Community Disaster community disaster Preparedness modules preparedness (under the Bicol Recovery Program) 5 DSWD‐WFP Cash‐for‐Work, Food‐for‐ Albay and Sorsogon Tools/methods through Work, and Cash‐for‐Training mitigation and recovery activities 6 OCD Development of NDRRM Nationwide Target completion date Mechanism/process to Based on the framework and plan for National DRRM generate framework and DRRRM law process Plan and Framework plan through regional

Project/partners What Where When Deliverables/Activities Additional notes (Timeframe) development is April consultations 2011 7 OCD‐WB Capacity building on post‐ Tools and methods disaster reconstruction and monitoring & evaluation system 8 OCD‐AUSAID: READY Hazard Mapping and 23 most vulnerable Originally 2006‐ Tools and methods; project; with Assessment for Effective provinces 2010; extended until institutional capacity CSCAND Sub‐ Community‐based June 2011 Committee and Disaster Management Geoscience Australia 9 OCD‐ADB Risk modeling and 2 cities 2011‐2014 Tools and methods financing: pilot project 10 OCD‐AusAID: “Risk Enhancing Risk Analysis Greater Tools and methods Analysis” Project; Capacities for Flood, Metropolitan Manila with CSCAND Sub‐ Typhoon, Severe Wind Committee and and Earthquake for NDRRMC Greater Metro Manila Area 11 OCD‐CIDA: Building Resilience and Marikina City, Pasig Began in 2010 after Institutional competency Other partners: “Resiliency” Project; Strengthening Local City, Cainta Typhoon Ondoy to League of Cities of with UNDP, CSCAND Government Capacities for finish 2013 the Philippines and and NDRRMC Recovery and DRM the 3 LGUs

IX. Characterizing WFP’s Partner National Government Agencies

DILG DSWD OCD Vision Primary catalyst for excellence in local A society where poor, vulnerable and While systems and mechanisms have been set in governance that nurtures self‐reliant, disadvantaged individuals, families and place from the national, regional and local levels progressive, orderly, safe and globally communities are empowered for an to address disasters and emergencies, OCD competitive communities sustained by God‐ improved quality of life. continuously strive to enhance them to be more centered and empowered citizenry. responsive in dealing with disasters. OCD aims for the following:

A service‐oriented organization A prepared population A safe nation Mission Promote peace and order, ensure public safety, With the above‐stated vision, OCD is committed and strengthen capability of local government To provide social protection and promote the to administer a comprehensive national civil units through active people participation and a rights and welfare of the poor, vulnerable defense and civil assistance program by professionalized corps of civil servants. and the disadvantaged individuals, families providing leadership in the continuous and communities that will contribute to development of measures to reduce risk to poverty alleviation and empowerment communities and manage the consequence of through social welfare development policies, disasters. programs, projects and services implemented with or through local government units (LGUs), non‐government organizations (NGOs), people’s organizations (POs), other government organizations (GOs) and other members of civil society.

Mandate/ • Peaceful, safe, self‐reliant and development‐ To provide assistance to local government As the implementing arm of the National Council, Objectives dominated communities; units, non‐government organizations, other OCD shall have the primary mission of (Goals) • Improve performance of local governments national government agencies, people’s administering a comprehensive national civil in governance, administration, social and organizations, and other members of civil defense and disaster risk reduction and economic development and environmental society in effectively implementing management program by providing leadership in management; programs, projects and services that will the continuous development of strategic and • Sustain peace and order condition and alleviate poverty and empower systematic approaches as well as measures to disadvantaged individuals, families and reduce the vulnerabilities and risks to hazards

DILG DSWD OCD ensure public safety. communities for an improved quality of life. and manage the consequences of disasters.

Functions/Tasks • Reduce crime incidents and improve crime • Formulates policies and plans which • Advise the NDRRMC on matters relating to solution efficiency provide direction to intermediaries and disaster risk reduction and management • Improve jail management and penology other implementers in the development consistent with the policies and scope as services and delivery of social welfare and defined in this Act; • Improve fire protection services development services. • Formulate and implement the NDRRMP and • Continue professionalization of PNP, BFP and • Develops and enriches existing programs ensure that the physical framework, social, BJMP personnel and services and services for specific groups, such as economic and environmental plans of • Enhance LGU capacities to improve their children and youth, women, family and communities, cities, municipalities and performance and enable them to effectively communities, solo parents, older persons provinces are consistent with such plan. The and efficiently deliver services to their and Persons with Disabilities (PWDs); NDRRMC shall approve the NDRRMP; constituents • Registers licenses and accredits individuals, • Identify, assess and prioritize hazards and risks • Continue to initiate policy reforms in support agencies and organizations engaged in in consultation with key stakeholders; of local autonomy social welfare and development services, • Develop and ensure the implementation of sets standards and monitors the national standards in carrying out disaster risk empowerment and compliance to these reduction programs including preparedness, standards. mitigation, prevention, response and • Provides technical assistance and capability rehabilitation works, from data collection and building to intermediaries; and analysis, planning, implementation, • Provides social protection of the poor, monitoring and evaluation; vulnerable and disadvantaged sector, • Review and evaluate the Local Disaster Risk DSWD also gives augmentation funds to Reduction and Management Plans (LDRRMPs) local government units so these could to facilitate the integration of disaster risk deliver SWD services to depressed reduction measures into the local municipalities and barangays and provide Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) and protective services to individuals, families Comprehensive Land∙ U se Plan (CL UP); and communities in crisis situation. • Ensure that the LG U s, through the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Offices (LDRRMOs) are properly informed and adhere to the national standards and programs; • Formulate standard operating procedures for the deployment of rapid assessment teams,

DILG DSWD OCD information sharing among different government agencies, and coordination before and after disasters at all levels; • Establish standard operating procedures on the communication system among provincial, city, municipal, and barangay disaster risk reduction and management councils, for purposes of warning and alerting them and for gathering information on disaster areas before, during and after disasters; • Establish Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Training Institutes in such suitable location as may be deemed appropriate to train public and private individuals, both local and national, in such subject as disaster risk reduction and management among others; • Ensure that all disaster risk reduction programs, projects and activities requiring regional and international support shall be in accordance with duly established national polices and aligned with international agreements; • Ensure that government agencies and LGUs give top priority and take adequate and appropriate measures in disaster risk reduction and management; • Create an enabling environment for substantial and sustainable participation of CSOs, private groups, volunteers and communities, and recognize their contributions in the government's disaster risk reduction efforts; • Conduct early recovery and post‐disaster needs assessment institutionalizing gender

DILG DSWD OCD analysis as part of it; • Establish an operating facility to be known as the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Operations Center (NDRRMOC) that shall be operated and staffed on a twenty‐four (24) hour basis; Prepare the criteria and procedure for the enlistment of accredited community disaster volunteers (ACDVs). It shall include a manual of operations for the volunteers which shall be developed by the OCD in consultation with various stakeholders; • Provide advice and technical assistance and assist in mobilizing necessary resources to increase the overall capacity of LGUs, specifically the low income and in high‐risk areas; • Create the necessary offices to perform its mandate as provided under this Act; and • Perform such other functions as may be necessary for effective operations and implementation of R.A. 10121.

X. DRR Capacity Building Activities of Nongovernmental Organizations

Project/partners What Where When Deliverables/Activities Additional notes (Timeframe) Center for Disaster Capacity development/ Nationwide On demand Training modules Partnership with IOs Preparedness module development and government CARE Netherlands Capacity‐building on Bgy. Malanday, Collapsible shelters with Corporate community‐based disaster Marikina Contingency planning Network for preparedness and planning Disaster Response (Noah’s Ark (CNDR) CARE Recovery project Benguet and Until June 2011 Shelter, livelihood, Netherlands – Cordillera region – community‐based early (PostKetsana) 67 barangays warning system ACCORD CAREDIPECHO Comprehensive recovery 3 municipalities in Contingency plan Southern Leyte program Camarines Sur Book on lessons learned (provincial) (2005); St. Bernand, Southern Leyte (2006); Malagusan Compostela Valley CAREEU Food security (Food facility Agusan del Norte, Support for agriculture project) plus alternative Aurora livelihoods CARE Safe Schools Campaign Project info sheet (lessons UNISDR learned) Teacher training CARE Netherlands CCA‐ DRR Agusan del Norte Five years until June Internal: strategic plan – Livelihood and agriculture (marsh) 2011 capacity needs assessment program Benguet Metro Manila Oxfam Post‐Ketsana program: Laguna (Bay, Human/institutional

Project/partners What Where When Deliverables/Activities Additional notes (Timeframe) WASH project, CFW, and Cabuyao, Calamba, competence; tools/ methods others Los Banos, Sta. Cruz) Primers of the law (different languages) OxfamAusAID Institutionalization of Surigao del Norte Documentation of best Roll out in partnership DRRM Office and Surigao del Sur practices DRR‐CCA (e.g., with DILG/BLGD and (with 2 high‐risk Bulacan; St. Bernard, Leyte; OCD barangays) Bgy. Inundao, Southern Leyte)

XI. Mainstreaming Projects Implemented by the National Economic and Development Authority

Project Outcomes Output (1) Integrating DRR and CCA in Local Development Outcome 1. Tacit acknowledgment Output 1: Enhanced awareness and understanding of, Planning and DecisionMaking Processes” that DRR and CCA are primarily and competences on climate change among local (20092012) UNDP/AusAID local undertakings supported ably government and other stakeholders (through gender‐ by national technical backstopping sensitive information kits and mass communication and enabling environment. materials); Duration: 20092012 Estimated cost: Aus$2.5 M Output 2: CC and DRR incorporated in the land use and physical framework planning process (supplementary guidelines on mainstreaming integrated DRR and CCA and in land use and physical framework planning; handbook on establishing, managing and maintaining disaster risk and climate risk data for development and land use planning; and reference manual on mainstreaming DRR and CCA in local land use planning).

Output 3: Practical strategies for CCA and DRR demonstrated at the local level (CCA projects demonstrated in 10 pilot communities; documentation of best practices of community‐level adaptation projects. Outcome 2. Coherence and Output 4: National Action Plan on Climate Change integration of the response Output 5: Mechanisms for multi‐stakeholder strategies by providing the overall cooperation on DRR and CC at national and local levels framework and required multi‐ strengthened. stakeholder mechanisms. (2) Joint Programme on Strengthening the Climate risk mainstreamed in key Vulnerability assessment and climate change Philippines’ Institutional Capacity to Adapt to national and selected local monitoring and evaluation systems; Adaptation options; Climate Change (20082010) –MDGF 1656 development plans and processes; Climate change reduction (CRR) entry points; CRR (Government of Spain/UNDP) mainstreaming guidelines; CRR plans; Web‐based tool.

Project Outcomes Output Duration: 20082010 Enhanced national capacity to Capacity assessment; CRR awareness; Competency Estimated cost: US$8.62 M develop, manage and administer development. plans, programs and projects addressing climate change risks Coping mechanisms improved Demonstration projects and scaling‐up. through pilot demonstration adaptation projects.