EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

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

The Saug Watershed Subproject which covers a total area of 2,903.00 hectares is located within Compostela Valley and Davao del Norte in Region XI. More than 10,000 hectares of irrigable ricelands in the municipalities of Nabunturan, COMVAL and New Corella and Montevista are dependent on the water channels originating from these upland areas. Agricultural production however had been plagued by destruction of crops caused oftentimes by massive flooding because of the Saug Watershed deforestation .

The total area covered by the Subproject is the reduced version after the original target for Comprehensive Site Development (CSD) has been downscaled upon assessment of People’s Organization performance. With a CSD cost of PHP41.53, the POs were able to develop the revised target area with a general weighted average survival rate of 84.67% and the environment within the Subproject taking a positive turn as evidenced by the reappearance of some flora and fauna.

Direct income for beneficiary communities were provided when the members were hired to do CSD activities apart from income they get from the livelihood projects. Of the three POs involved in the project, the one to garner the highest in household income level was the SAMABACO with the average annual income of households going up from PHP27,164.30 (before project implementation) to PHP47, 658.31 as of December 2002.

As far as infrastructure is concerned, the Subproject has provided farm-to- market road and bridges as well as various equipment and facilities that are useful in Project operation and in livelihood activities. TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ------i

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

II. Subproject Implementation ------13 1. Organizations for Implementing Subproject 2. Implementation Period 3. Subproject Cost 4. Comments on Performance of AO, AP, PO, M&E, and Infra Contractors 5. Other Matters Relating to Subproject Implementation

III. Action taken by the AO, AP, and PO ------27 Relating to Recommendation(s)

IV. Initial Operation and Maintenance Of the Subproject Facilities ------28 1. Present Condition of Facilities 2. Organization for Operation and Maintenance 3. Annual Budget or Actual Expenditure For Operation and Maintenance (by year) 4. Maintenance Method

V. Benefits Derived from the Project ------40 1. Indirect Effects

VI. Conclusions and Recommendations ------43

LIST OF TABLES:

Table 1 : Trainings Attended by the People’s Organization ------44

Table 2 : Subproject Performance ------46

Table 3 : Subproject Site Management Office Equipment ------47

Table 4 : Trainings Attended by SUSIMO ------49

Table 5a : Money Lending Livelihood Project ------50

Table 5b : Agri-Vet Supply Livelihood Project ------51

Table 5c : Videoke Machine Livelihood Project ------52

Table 5d : Micro Credit (Supply of Fertilizer) Livelihood Project ------53

Table 5e : Agri-Vet/Farm Supply & Sari-Sari Store Livelihood Project -- 54

Table 6 : Subproject Status Report ------55

Table 7 : SMP Cost Estimate per Activity ------56

Table 8 : Community Organizing Cost Estimate per Activity ------57

Table 9a : Cost Estimate for Agroforestry Per Activity ------58

Table 9b : Cost Estimate for Bamboo Plantation Per Activity------59

Table 9c : Cost Estimate for Tree Plantation Per Activity ------60

Table 10 : Monitoring and Evaluation Cost Estimate Per Activity ------61

Table 11 : Infrastructure Project ------62

Table 12 : Annual Work and Financial Plan ------63

ANNEXES:

1. Organizational Structure ------67

1a. CO Contractor 1b. PO 1c. SUSIMO 1d. Infrastructure Contractor

2. Pictures ------74

3. CSD Accomplishment Map ------76

SUBPROJECT COMPLETION REPORT Of SAUG WATERSHED SUBPROJECT

Forestry Sector Project Loan Agreement No. PH-P 135

I. SUBPROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Saug Watershed Subproject lies within the Provinces of Compostela Valley and Davao del Norte specifically between latitude 7°34’31” to 7°43’32” and longitude 125°52’39” to 125°58’04”. The subproject has a total approximate area of 3,928 hectares distributed in three (3) municipalities namely: Montevista (1,508 has.), Nabunturan (1,201 has.) both in Compostela Valley province and New Corella (1,149 has.) in Davao del Norte province.

The Subproject is accessible from several entry points mainly passing through Nabunturan, Montevista and New Corella. It is classified as timberland as reflected in LC Map No. 1901 dated September 1, 1955.

1. Purpose/Objectives

A) Original

1. To institutionalize community participation in watershed development and management through comprehensive and watershed-focused on community organizing activities; 2. To provide direct employment and income generating activities to the participants; 3. To reforest and rehabilitate 3,928 hectares of open and degraded grasslands and denuded forestlands within the subproject site; 4. To plant 3,960,000 forest trees and 318,000 banana suckers for firebreak under comprehensive reforestation; 181,597 fruit trees under agro forestry and 14,560 bamboo culms cutting under stream bank stabilization; 5. To instill forest conservation in the minds of the upland watershed dwellers; and 6. To develop the overall capability of the community to sustainably manage the watershed resources.

B) Modification a. Modified purpose/objectives

1. To reforest and rehabilitate 2,903 hectares of open and degraded grasslands and denuded forestlands within the subproject site; 2. To plant 1,424,572 forest trees and 318,000 banana suckers for firebreak under comprehensive reforestation; 338,055 fruit trees under agro forestry and 728 bamboo culms under stream bank stabilization;

b. Reasons for the modification

The assessment and validation conducted in 2000 on the performance of the PO reduced the target for Comprehensive Site Development (CSD) from the original 3,928 hectares to 2,903.00 hectares. The NFDO advised the revision when the PO showed poor performance on some of the established plantations. The two out of the three (3) People’s Organizations (PO) of the subproject were advised to reduce the target for site development. This eventually reduced the original target on seedling production from 3,960,000 forest trees for reforestation component to 1,424,572. On the other hand, the agro forestry seedlings increased from 181,597 to 338,055 grafted fruit trees seedlings when the community people manifested their willingness to include their land claims for agro forestry component after they were convinced with the merit in adjusting costing of seedlings.

2. Subproject Scope and Dimension

A. Comparison of Original and Actual Scope & Dimensions A.1. Please check: There has been ( revision and/or modification or  no revision and/or modification) of the Subproject scope and dimensions. A.2. If “revision and/or modification”, please complete the Table.

2 Original Scope and Revised/Modified ITEM Dimensions (Actual) 1. REFORESTATION/ WATERSHED/CBFM A. Survey, Mapping and 5,259 hectares 5,259 hectares Planning (SMP) Aug.-Nov., 1995 (1st contract) Aug.-Nov., 1995 (1st contract) nd nd Sept. –Dec., 1995(2 contract) Sept. –Dec., 1995(2 contract) Oct.95-Feb.,1996(3rdcontract) Oct.95-Feb.,1996(3rdcontract) B. Community Organizing (CO)1 Two (2) years duration: Extended for another six 3,928 ha. months: 3,928 ha. June 1997-June 1999 June 1997-June, 2001 Year 1  IEC activities  IEC activities Year 2  Assistance to CSD  Assistance to CSD Year 3 (six months extension) activities activities  Assistance on  Assistance on Networking and Networking and Linkage Linkage  Organizational  Organizational Development and Development and Capacity Building Capacity Building  Livelihood Project  Livelihood Project implementation implementation  Monitoring and  Monitoring and Evaluation Evaluation

C. Comprehensive Site Four (4) years duration Extended for two (2) Development (CSD) Sept, 1997-June, 2001 years June 1997-Sept. 2003 1. Soil Erosion Control/SWC a. Infrastructure b. Trail and footpath 2. Vegetative Measures2 a. Agroforestry 711.00 hectares 1,538.81 hectares b. Assisted Natural Regeneration c. Enrichment Planting d. Tree Plantation d.1. Bamboo (stream bank) 28.00 hectares 1.4 hectares d.2. Rattan d.3. Mangrove d.4.Plantation Species (Refo 3,189 hectares 1,362.79 hectares spp.)

3 e.Timber Stand Improvement f. Roadside Planting g. Greenbelt TOTAL 3,928.00 hectares 2,903.00 hectares 3. Inventory Residual Forest 4.Income Enhancement Subproject 5. Infrastructure  Bunkhouse/PO Office 4 units 11 units  Lookout Tower 8 units none  Trail and Footpath 11.8 km. 10.85km.

D. Major Infrastructure - Farm to Market road with 5.902 km. Bridge. Aug.2002-Aug. 2003 Duration: 13 months E. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Year 1 Inspection Chart Mapping Physical Validation: Year 2 (ICM) Conducted two (2) passes

only; 1691 has. (1st pass) –

Aug. 2000-July 2001

2nd pass: 2903 has. Oct. 2002 – Sept. 2003  Verification of boundaries, monuments, and block corner posts  Seedling production inventory analysis  Survival Counting with 20% sampling intensity, including mapping of developed areas  Height and diameter measurement, assessment of overall health/appearance  Inspection of physical infrastructure

4 Institutional and Project Year 1 Benefit Assessment: Year 2 Conducted two (2) passes only; 1691 ha. (1st pass) – Aug. 2000-July 2001 2nd pass: 2903 has. Oct. 2002 – Sept. 2003  Assessment on the overall development of the PO  Assessment on the capability of the PO to pursue sustainable resource management and sustain its livelihood initiatives  Identification of various issues/problems/constrai nts related to the development and strengthening of the PO and the relevant support systems  Identification of immediate benefits of the project and evidences that would indicate the intermediate and long-term socio- economic and environmental impacts. 2. Subproject Site Management Office (SUSIMO) Equipment provided to the Office3: 3 units Binocular 2 units Calculator 3 units Computer Desktop 2 units Cassette Tape Recorder 2 units Meter Tape 2 units Tape Measure 3 units Steel Cabinet

5 1 unit Manual Typewriter 3 units VHF handheld Radios 4 units Brunton Compass 4 units Abney Hand Level 2 units Camera 6 units Motorcycles (SUZUKI 125) 1 unit Forester’s Transit 1 unit Base Radio 1 unit Rain Gauge 2 units Computer Table 12 units Office table w/ chair 1 unit Generator 2 units Printer 1 unit GPS 2 units Fire extinguisher 1 unit Refrigerator 1 unit Planimeter 1 unit Lettering set 2 units Computer Table 2 Computer Rack 3 units Petromax 1 unit UPS 500VA 1 unit GIS software 2units Electric fan 1 unit Airpot 2 units Stapler 2 units Puncher 1 unit CD writer 1 unit Truck/vehicle (KIA) 1 unit Television 1 unit Stereo component 1 unit Gas stove 3 units Jungle bolo 3 units Steel rake 3 units Rubber boots 1 unit Helmet 3 units Shovel 3 units Axe

6 3 units Horse (work animal) From Infra Engineer: 1 unit Desk top computer 1 unit Office building 2 units Double deck bed

Researches conducted: NONE

Trainings attended4: 1. FSP Phase-in/Phase out workshop 2. FSP Assessment and Planning Workshop 3. Orientation Course of SUSIMO Staff of Watershed Subproject Site 4. Pre-phase in/phase out workshop 5. FSP Re-Orientation Course 6. Field exposure on SALT farming 7. FSP Orientation Course

Others: Construction of field office (SUSIMO): 1 storey structure with quarters for office staff. 1Please refer to Table 1 for the details on trainings attended by the POs 2Table 2 details the subproject performance in terms of area planted 3Table 3 shows the details of the equipment provided to the SUSIMO 4Please refer to Table 4 for the trainings attended by the SUSIMO staff

7

B. Reasons for Revision/Modification of scope and Dimensions B.1. Where there has been “revision/modification” of the Subproject scope and dimensions. Please choose the reason(s) from the following list and check.  Revision of the superior plan (e.g. sector development plan, etc.)  Revision of the supply-and-demand estimate  Large fluctuation in the Subproject cost  Substantial revision of design due to the unforeseeable physical condition at the time of the original design (e.g. poor soil condition, etc.)  Natural disaster/unseasonable weather  Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing Agency  Structural and organizational problems of the agencies concerned (e.g. lack of staff, inadequate coordination with other agencies, etc.)  Availability of funds (e.g. lack of funds, use of contingency, fluctuation of the exchange rate, etc.)  Unrealistic initial plan/Technical problems  Procurement problems  Performance of contractor/supplier  Performance of consultant  Change in construction period  Others, additional component

B.2. Detailed statement of reasons

Unrealistic initial plan/Technical problem.

 On Comprehensive Site Development

a. Agro forestry – Originally, only 711 hectares was targeted based on the appraisal report. The CSD contracts were amended and the Work and Financial Plan (WFP) was revised due to the unrealistic cost estimates on the procurement/production of fruit tree seedlings which resulted to the resistance/low interest of several target community people to join and commit their land claims for the project. A series of dialogues and consultations were conducted with prospected planters for agro forestry component. This resulted to more commitment of areas to be planted when the community members learned that grafted fruits tree seedlings with improved pricing will be used for planting. The prospective planters committed a total of 1,538.32 hectares.

8 b. Reforestation - The target for reforestation was reduced to offset/compensate the increase in agro forestry target of the subproject. Further, most of the participants become more interested in subjecting their land claims for agro forestry purpose rather that for reforestation because they can harvest agro forestry products from their respective land claims.

c. Infrastructure – The POs constructed 11 bunkhouses instead of (4) four to correspond to the 11 barangays. No lookout tower was erected within the subproject for fear that this might be used by “bad elements” in conducting their surveillance activities. Footpath construction was also reduced from 11.8 km to 10.85 km because the Subproject had existing footpaths/graded trails traversing within the site even prior to implementation.

Performance of Contractor/supplier

 On Comprehensive Site Development

a. Tree Plantation (Reforestation & Bamboo) – From the strategizing workshop of PO target for CSD with technical assistance team and DENR-NFDO, the PO assessed their capability in terms of physical accomplishment with respect to limited time left in CSD activities and their manpower availability and came up with a decision to reduce their target area for reforestation from 3,189 hectares to 1,362.79 hectares. They also decided to reduce bamboo plantation target from 28 to 1.4 hectares.

Others (Additional Component)

 On Infrastructure

From the interview conducted by the TA Team and DENR- NFDO with the respondent participants of the subproject, they assessed that the introduction of livelihood components for the community can be best promoted if there is a good road condition. Thus,

9 a farm-to-market road rehabilitation project was pursued as part of the infrastructure component of the subproject to improve mobility of their farm produce thereby enhancing their livelihood projects.

 Creation of SUSIMO

Past experience showed that lack of DENR personnel assigned to monitor and supervise the developmental phasing of the subproject on full time basis also contributed to subproject shortcomings. To address this, the DENR through Department Administrative Order (DAO) 2000-65 created and institutionalized the Subproject Site Management Office (SUSIMO) mandated to ensure effective implementation and management of the subproject by the PO. Selected DENR personnel from Regional to PENRO and CENRO level were assigned on full time basis and provided with capability building trainings and seminars. Office building and other equipment were also provided to effectively render the services required in Subproject implementation.

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

C.1. (Sub) Sector(s) to which the Subproject belongs

 Electric power and Gas  Telecommunication  Social services  (Multipurpose) Dams  Telecommunication  Water supply  Power Plants  Broadcasting  Sewerage  Transmission lines  Education Distribution Systems  Irrigation and Flood control  Health  Gas  Irrigation  Tourism  Others  Flood control  Others, Employment Livelihood  Transportation  Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries  Roads  Agriculture and Forestry  Bridges  Fisheries  Railways  Airport  Mining and Manufacturing  Ports  Mining  Marine Transportation  Manufacturing  Others

10

c.2. Original

Item Description

1. Bio-Physical & With the implementation of the subproject, land uses will Environmental improve and will consequently minimize accelerated soil Development erosion, landslides and stream bank erosion. A sufficient Aspect vegetative cover in the area will minimize flooding in the downstream municipalities and reduce the occurrence of drought. The established vegetative cover will likewise enhance the ecological habitat of the remaining wildlife both flora and fauna in the area and nearby communities. The yield and quality of water will improve and will support the irrigation, industrial and domestic needs of the downstream agricultural farms and communities. Lastly, spill over effects will be felt in adjacent communities in terms of environmental and economic benefits. 2. Socio-Economic and The community will be organized such that institutional Institutional structures will be established to address social and Development economic problems of the people. The level of awareness Aspect and willingness of the people regarding the project will be encouraged and developed giving emphasis on the participation of women. Appropriate linkages and networks will be established with other public and private organizations. Likewise, employment opportunities and livelihood activities will be created to uplift the socio- economic conditions of the people. Support services and facilities will be addressed through the assistance of CO/NGO in the Subproject site and the local government units.

11

c.3. Present situation and outlook for the future

Item Description 1. Physical and The People’s Organizations were able to develop a total Environmental forest land area of 2,903.00 hectares (i.e. 1,538.81 ha.- component Agro forestry; 1,362.79 ha.- Reforestation; and 1.40 ha.- Stream bank Stabilization) with a general weighted average survival rate of 84.67%. Changes in biophysical and environmental condition are not significantly felt since vegetation is not yet fully grown and developed in the area. But in due time, change in microclimatic condition and other aesthetic values will be attained considering the good performance of the plantation. The Subproject in general is expected to have an entirely stable environment with continuous supply of water for domestic, industrial and agricultural consumption and minimal soil erosion, flooding and drought occurrence. Wildlife flora and fauna observed to be diminishing are expected to be restored in the area. 2. Socio-economic and With the advent of the subproject, the members of the Institutional community were able to improve their income through Component various livelihood5 projects aside from the direct income derived from the CSD activities. The various trainings and workshops offered to the project participants equipped them with technical knowledge and skills needed in operating the project and managing the organization as a whole. The people have become aware of the importance of the forest and the environment and how it affects their lives. The subproject, especially the agro forestry component is expected to provide the community with continuous source of income through harvests from the fruit trees planted in the area. Thereby, a stable community with empowered people will be developed in the long run.

12 3. Infrastructure The Subproject has provided the community with farm- component to-market road and bridges needed in transporting their farm products to the market sites. Aside from these, the PO was able to acquire different facilities and equipment that are very useful not only in the continuity of project operation but also in their livelihood activity improvements. With the facilities provided to the community and equipment they acquired, the POs will have the chance to engage in different activities and means of improving their quality of lives for a long period of time. 4. Tenurial component With the Community-Based Forest Management Agreement awarded to the community, they were given the privilege to manage, utilize, conserve, rehabilitate and develop the forest land for 25 years and renewable for another 25 years. This land tenure arrangement will be of great advantage to the community in terms of security and investment purposes. Please refer to Table 5 for the livelihood project being implemented by the POs

II. SUBPROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

1. Organizations for Implementing Subproject

Function in the Name of Organization Subproject Implementation (1) Original (2) Changed 1. SMP Contractor  Southeastern Mindanao Development Coopera- tive, Inc. 2. AO for CO  Davao Environmental Concern Group, Inc. (DECGI) – New Corella  Kaliwat Resources  Institute of Small Development Found. Farms and Industries (KRDEF) – Nabunturan (ISFI); Six (6) months contract.  Resources Ecology  Institute of Small Foundation for Regene- Farms and Industries ration of Mindanao (ISFI); Six (6) (REFORM) - Montevista months contract.

3. PO  Elcadefe CBFM Planters

13 Association (ELCADEFE) – New Corella, DDN  San Isidro Mambing Bayabas Multipurpose Cooperative (SAMABACO) - Nabunturan, ComVal  Dalesan Montevista Watershed Multipurpose Cooperative (DALESAN) - Montevista. ComVal

5. M & E contractor  RDI Philippines Inc. (RDI LEAF Foundation, Inc. PHILS)

Please state:

1.1 Reasons for the change

 On Community Organizing

The failure of KRDEF (Kaliwat Resources Development Foundation) to submit/comply with necessary requirements for DENR re- accreditation when its contract had lapsed was a ground that deterred the extension of its CO contract for six months. The REFORM (Resource Ecology Foundation for Regeneration of Mindanao) on the other hand was terminated because many CO activities were left unaccomplished due to staff unavailability and incompetence disqualifying them to extend their CO contract. The two (2) CO/NGOs were replaced by ISFI (Institute of Small Farmers and Industries) using the available/unused fund left by the previous contractors. ISFI was given 6 months to complete the CO activities particularly the further strengthening and capacitating of POs.

 On Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E)

The M & E contractor (RDI Philippines) decided to rescind their contract with the DENR because of change in contract provision and stipulation. DENR had awarded the first contract based on the provisions of MC 99-17 (Guidelines on the Conduct of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) of Forestry Sector Project under Loan II) and

14 eventually issued a revised M&E contract based on MC 2000-04 (Revised Guidelines on the Conduct of M&E of the Forestry Sector Project) which the contractor did not comprehend. This ended up with the cancellation of M&E contract and change of creditor in favor of LEAF Foundation.

1.2 Problems arising, counter measures adopted and results

 On Community Organizing

The CO contractors particularly KRDEF and REFORM voluntarily rescinded their contract due to non-compliance with the DENR rules concerning NGO accreditation and performance expectation (availability of competent staff). Despite DENR encouragement, the NGOs seemed to be unwilling to renew the accreditation (for KRDEF) and to improve the quality of the CO staff (for REFORM). The DENR was compelled to re-award the CO extension to ISFI.

 On Monitoring and Evaluation

The first pass of M&E contract was smoothly undertaken by the contractor. It was during the second pass that the contractor became uninterested to pursue the activity because of revisions in the guidelines on the conduct of M&E for FSP under Loan II especially on the matter of budget. This prompted the RDI Philippines to voluntarily cancel the M&E contract.

The DENR had no alternative but to re-award the M&E contract to the LEAF Foundation which was able to complete the unfinished activities of the previous contractor for the Physical Assessment and Socio and Project Benefit Assessment.

 On Comprehensive Site Development

The CSD activities had also encountered unavoidable operations- related problems such as:

a. Since community organizing activities were done simultaneously with CSD implementation, the establishment of plantation was fast tracked without the benefit of proper social preparation and training in comprehensive site development

15 b. The El Niño Phenomenon in 1998 affected the quality of growth of the young stands. c. Delayed payments of billings greatly affected the morale of the PO in carrying out the maintenance and protection activities. d. Non-compliance with the plantation establishment target for agro forestry and rubber plantations, brought about by the following reasons:

. Lower costs of seedlings for both agro forestry and rubber species; . No maintenance and protection cost for agro forestry plantation; . Reluctance of the PO members to plant un-grafted and un- budded agro forestry and rubber seedlings respectively.

These problems were remedied through series of dialogues and leveling-off meetings with the PO and through adjustments in contract specifications and revision of WFP based on MC 2000-19 (Guidelines Governing the Updating of Cost Estimates and Intensification of Plantation Maintenance and Protection Activities for DENR-FSP Watershed Subproject Under JBIC Funding). With this, the POs dissatisfaction with the Subproject waned and their active participation and willingness bounced back particularly in CSD operation.

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

Organizational Charts for M & E and Infra components are attached as Annex 1a and 1b, respectively.

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

Organizational Charts of SMP and CO were not available because profile documents/records of NGOs for SMP and CO were already condemned considering that these are CY-1995 and CY-1997 files.

16

2. Implementation Period

A. Comparison of Original Schedule and Actual Period

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

ITEM ORIGINAL SCHEDULE ACTUAL PERIOD 1. Contract for Aug., 1995-Feb., 1996 Aug., 1995-Feb., 1996 SMP 2. Contract of AO for CO June 1997 - June 1999 June 1997 - June 2001

3. Contract of PO Sept 15, 1997 - June 30, 2001 June 30, 1997 - Sept 15, 2003 for CSD 4. Contract of Aug. 30, 2000 – Feb., 2002 Aug. 30, 2000 – Sept., 2003 NGO for M&E 5. Contract of

Infrastructure

Component Aug. 6, 2002 - June 30, 2003 Aug. 6, 2002 - August 30, (Farm to Market 2003 Road w/ Bridge)  Completion

(completion of June 30, 2001 September 30, 2003 Subproject) Please refer to Table 6 for the subproject status report

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

The completion date was scheduled for June 30, 2001 (at the time of appraisal) and is indicated (thus ) in the above Table.

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

 Change in scope/dimensions  Natural disaster/Unseasonable weather (e.g. earthquake, typhoon, etc.)

17  Shortage of funds/Fluctuation of the exchange rate  Problems in procurement  Inflation  Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing Agency  Structural and organizational problems of the agencies concerned (e.g. lack of staff, inadequate coordination with other agencies, etc.)  Legislative matters  Unrealistic initial plan/Technical problems  Performance of contractor/supplier  Performance of consultant  Others, voluntary rescission from contract

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

Natural disaster/Unseasonable weather (e.g. earthquake, typhoon, etc.)

 On Infrastructure component

Unfavorable weather condition caused the delay of the rehabilitation of the farm-to-market road. Heavy rains and bad weather condition interrupted the actual road works. The contractor was prompted to request for an extension.

Unrealistic initial plan/Technical problems

 On Comprehensive Site Development (CSD)

Unrealistic cost estimate in the WFP and the resistance of PO members to plant un-grafted fruit tree seedlings caused the delay of CSD implementation. Another reason is the late conduct of parcellary survey of established plantations that in turn contributed to the delayed completion of accomplishment resulting to late releases of payments. This caused the CSD contract to go through series of revisions.

Performance of contractor/supplier

 On Community Organizing (CO)

The below par performance of NGOs/AOs assigned to conduct CO in the Subproject resulted to the delay of payments of CO billings which in turn affected the financial status of the AO and also delayed the release of compensation to their staff. The work schedule for field implementation

18 was consequently affected. This circumstance prompted the DENR to extend the CO contracts for another six months after its termination to further strengthen the PO organization and make up for the backlogs in CO.

Others, voluntary rescission from contract

 On Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

The non-adherence of the M&E contractor (RDI Philippines) to honor & comply with the change of provisions on M&E Guidelines from MC 99-17 to MC 2000-04 led them to voluntarily rescind and discontinue the contract on M&E. The M&E contract was re-awarded to LEAF Foundation Inc. with modification on contract duration from August, 2000-Feb. 2002 to Aug. 2000 – Sept. 2003.

C. Remedial Action Taken in Each Case of Delay

 On Infrastructure component

The need for extension was deemed necessary in the view of the situation being an act of nature and could not be avoided. The Regional Executive Director of DENR XI approved the request for extension after a thorough evaluation conducted by DENR Staff. Cost adjustment was also included in the request.

 On Comprehensive Site Development (CSD)

A workshop was conducted to revise the CSD Work and Financial Plan adopting the MC 2000-19 or Guidelines Governing the Updating of Cost Estimates and Intensification of Plantation Maintenance and Protection Activities for DENR-FSP Watershed Subproject under JBIC Funding. CSD contract was revised and cost of seedlings increased.

 On Community Organizing (CO)

The NGOs/AOs general performance were reviewed and assessed while CO activities needing immediate attention and further action for the benefit of the POs were identified. A move for CO contract extension was pursued because of unfinished activity on CO.

19

 On Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

The LEAF Foundation, Inc., who took over the M&E contract over RDI Philippines, had some activities in physical assessment which need further verification in the field as clamored by the PO. Through the assistance and supervision of DENR and the PO, the M&E contactor returned to the site and conducted field survey and validation. This particular activity had been agreed upon in a workshop meeting conducted by the groups.

3. Subproject Cost

A. Comparison of Original Estimated Cost and Actual Expenditure (by Component)

Original Cost Actual Expenditures Item (based on appraisal) (in M pesos) (in M pesos) Survey Mapping 3.549825 3.549825 and Planning Community 7.070400 6.916279 Organization Comprehensive 31.413111 41.538879 Site Development Monitoring 1.767095 2.817664 and Evaluation Infrastructure 20.220373 22.612761 Dev’t Subproject Site Management 4.292100 2.462902 Office (SUSIMO) T O T A L : 68.312904 79.898310 Please refer to Table 7, 8, 9a-c, 10 for the details on cost of SMP, CO, CSD and M&E. List of Infra project/s with its corresponding cost is also attached as Table 11.

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

B.1. If there is any difference between Column a.1 and Column a.2 in Paragraph a, please choose the reason(s) from the following list and check.

 Increase in reconstruction cost arising from natural disaster/unreasonable weather (e.g. earthquake, typhoon, etc.)  Increase or decrease arising from a change in construction period  Increase or (decrease) arising from inflation  Increase or decrease arising from fluctuation in the exchange rate Increase or decrease arising from a change in the scope/work volume of the Subproject  Decrease arising from keen competition in tender  Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing Agency  Unrealistic cost estimates/Technical problems  Others

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

Increase in reconstruction cost arising from natural disaster/ unreasonable weather.

 On Infrastructure component

Bad weather condition wrought damages on the already rehabilitated road. The occurrence of landslide forced the contractor to conduct re-work and clearing operation on the damaged portion, making them spend outside the original contract cost. This prompted them to request for additional funding.

Increase or decrease arising from a change in the scope/work volume of the Subproject

 On Community Organizing (CO)

The CO funds left by KRDEF and REFORM had been obligated to ISFI to be utilized for the CO strengthening of the POs for six months, however, said AO/NGO (ISFI) failed to accomplish the activity on assistance and supervision of PO in the preparation and documentation/processing of CBFM Agreement. The corresponding

21 amount for this activity was discarded from the work and financial plan and disallowed the contractor to claim the payment for the said activity.  On Monitoring and Evaluation

The increase of cost on actual expenditure was brought about by the increase of target area subject to M&E from 1,691 hectares (from the first creditor) to 2,903 hectares (second creditor). The M&E scope followed the actual area accomplished by the POs on CSD.

Unrealistic cost estimates/Technical problems

 On Comprehensive Site Development (CSD)

Change in the economic situation in the country caused the revision hence, an urgent need to adjust the cost of plantation establishment and maintenance and protection.

The revision of WFP was based on the updated cost estimate as provided in the Memorandum Circular (MC) No. 2000-19 otherwise known as the “Guidelines Governing the Updating of Cost Estimates and Intensification of Plantation Maintenance and Protection Activities” for DENR-FSP Watershed Subproject under JBIC funding signed by the Secretary dated September 8, 2000.

C. Action taken in Case of Cost Overrun and Results

Additional obligation was provided by the Project Management Office (National Level) to the Subproject upon request of the contractors and submission of revised WFPs and amended contract. Thus, all activities were completed with desirable results.

D. Comparison of Original Estimated Expenditure and Actual Expenditure (By Year)

Original Cost Actual Expenditures Calendar Year (in M pesos) (in M pesos) 1995 3.549825 3.549825 1996 - - 1997 3.888720 1.248512 1998 23.786463 8.421196 1999 8.976194 4.193606

22 2000 2.508534 5.828542 2001 3.729895 14.811455 2002 3.711056 12.132228 2003 18.162217 29.712945

TOTAL 68.312904 79.898310

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

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

Please describe the performance of each organization after checking the item(s) in the relevant lists on which you have any comment.

A. Performance of the SMP contractor, Assisting Organizations & Assisting Professionals (if any) Peoples Organizations, M&E and Infrastructure contractors

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

A.2 Description (in detail)

Overall Performance/Expertise/Staff qualification

 Assisting Organization

DECGI’s overall performance in carrying out organizing activities was quite all right except for some networking activities that took time to be accomplished. As a consequence, time frame in CO was affected necessitating an extension of the contract for another 6 months. On the whole, the CO experts and staff of said NGO were all qualified and competent enough to do the CO works for the PO of ELCADEFE.

23

The same is true with KRDEF which also performed well in Community Organizing and with staff generally qualified and with sufficient expertise. However, like in the case of DECGI, said AO also encountered some CO activities that required time to accomplish hence, an extension of CO contract was inevitable. However, the CO contract extension was awarded to ISFI because the former failed to comply with the requirements in renewing the accreditation of their association with the DENR.

A low performance rate was given to REFORM, the AO that conducted the CO for DALESAN. The AO staff assigned in the field was mostly fresh graduates and had no actual experience in doing CO tasks. This slowed down the organizing process which in turn resulted to slow phasing of CO/CSD accomplishment.

Finally, ISFI who took over the CO contract extension vice KRDEF and REFORM, generally performed satisfactorily. The CO strengthening activities were all accomplished in due time and in accordance with the contract stipulation employing competent CO experts and staff.

 Assisting Professional

The DENR hired two Assisting Professionals (APs) in the person of Librado G. Aro and Arnelito Culiao. Their performance can be rated satisfactory since they were able to continue the major activities left unaccomplished by the assisting organizations. Their work was focused on the milestone compliance of the three PO’s of Saug Watershed Subproject particularly on the following major activities:

a. P.O. Organization and Structure; b. Forest Resource Management; c. Management Systems Development and Installation; and d. Project Management.

The APs Contract started from January 2001 and expired on June 30, 2003 with most of the milestones accomplished except for some activities under the Forest Resource Management like affirmation of Community Resource Management Framework

24 (CRMF), Annual Work Plan (AWP) and Resource Use Permit/Plan (RUP).

 People’s Organization

PO’s performance on comprehensive site development had been limited, constrained by the operational problems encountered during its implementation period. Despite the odds, however, and with the institutionalization of SUSIMO, the three (3) POs in general performed very satisfactorily for this project. The required targets of the POs were attained and accomplished. The quality of the plantations has greatly improved with the additional funds allotted for protection and maintenance including fertilizer application.

 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

Both contractors (RDI Philippines and LEAF Foundation) were able to device proper instruments to suit each unique situation encountered in the field survey and actual verification. These does not necessarily were detrimental to the objectives and end results of M&E activity and to the contract itself that was entered into by the DENR and the NGOs.

M&E was conducted with a satisfactory performance of the NGOs, in general.

 Infrastructure

On July 31, 2003 the rehabilitation of the farm-to-market road was 100% accomplished and on August 1, 2003 the infrastructure was formally turned-over to the local government units. There was an approved extension period of one month as requested by the contractor due to unfavorable weather that caused the delay of some rehabilitation works. However, based on the prescribed project design, it was

25 satisfactorily accomplished thus the contractor’s performance rate was not affected by its delay.

5. Other matters relating to Subproject Implementation

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

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

B. Description

Description Comment Measure Result A.  Lack of technical  Creation of interim  Able to address Technical personnel to conduct SUSIMO through the delayed inspection and vali- DENR Special payments of dation of Subproject Order billings both CO accomplishments & CSD accomplishments  Subproject  The DENR-  The DENR came performance is SUSIMO & PO in up with a generally inefficient in collaboration with performance attaining its core APs conducted assessment tool objectives and goals. review on the in attaining goals general and objective of performance of the the subproject in project and an organized assess/evaluate the manner & accomplishments of rationality. the subproject physically, financially and socially.

 Delayed issuance of  Legal advice was  Able to interpret CBFM Agreement to sought from the the laws and the PO due to Legal Division of policy favoring conflicts between the the DENR. the issuance of CBFMP policy and CBFMA to the NCIP (IPRA Law). PO.

26 B. Financial  Inappropriate cost of  Revision of WFP to  100% seedlings particularly increase cost of accomplishments agro-forestry. seedlings of the planned targets  PO lack knowledge on  Allowing the  The PO realized financial management SUSIMO staff to the importance sys-tem to sustain the train the PO of proper continuity of the through coaching & management of project in terms of intervene in their finances in finances. managing PO funds order to fully properly. sustain the project.

III. ACTION TAKEN BY THE AOs, APs AND POs RELATING TO RECOMMENDATION(S)

1. Recommendation(s) made by SUSIMO This article is ( applicable  not applicable. There has been no recommendation with regard to the Subproject).

RECOMMENDATION ACTION TAKEN FROM THE RESULTS/REMARKS By the AP By the PO SUSIMO PO Organization and Assisted the PO The PO The working Structure must be in formulating participated relationship improved strengthened in order plans/programs in actively in pre- and strengthened, PO to prepare them for the form of member ship committees and set of self- sufficiency and meetings, training & CBFM officers were created sustainability. trainings, orientation & team with written and seminars & work- building workshop updated organizational shops. Properly & other trainings. and functional chart. documented said activities.

27 The PO should develop Supervised the Participated in the The PO was able to a systematic forest PO in laying out preparation and formulate CSD Plan, resource management plan of activities finalization of Forest Protection Plan; strategy in carrying out in forest documents/reports Prepared pre-project subproject physical resource required in forest land use map & activities. management resource progress/operational system management map; Re-activated the strategies. system. Attended Internal Monitoring the trainings Unit assigned to conducted jointly validate physical and by the APs and financial SUSIMO staff. accomplishments. The PO also came up with a ratified capital build up policy and updated membership records. Financial management system was also installed.

IV. INITIAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SUBPROJECT FACILITIES

1. Present Condition of Facilities

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

Initial Item Status Maintenance Management Others Operation 1. SUSIMO Building Operational  1. Binocular Operational 2. Calculator Operational 3. Computer Desktop Operational  4. Cassette Tape Recorder Operational 5. Meter Tape 25mt Operational 6. Steel Cabinet Operational 7. Manual Typewriter Operational 9 .VHF handheld Radios Operational

28 10. Brunton Compass Operational 11.Abney Hand Level Operational 12.Camera Operational 13.Motorcycles (SUZUKI 125) Operational  14.Forester’s Transit Operational 15.Base Radio Operational 16. Rain Gauge Operational 17. Grass Cutter Operational 18. Computer Table Operational 19. Office table w/ chair Operational 20.Generator Operational  21. Printer Operational 22.GPS Operational  23.Fire extinguisher Operational 24.Steel tape Operational 25.Planimeter Operational 26.Lettering set Operational 27.Drafting table Operational 28.Flashlight Operational 29.Petromax Operational 30.UPS 500VA Operational 31.GIS software Operational 32. Electric fan Operational 33. Airpot Operational 34. Stapler Operational 35. Puncher Operational 36. CD writer Operational 37. Truck/vehicle (KIA) Operational  38. Computer rack Operational 39. Television Operational 40. Stereo component Operational 41. Refrigerator Operational 42. Gas stove Operational 43. Jungle bolo Operational 44. Steel rake Operational 45. Rubber boots Operational 46. Helmet Operational 47. Shovel Operational 48. Axe Operational 49. Horse (work animal) Operational

29 For Peoples Organization.:

Item Status Initial Maintenance Management Others Operation

1. Bunkhouse Operational   2. Computer w/ Printer Operational 3. Colored TV with CD 

Player Operational 4. Steel Cabinet Operational  5. Motorcycle Operational  6. Satellite Phone Operational  7. Video Karaoke  Machine Operational  8. Refrigerator Operational

Please check: The Problem(s) has arisen owing to the following reason(s).  Technical  Financial  Institutional  Economic  Social/Distributional  Others, Quality and Serviceability

C. Description

Others, Quality and Serviceability

 For the SUSIMO: . KIA Truck – repair of air con, horn and front drive aside from tune- ups and change of oil. . Motorcycles – change in battery, sprockets, signal lights, spark plugs and other minor parts when damaged and/or exhausted. . Desktop computer – one unit not functional when its CPU bogged down. Said unit was already brought to technician for repair. . GPS units – all units are operational except their cords and antenna cables but parts for replacement are hard to find.

 For the PO: . Desktop computer – CPU bogged down; for repair . Television set – IC malfunctioned due to overuse . Motorcycle (2nd hand) – problem on battery and other minor parts. . Computer printer – problem on availability of spare parts in repair shops.

30 . Videoke machine – TV monitor malfunctioned due to unregulated use.

D. Aspect of utilizing the Subproject facilities For SUSIMO:

Item Original Plan Actual Operation Being used by the SUSIMO 1. SUSIMO Building For SUSIMO use & sometimes borrowed by the PO 2. Binocular -do- 3. Calculator -do- -do- 4. Computer Desktop -do- -do- 5. Cassette Tape Recorder -do- -do- 6. Meter Tape 25mt -do- -do- 7. Steel Cabinet -do- -do- 8. Manual Typewriter -do- -do- 9 .VHF handheld Radios -do- -do- 10. Brunton Compass -do- -do- 11.Abney Hand Level -do- -do- 12.Camera -do- -do- 13.Motorcycles (SUZUKI 125) -do- -do- 14.Forester’s Transit -do- -do- 15.Base Radio -do- -do- 16. Rain Gauge -do- -do- 17. Grass Cutter -do- -do- 18. Computer Table -do- -do- 19. Office table w/ chair -do- -do- 20.Generator -do- -do- 21. Printer -do- -do- 22.GPS -do- -do- 23.Fire extinguisher -do- -do- 24.Steel tape -do- -do- 25.Planimeter -do- -do- 26.Lettering set -do- -do- 27.Drafting table -do- -do- 28.Flashlight -do- -do- 29.Petromax -do- -do- 30.UPS 500VA -do- -do- 31.GIS software -do- -do- 32. Electric fan -do- -do- 33. Airpot -do- -do-

31 34. Stapler -do- -do- 35. Puncher -do- -do- 36. CD writer -do- -do- 37. Truck/vehicle (KIA) -do- -do- 38. Computer rack -do- -do- 39. Television -do- -do- 40. Stereo component -do- -do- 41. Refrigerator -do- -do- 42. Gas stove -do- -do- 43. Jungle bolo -do- -do- 44. Steel rake -do- -do- 45. Rubber boots -do- -do- 46. Helmet -do- -do- 47. Shovel -do- -do- 48. Axe -do- -do- Being used by the SUSIMO 49. Horse (work animal) For SUSIMO use & sometimes borrowed by the PO

For Peoples Organization:

Item Original Plan Actual Operation 1. Bunkhouse (11 units) Office/PO Quarter 2. Computer w/ Printer (3) PO office use 3. Colored TV with CD Player (3) PO use (IEC & IGP) 4. Steel Cabinet (3 units) PO office use 5. Motorcycle (3units) PO use/service mobility 6. Satellite Phone (1 unit) PO use/communication 7. Video Karaoke Machine (2) PO use/IGP 8. Refrigerator (3 units) PO use/IGP

2. Organization for Operation and Maintenance

A. Name of POs/SUSIMO

A.1. PO: i. ELCADEFE CBFM Planters Association Incorporated (ELCADEFE) ii. San Isidro-Mambing-Bayabas Multi-Purpose Cooperative (SAMABACO) iii. DALESAN Montevista Watershed Managers Cooperative (DALESAN)

32

SUSIMO: SUSIMO-SAUG WATERSHED SUBPROJECT Site Management Officer : David L. Fabila, Jr.

A.2. Please check: The latest organizational chart (or equivalent) for O/M of the Subproject facilities is ( attached or  not available).

PO: Members and Officers have all the responsibility of the facilities they acquired. SUSIMO: The staff assigned to the area is maintaining the SUSIMO facilities.

 POs and SUSIMO Organizational Charts are attached as Annex 1c, 1d, 1e and 1f, respectively.

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

A.4. Number of staff/workers of the PO or Body for Operation and Maintenance of Subproject Facilities.

- 6 persons (PO) - All SUSIMO personnel assigned in the area.

B. Please check and explain the following.

B.1. The number of staff is currently ( sufficient or  insufficient). If “Insufficient”, please describe your estimate of the optimum number of staff and your plan for providing them.

B.2. Average employment period of the present staff

PO: 5 Years SUSIMO: 12 years

B.3. Availability of training program to promote the vocational ability of the staff, its contents and expected effects.

For the PO: None For the SUSIMO: None

33

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

B) Original Expected Expenditure

For the PO

Item/ Maintenance Operation TOTAL Calendar Year (PhP) in Million (PhP) in Million 1998

1. PO Office 0.000400 0.000400 (supplies, electricity) SUBTOTAL 0.000400 .000400 1999 1. PO Office 0.000400 0.000400 (supplies, electricity) SUBTOTAL 0.000400 0.000400 2000 1. PO Office 0.004200 0.004200 (supplies, electricity, communication) 2. Motorcycle SUBTOTAL 0.004200 0.004200 2001 1. PO Office 0.004700 0.004700 (supplies, electricity, communication) 2. Motorcycle 0.007000 0.025000 0.032000 SUBTOTAL 0.007000 0.029700 0.036700 2002 1. PO Office 0.007800 0.007800 (supplies, electricity, communication) 2. Motorcycle 0.007000 0.025000 0.032000 SUBTOTAL 0.007000 0.032800 0.039800 2003

34 1. PO Office 0.007800 0.007800 (supplies, electricity, communication) 2. Motorcycle 0.020000 0.050000 0.070000 3. Colored TV 0.000500 0.000500 4. Refrigerator 0.003500 0.003500 5. Videoke machine 0.000700 0.000700 SUBTOTAL 0.020000 0.062500 0.082500 GRAND TOTAL 0.034000 0.130000 0.157000

For the SUSIMO Item Maintenance Operation TOTAL Calendar year (PhP) in Million (PhP) in Million 2001 1. SUSIMO Office 0.808000 0.808000

2. Vehicles/generat or (motorcycle, 0.080000 0.180000 0.260000 KIA) 3. Computer & other office equipment/ 0.262000 0.262000 fixtures SUBTOTAL 0.080000 1.150000 1.330000 2002 1. SUSIMO Office 0.120000 0.120000

2.Vehicles/genera tor (motorcycle, KIA 0.040000 0.138000 0.178000 3. Computer & other office equipment/ 0.070000 0.070000 fixtures SUBTOTAL 0.040000 0.328000 0.368000 2003 1. SUSIMO Office 0.248900 0.248900 2. Vehicles/generator 0.100000 0.210000 0.310000 (motorcycle, KIA 3. Computer & other office eqment/ 0.070000 0.070000 fixtures SUBTOTAL 0.100000 0.529000 0.529000 GRAND TOTAL 0.220000 2.107000 2.327000

35

C) Actual and Currently Expected Expenditure

For the PO

Item/ Maintenance Operation TOTAL Calendar year (PhP) in Million (PhP) in Million 1997 1. PO Office (supplies, 0.003051 0.003051 electricity, communication) 2. Camera (2) 0.000540 0.000540 SUBTOTAL 0.003591 0.003591 1998 1. PO Office (supplies, 0.004216 0.004216 electricity, communication) 2. Camera 0.001760 0.001760 SUBTOTAL 0.005976 0.005976 1999 1. PO Office (supplies, 0.004001 0.004001 electricity, communication) 2. Camera 0.001810 0.001810 SUBTOTAL 0.005811 0.005811 2000 1. PO Office (supplies, 0.005136 0.005136 electricity, communication) 2. Camera 0.001810 0.001810 3. Motorcycle 0.000591 0.002000 0.002591 SUBTOTAL 0.000591 0.008946 0.009536 2001 1. PO Office (supplies, 0.013660 0.013660 electricity, communication) 2. Camera 0.001810 0.001810 3. Motorcycle 0.020000 0.028823 0.048823

36 4. Typewriter 0.000150 0.000150 SUBTOTAL 0.020000 0.044443 0.064443 2002 1. PO Office (supplies, 0.054363 0.054363 electricity, communication) 2. Camera 0.002900 0.002900 3. Motorcycle 0.020000 0.028341 0.048341 4. Colored TV 0.001000 0.001000 5. Refrigerator 0.000750 0.000750 6. Cellular phone 0.006720 0.006720 7. Weighing scale 0.000040 0.000040 8. Planer 0.000030 0.000030 SUBTOTAL 0.020000 0.094144 0.114144 2003 1. PO Office (supplies, 0.043936 0.043936 electricity, communication) 3. Camera 0.002900 0.002900 4. Motorcycle 0.030000 0.038874 0.068874 5. Colored TV 0.000700 0.000700 6. Refrigerator 0.002720 0.002720 7. Cellular phone 0.006720 0.006720 8. Weighing scale 0.000050 0.000050 9. Planer 0.000100 0.000100 10. Videoke machine 0.001679 0.001679 11. Corn sheller 0.000750 0.000750 12. Computer/printer 0.010700 0.010700 SUBTOTAL 0.070591 0.109130 0.139130 GRAND TOTAL 0.070591 0.272040 0.342631

37 For the SUSIMO

Item/ Maintenance Operation Maintenance Operation TOTAL Calendar year (PhP) in (PhP) in (PhP) in (PhP) in Million Million Million Million 2001 1. SUSIMO 0.441319 0.441319 Office (office supplies, communication) 2. Vehicles/gen erator 0.055737 0.050429 0.106167 (motorcycle, KIA) 3. Computer & other office 0.200000 0.200000 equipment/ fixtures SUBTOTAL 0.055737 0.691748 0.747485 2002 1. SUSIMO Office (office 0.062751 0.062751 supplies, communication) 2. 0.023375 0.073664 0.097039 Vehicles/gener ator (motorcycle, KIA 3. Computer & other 0.074285 0.074285 office equipment/ fixtures 4. Others 0.025000 0.025000 (electric, water bills) SUBTOTAL 0.023375 0.210701 0.234406 2003 1. SUSIMO 0.128543 0.128543 Office (office supplies, communication)

38 2. Vehicles/ 0.058319 0.022724 0.081043 generator (motorcycle, KIA) 3. Computer & other office 0.098725 0.098725 equipment SUBTOTAL 0.058319 0.249992 0.308311 GRAND 0.137432 1.152441 1.289872 TOTAL EXPANDED PORTION July –Dec, 2003 1. SUSIMO Office (office 0.130800 0.130800 supplies, communication) 2. Vehicles/ generator 0.060000 0.126000 0.186000 (motorcycle, KIA) 3. Computer & other office 0.020000 0.020000 equipment TOTAL 0.060000 0.276800 0.336800 Jan - Mar, 2004 1. SUSIMO Office (office supplies, 0.043750 0.043750 communication) 2. Vehicles/ generator 0.035000 0.026250 0.061250 (motorcycle, KIA) 3. Computer & other office - equipment TOTAL 0.035000 0.070000 0.105000

Note:

For the PO - The Peoples Organization had purposely allotted funds for their actual and current expenditure for the office equipment and vehicles they acquired during the course of the Subproject.

39 Please describe the basis for the above estimate and your financing plan for the same.

1. Maintenance Method

For the PO:

Facility/Item Maintenance method Frequency 1. Motorcycle Change of oil 2 times a year 2. Computer and other mechanical and As the need arises electronic appliances

For the SUSIMO:

Facility/Item Maintenance method Frequency 1. KIA Change of oil 3 times a year 2. Motorcycle Change of oil 2 times a year 3. Computer and other mechanical and electric As the need arises facilities

V. BENEFITS DERIVED FROM SUBPROJECT

1. Indirect Effects

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

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

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

40

Employment Creating

The participants have been provided direct employment from actual plantation development during the CSD operation of the Subproject creating a total of 211,790 man-days. This is expected to continue all throughout the 25 years particularly on protection and maintenance activities involving the resident participants as labor force. Thus, aside from the livelihood projects the POs had developed, the Subproject gives income opportunity in the form of direct employment for the community.

Income Raising

It is expected that in due time household participants and members of the PO will definitely increase their income.

The following are the household income level before the project and during the project implementation of the three POs both based on the result of the M & E (socio institutional) conducted on December 2002:

ELCADEFE – before the project, the average annual income per household was PhP13,757.39. As of December 2002, the average annual income per household has increased significantly to PhP20,178.27.

The ELCADEFE members in general have benefited from the different livelihood programs and projects implemented by the organization. Members of the organization were able to avail soft loan from the micro-lending fund. Some members were also given the opportunity to raise some domesticated and hybrid animals like the cabir chicken, anglonovian goats and swine through the chicken, goat and swine dispersal projects.

SAMABACO – the participating households average annual income was PhP27,164.30 before project implementation but with the project it has reached to PHP47,658.31 as of December 2002.

SAMABACO through their consumer store was able to give dividends and patronage refund to their members. With the help and assistance of the Institute of Primary Health Care (IPHC) and Phil-Ger fund

41 they were able to intensify its capital formation activities in early 1999 and 2000.

DALESAN – the household annual income before the project was only PhP24,264.00 and as of December 2002 it has reached Ph P34,550.51 per participating household.

Members of DALESAN cooperative were given the opportunity to loan pesticides and fertilizer from their agri-based cooperative store to enhance their income in corn production and other agricultural products.

42 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 The satisfactory performance of the Subproject can be credited to the members of the community who actively participate and relentlessly give their wholehearted support in realizing the goals and objectives of the subproject.

 The completion of the subproject unfolds new challenges for the Peoples Organizations that are directly involved in day to day activities of the Subproject. Despite cultural differences that sometimes get in the way of developmental activities, the strong desire of the POs to achieve an ideal environment where to live pervaded.

 Inasmuch as the PO still needs continuous technical and organizational assistance, it is recommended that an AP be assigned in the Subproject in close coordination with the SUSIMO.

 Since Community Organizing Component is difficult to conduct simultaneously with the Comprehensive Site Development Component, it is recommended that the DENR formulate a guideline ensuring that a community stakeholder is technically and socially prepared before getting it involve in CSD activities and ensuring as well that the CO process is not pre-empted by CSD activities and vice versa.

 The DENR should institute a clear-cut policy/guideline on benefit sharing between PO and the government on agro forestry component of the Subproject to avoid conflict.

 SUSIMO personnel being the ones directly involved in Subproject development should be subjected to a continuous training for the improvement of their technical and social skills

 The DENR and the National Commission for Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) should collaborate on the matter of issuances, agreements, certificates and other related legal documents to establish clear bases of legal existence and boundaries. This is particularly true with the issuances of CBFMA (DENR) and CADT (NCIP) for the POs that also involve Indigenous Communities.

 The DENR should review the existing policy on harvesting of timber within the watershed areas to ensure that the provisions are strictly enforced particularly in areas covered by CBFM Program like in the case of Saug Watershed Subproject.

43 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 1. TRAININGS ATTENDED BY THE PEOPLES ORGANIZATION Receipient/ # OF TRAINING TRAINORS INCLUSIVE DATES PO PARTICIPANTS Financial Management Training DALESAN Leila Hermosura- BOD, Proj. Oct. 13-15. 1997 CPA Accountant, Bookkeeper, Cashier, Manager, Site Coordinator & selected Team Leaders Financial System Installation DALESAN Leila Hermosura- DALESAN Nov. 12-13, 1997 CPA Officers Installation Workshop for DALESAN Erlinda Erbiol - DALESAN Nov. 24-25, 1997 Operation, Planning and DENR Officers & Reporting Cluster Leaders Agroforestry Development DALESAN Dept. of Selected Dec. 22-23, 1997 and Management Training Agriculture (DA) members of San Vicente & Lebanon Technical Training Workshop DALESAN AO/NGO 36 participants Sept. 10-12, 1997 on Nursery Operation and (REFORM) CSD Process Management Training DALESAN AO/NGO Officers, BOD, Dec. 26-28, 1997 on Team Building (REFORM) selected cluster Communication Skiils, Probem leaders, Solving, Decision Making and representative Leadership of GA Technical Training on Tree DALESAN LEAF Found., Inc. Core & Cluster Mar. 25-27, 1998 Plantation Management Leaders Sloping Land Agricultural Land DALESAN LEAF Found., Inc. PO members Sept. 28-30, 1998 Technology (SALT) CRMF Training Workshop DALESAN Prisilio Penaloga DALESAN Core Dec. 18-20, 1998 (I) Session I AO and Cluster Jan. 24-31 1999 (II) Annual Work & Resource Use DALESAN Prisilio Penaloga DALESAN Core Jan 14-16, 1999 Planning Workshop AO and Cluster Leaders, Religious Leaders, MPDO, Tribal Chieftain & Brgy. Officials

Gender and Development DALESAN AO/NGO (ISFI) Officers and Aug. 4, 2000 Session I SAMABACO selected Gender and Development DALESAN AO/NGO (ISFI) Officersmembers and Aug. 23, 2000 Session II SAMABACO selected members CSD Orientation and Field DALESAN AO/NGO (ISFI) Officers and Aug. 4-5, 2000 Operation Refresher Course SAMABACO selected Aug. 2, 2000 members Refresher Course on Financial DALESAN AO/NGO (ISFI) Officers and Aug. 22-23, 2000 Management SAMABACO selected Aug. 24-25, 2000 members Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 1. TRAININGS ATTENDED BY THE PEOPLES ORGANIZATION On the Job Training/ Coaching DALESAN AO/NGO (ISFI) Officers and Sept. 6, 2000 on Fiancial Management SAMABACO selected Sept. 2, 2000 (Session I) members On the Job Training/ Coaching DALESAN AO/NGO (ISFI) Officers and Oct. 4, 2000 on Fiancial Management SAMABACO selected Oct. 5, 2000 (Session II) members Team Building Seminar DALESAN AO/NGO (ISFI) Officers and Nov. 15-16, 2000 SAMABACO selected members Nursery Development & DALESAN Aps/SUSIMO Officers and Mar. 7-8, 2001 Management, Plantation, ELCADEFE selected Mar. 20-21, 2001 Establishment, Maintenance members and Protection Enhancement Program Premembership and Education DALESAN Aps/SUSIMO Officers and Jan. 7-8, 2002 Seminar (PMES) SAMABACO selected Mar. 21-22, 2002 ELCADEFE members June 20-21, 2001

Forest Protection Seminar DALESAN Aps/SUSIMO PO Officers & Oct. 17-18, 2001 SAMABACO Cluster Leaders Oct. 10-11, 2001 ELCADEFE Oct. 23-24, 2001

Human Relation and SAMABACO AO/NGO 51 participants Nov. 12-14, 1997 Communication (KRDeF) Forest Plantation SAMABACO AO/NGO 21 participants Nov. 27-28, 1997 Establishment and (KRDeF) Maintenance Cooperative Management SAMABACO AO/NGO Community Jan.29-31, 1998 Seminar (KRDeF) Residents Project Proposal Development SAMABACO AO/NGO Communty Feb. 19-21, 1998 Seminar (KRDeF) Residents Multiple Gender Cropping & SAMABACO AO/NGO Communty Jan. 6-7, 1998 Plant Propagation (KRDeF) Residents Basic Bookkeeping & Acctg. ELCADEFE AO/NGO 4 Bookkeepers, Oct, 27-30, 1997 Seminar for Coop Bookkeepers DECGI PO Core Leaders

Surveying and Community ELCADEFE DENR/DECGI 4 Core Leaders Sept. 18-20, 1998 Mapping Seminar Agroforestry Livelihood ELCADEFE DENR/DA/ DECGI PO members Sept. 28-29, 1998 Technologies Seminar Participatory Action Research ELCADEFE DENR/DECGI PO members Nov. 26-27, 1999 Process Training Family Health Care Training ELCADEFE DENR/DECGI 30 participants Dec. 7-8, 1999 Business Enterprise & Dev't ELCADEFE DENR/DECGI 30 participants Dec. 1-2, 1999 Training CSD Training ELCADEFE DECGI PO members Nov. 21-30, 1997 Micro-Lending Operation ELCADEFE DECGI PO members May 28-29, 1998 Seminar Consultation Workshop on ELCADEFE Aps/SUSIMO 10 PO Officers June 14, 2001 Local Resources Identification 8 PO Officers June 29, 2001 and Prioritation of Livelihood Projects FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

TABLE 2. SUBPROJECT PERFORMANCE

Year Planted Component Species Planted Area Planted Survival

1997-2002 Refo Mahogany 86.75 83.97 Gmelina 424.08 84.93 Bagras 268.00 83.70 Falcata/Coffee 390.83 83.59 Falcata 33.51 82.33 Rubber 159.62 84.54 1,362.79 84.48

1997-2002 Agro Durian 734.77 84.83 Lanzones 347.39 84.76 Rambutan 199.50 79.20 Mango 254.15 84.64 Marang 3.00 84.95 1,538.81 84.78

1997-2002 Streambank Bamboo 1.40 81.04 Stabilization 1.40 81.04 TOTAL 2,903.00 84.67

46 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 TABLE 3. SUBPROJECT SITE MANAGEMENT OFFICE (SUSIMO) EQUIPMENT Procured ITEM Specifications Qty Cost (PhP) Date procured 1 Pick up Truck KIA FC2700 Crosstrak 1 680,000.00 2 Power generator Engine, gasoline, GS 280, 1 1/12/2001 44,096.00 3.5 KVA 3 Motorcycle Suzuki TS 125 6 7/1/1998 354,000.00 4 Computer w/ HP Brio PC Intel Pentium 1 70,850.00 software III 733 mhg 5 Printer Hp Deskjet model 840 C 1 5,811.52 6 UPS 500 VA UPS Battery Backup 1 5/15/2001 5,500.00 AP350/500VA 7 GIS Software Comb software & 1 6/15/2001 44,460.00 (maptitude) geographic data 8 GPS Global positioning 1 3/28/2001 105,000.00 Promark X 9 Handheld Radio VHF, FM COM Model IC- 3 1/12/2001 44,899.92 Transceiver F3GT 10 Foresters transit Surveying compass, 1 8/16/2001 34,840.00 Ushikata, model S-27 11 Manual Oliveti, 18 carriage 1 3/28/2001 8,309.60 12 Bruntontypewriter compass Kataoke br., Model BCD- 4 3/28/2001 19,552.00 90 13 Steel/Nylon Tajima Br. 2 10/26/2001 2,700.00 Tape/Chain 14 Planimeter OSKK KOIZUMI 1 8/16/2001 7,800.00 15 Abney hand level Model:OSK 17251 4 8/16/2001 9,568.00 16 Rain gauge Digital rainwise 1 816/01 6,300.00 17 Lettering set Linemaster 2000 1 6/15/2001 4,992.00 (Leroy Set) 18 Binoculars 7X50 Diastone made in 3 6/15/2001 12,168.00 Japan 19 Tape Measure Dia tape 20m Kinglon Br. 2 8/16/2001 1,331.20

20 Camera Canon Zoom 76 2 12/20/2001 16,990.00 21 Television Panasonic 14" Colored 1 10/12/2000 8,360.00 22 Component Panasonic w/ 2 spks 1 10/12/2000 8,700.00 23 Computer set w/ ACER CPU Power 3000 ip 1 8/16/2001 62,470.00 software 233, 16mb RAM 2mb SDRAM 512KB cache, 15- 120 drive w/ complete accessories/monitor 24 Computer set w/ Intel Pentium 2 32MB 1 8/16/2001 68,500.00 software & Ram 1.44 MB floppy drive printer 6.4 GB hard disk 60X CD ROM, Printer FX1170 25 CD ROM drive 50X CD ROM w/ Altec 1 7,500.00 lansing FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 TABLE 3. SUBPROJECT SITE MANAGEMENT OFFICE (SUSIMO) EQUIPMENT 26 Office Table Color Gray w/ 3 sides & 1 6 6/4/2001 16,780.50 center drawers 27 Office Table Color Gray w/ 3 sides & 1 5 6/4/2001 19,457.25 center drawers 28 Office Table Executive w/ 6 drawers 1 6/4/2001 5,021.45 29 Chair Ergonomic w/out arm 1 6/4/2001 1,275.35 30 Chair Ergonomic w/out arm 5 6/4/2001 7,593.75 31 Chair Ergonomic w/ arm 10 6/4/2001 18,786.50 32 Refrigerator National 5cu.ft 1 10/12/2000 8,250.00 33 Cabinet Steel 4 drawers 5 12/12/2001 20,408.00 34 CD Writer HP (CD 12series) 1 8/3/2001 10,500.00 35 Petromax Super Gasul 4 12/20/2001 12,000.00 36 Steel cabinet 4 drawers 4 12/20/2001 24,000.00 37 Computer Rack Prestige 2 8/3/2001 7,000.00 38 Computer table Steel (CMX-2001) 2 8/3/2001 8,600.00 39 Tape recorder Sony Cassette 2 8/3/2001 4,998.00 40 Electric Fan Stand Fan National 2 10/11/2000 2,880.00 F40LA 41 Air pot Mitsubishi 3.9 L 1 8/3/2001 1,500.00 42 Stapler Swingline HD 2 8/3/2001 920.00 43 Puncher Puncher 2 8/3/2001 254.30 44 Calculator Casio SJ 120 2 12/1/2001 3,545.40 45 Gas Stove 3D w/ 2 burner 1 10/12/2000 1,600.00 46 J. Bolo Jungle bolo 3 10/12/2000 1,755.00 47 Steel Rake Rake w/ handle 3 10/12/2000 1,260.00 48 Rubber Boots Rubber boots 3 10/12/2000 2,655.00 49 Shovel Jumbo shovel 3 10/12/2000 2,520.00 50 Helmet THH Helmet 1 10/12/2000 1,495.00 51 Axe Axe 3 10/12/2000 4,950.00 TOTAL 1,824,703.74 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 4. TRAININGS CONDUCTED/ATTENDED BY THE SUSIMO INCLUSIVE TRAINING TRAINORS PARTICIPANTS DATES DENR-NFDO/ All SUSIMO, RO FSP Assessment and JBIC TA staff, FSP Focal May 22-24, 2003 Planning Workshop Person, PO & RTD FSP Phase Out/Phase In DENR-NFDO/ All SUSIMO, RO Nov. 19-20, 2002 Workshop JBIC TA staff, FSP Focal Person, PO & RTD Pre-Phase In/Phase Out SUSIMO All SUSIMO, RO Nov. 6-8, 2002 Workshop staff, FSP Focal Person, PO & RTD FSP Re-oreintation Course DENR-NFDO/ All SUSIMO, RO Mar. 13-15, 2002 JBIC TA staff, FSP Focal Person, PO & RTD Orientation Course of DENR-NFDO/ All SUSIMO, RO Nov. 20-22, 2000 SUSIMO Staff of JBIC TA staff, FSP Focal Watershed Subproject Site Person, PO & RTD Cross Visit/Field Exposure DENR-CAR All SUSIMO & PO Oct., 2003 to Baguio City, CAR Officers Field Exposure on SALT IPHC & LGU New All SUSIMO & PO Feb. 27-March 1, Farming Corella Officers 2002

49 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 5a. Livelihood Projects Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Money Lending

Implementor : ELCADEFE CBFM Planters, Assn. Inc.

No. of beneficiaries : 250

Amount of Investment : P66,050.00

Date of Feasibility Study : July, 1998

Date Started : August, 1998

Status : On-Going

CFDF/CBU : P278,529.00 as of Nov. 25, 2003

Linkages Developed : Congressional Fund, Dept. of Agriculture and LGU

50 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 5b. Livelihood Projects Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Agri-Vet Supply

Implementor : SAMABACO Multipurpose Cooperative

No. of beneficiaries : 51

Amount of Investment : P5,500.00

Date of Feasibility Study :

Date Started : July, 2002

Status : Operational/On-Going

CFDF/CBU : P24,991.60

Linkages Developed : Philipine-German Fund, IPHC

51 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 5c. Livelihood Projects Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Videoke Machine

Implementor : SAMABACO Multipurpose Cooperative

No. of beneficiaries : 101

Amount of Investment : P13,791.60

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date Started : February, 2002

Status : Operational/On-Going

CFDF/CBU : P24,991.60

Linkages Developed : Philipine-German Fund, IPHC

52 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 5d. Livelihood Projects Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Micro Credit (Supply of Fertilizer)

Implementor : DALESAN Montevista Watershed Multipurpose Cooperative

No. of beneficiaries : 72

Amount of Investment : P60,000.00

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date Started : January, 2002

Status : Temporary suspended due to collection problem

CFDF/CBU : P110,000.00

Linkages Developed : Dept. of Agriculture & LGU

53 DALESAN Montevista Watershed Multipurpose

Temporary suspended due to collection problem

53 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 5e. Livelihood Projects Established

Name of Livelihood Project : Agri-Vet/Farm Supply and Sari-Sari Store

Implementor : DALESAN Montevista Watershed Multipurpose Cooperative

No. of beneficiaries : 64

Amount of Investment : P50,000.00

Date of Feasibility Study : none

Date Started : Sept., 2002

Status : Operational/On-Going

CFDF/CBU : P110,000.00

Linkages Developed : Dept. of Agriculture & LGU

54 FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135 TABLE 6. SUBPROJECT STATUS REPORT NAME/LOCATION OF PROJECT PROJECT COST STATUS OF PROGRESS Region (O:on going C: Completion) THE SUBPROJECT AREA (ha) (Mil peso) SMP CO CSD M & E INFRA

Saug Watershed Subproject/ Brgys. Del Monte, Sta. Fe, El Salvador, Cabidianan & Mambing, Davao del XI Norte; Brgys. San 2,903.00 77.435408 C C C C C Isidro, Bayabas, Nabunturan, San Vicente, Dalaguete, Lebanon & Montevista, Compostela Valley

TOTAL 2,903.00 77.435408

55 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 7. SURVEY MAPPING & PLANNING Cost Estimate By Activity TARGET UNIT OF UNIT ACTIVITY TOTAL COST OUTPUT MEASURE COST

I. SURVEY AND MAPPING

a. Perimeter survey, area 5,259.00 Has. 100.00 525,900.00 computation, site characterization and map preparation

b. Field Section and Blocking 5,259.00 Has. 75.00 394,425.00

c. Present Land Use Survey and 5,259.00 Has. 75.00 394,425.00 Mapping

d. Topographic Survey & Mapping 5,259.00 Has. 75.00 394,425.00

e. Soil/Land Capability Survey and 5,259.00 Has. 175.00 920,325.00 Mapping

f. Agro-socio economic studies 5,259.00 Has. 50.00 262,950.00 (ave. 3 household/ha.)

g. Climate, geology and water 5,259.00 Has. 50.00 262,950.00 resourced survey

SUB-TOTAL 600.00 3,155,400.00

II. PLANNING 5,259.00 Has. 75.00 394,425.00

a. Data synthesis and analysis

b. Report Writing

SUB-TOTAL 75.00 394,425.00 GRAND TOTAL 5,259.00 675.00 3,549,825.00 Note: 5,259 hectares was the actual target prior to appraisal of the subproject. This was eventually reduced to 3,928.00 hectares during the appraisal report preparation after obtaining only the areas which are plantable (I.e. excluding the non-plantable areas such as natural forests and areas with claimants). Since then, only 3,928.00 hectares was subjected to CO and CSD operation based on the appraisal report.

56 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 8. COMMUNITY ORGANIZING Cost Estimate By Activity UNIT ACTIVITIES TARGET of UNIT COST TOTAL COST MEASURE 1. Social Investigation 3,928.00 hectare 75.00 294,600.00 (SI)/Organizing Activity/Technical and Administrative Assistance

2. Information and Education 3,928.00 hectare 310.00 1,217,680.00 Campaign

3. Documentation Process 3,928.00 hectare 25.00 98,200.00

4. Identification of Possible 3,928.00 hectare 35.76 140,478.76 CBFMA

5. Organizing Activities 3,928.00 hectare 680.00 2,671,040.00

6. Community Activities 3,928.00 hectare 75.00 294,600.00

7. Other Support Activities 3,928.00 hectare 560.00 2,199,680.00 (CO Staff Development)

8. Contingency

TOTAL 3,928.00 1,760.76 6,916,278.76 Note: During the whole course of CO operation, 3,928.00 hectares was the actual target area. Further reduction of area coverage to 2,903 hectares only came later when the CO operation almost finished with only few activities left and funds was almost exhausted. The 2,903-hectare reduction issue was primarily based on MC 2000-19 (for CSD operation).

57 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 9a. AGROFORESTRY COMPONENT (1538.81 hectares) Cost Estimate By Activity UNIT OF TARGET UNIT TOTAL MAJOR ACTIVITY/ACTIVITY MEASURE OUTPUT COST COST 1. SEEDLING PRODUCTION a. Nursery Site Preparation ha 1,538.81 170.00 261,597.70 b. Seeds/Planting Stock sdlg 482,936.00 19.91 9,612,969.40 c. Soil Collection sdlg 482,936.00 0.90 434,642.40 d. Bagging sdlg 482,936.00 1.00 482,936.00 e. Maintenance & Fertilizer sdlg 482,936.00 1.60 772,697.60 SUB-TOTAL 11,564,843.10 2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT a. Strip brushing/clearing ha 1,538.81 370.71 570,448.48 b. Staking sdlg 338,055.20 0.19 62,884.89 c. Hole Digging sdlg 338,055.20 0.78 262,716.08 d. Hauling sdlg 371,860.72 0.71 263,572.15 e. Planting sdlg 338,055.20 0.58 197,431.64 f. Tools hectare 338,055.20 0.17 55,817.41 SUB-TOTAL 373.13 1,412,870.65 3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer sdlg 338,055.20 6.13 2,072,152.87 b. Replanting (including transport) sdlg 67,611.04 9.19 621,040.10 c. Patrol Works hectare 1,538.81 197.81 304,390.20 d. Tools and materials hectare 1,538.81 15.44 23,756.58 SUB-TOTAL 228.56 3,021,339.75 4. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION a. First and Second Year 252,167.43 b. Third Year 310,618.82 c. Fourth Year 993,833.01 d. Fifth Year 386,331.90 e. Sixth Year 203,579.26 SUB-TOTAL - 2,146,530.42 GRAND T O T A L hectare 1,538.81 11,791.96 18,145,583.92

58 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 9b. BAMBOO PLANTATION (1.40 hectares) Cost Estimate By Activity

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

1. SEEDLING PRODUCTION a. Gathering of cuttings cutting 728.00 5.50 4,004.00 b. Soil Collection cutting 728.00 3.00 2,184.00 c. Bagging of soil & cuttings cutting 728.00 3.01 2,192.96 d. Maintenance & Fertilizer cutting 728.00 2.41 1,754.48 SUB-TOTAL 10,135.44 2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT a. Strip brushing/clearing 10,868.50 b. Staking 8,754.67 c. Hole Digging 8,977.30 d. Hauling 9,110.30 e. Planting 8,889.10 f. Tools and materials 8,894.70 SUB-TOTAL 55,494.57 3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer b. Replanting c. Patrol Works d. Tools and materials SUB-TOTAL - 4. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION a. First and Second Year 6,493.34 b. Third Year c. Fourth Year d. Fifth Year SUB-TOTAL 6,493.34 RETENTION FEE - GRAND T O T A L hectare 1.40 51,516.68 72,123.35

59 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 9c. TREE PLANTATION (1,362.79 hectares) Cost Estimate By Activity

UNIT OF TARGET MAJOR ACTIVITY / ACTIVITY Unit Cost TOTAL COST MEASURE OUTPUT 1. SEEDLING PRODUCTION a. Nursery Site Preparation ha 1,362.79 170.00 231,674.30 b. Seeds/Planting Stock sdlg 1,851,944.00 2.18 4,041,491.17 c. Soil Collection sdlg 1,851,944.00 0.32 592,622.08 d. Bagging sdlg 1,851,944.00 1.00 1,851,944.00 e. Maintenance & Fertilizer sdlg 1,851,944.00 0.34 627,988.22 SUB-TOTAL 7,345,719.77 2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT a. Strip brushing/clearing ha 1,362.79 1,679.40 2,288,675.54 b. Staking stake 1,424,572.00 0.30 422,096.13 c. Hole Digging hole 1,424,572.00 0.19 271,739.50 d. Hauling sdlg 1,567,029.20 0.26 408,096.98 e. Planting sdlg 1,424,572.00 0.38 540,281.65 f. Tools & Materials 1,424,572.00 0.10 137,103.33 SUB-TOTAL 4,067,993.13 3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer spot 1,424,572.00 3.61 5,138,942.25 b. Replanting(including transport) spot 284,914.40 4.51 1,283,825.18 c. Patrol Works/Tools hectare 1,362.79 723.53 986,024.56 SUB-TOTAL 7,408,791.99 4. CSD Infrastructure a. Footpath sqm 10.85 1,655.97 17,967.28 b. Bunkhouse unit 11.00 71,563.64 787,200.00 c. Fireline/firebreak sqm SUB-TOTAL 805,167.28 5. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION a. First and Second Year 503,791.78 b. Third Year 141,436.43 c. Fourth Year 608,483.64 d. Fifth Year 569,480.82 e. Sixth Year 760,838.72 SUB-TOTAL 2,584,031.39 G R A N D T O T A L hectare 1,362.79 16,298.70 22,211,703.56

60 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 10. MONITORING and EVALUATION Cost Estimate By Activity

Unit Target Unit ACTIVITIES of Total Cost Output Cost Measure Physical Validation Component 1. Verification of Boundaries, UTM monuments and block corner post 2,903.00 hectare 15.00 43,545.00

2. Seedling Production/Inventory Analysis 2,903.00 hectare 25.00 72,575.00

3. Height and diameter measurement 2,903.00 hectare 30.00 87,090.00

4. Other activities - e.g. 2,903.00 hectare 75.00 217,725.00 Inspection of Infrastructures & other support activities (organization of validation team, preparation of needed instrument, equipment and materials, levelling- off meeting with PO, AP, and DENR/SUSIMO, preparation of draft report, summary tables documentation, presentation/discussion of draft report to PO, DENR, LGU and AP, finalization and submission of report) II. Systematic Sampling (10%) 2,903.00 hectare 600.00 1,741,800.00

5. Mobilization Fund

S U B T O T A L 2,903.00 745.00 2,162,735.00

Institutional and Project Benefit Assessment 1. Data Collection and preliminary assessment 137,247.35

2. Formulation of findings and recommendation 19,606.76

3. Other activities (e.g. organization of the 169,925.29 team, leveling-off/meeting with PO ,SUSIMO, integration, preparation, presentation , finalization and submission of report to the DENR, LGU, PO) S U B T O T A L 2,903.00 112.57 326,779.40

III. Project Management Cost 2,903.00 113.04 328,149.60 S U B T O T A L 113.04 328,149.60 G R A N D T O T A L 2,903.00 970.60 2,817,664.00

61 Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135

TABLE 11. Infrastructure Component

Infrastructure Project : Rehabilitation of Farm to Market Road

Location : New Corella Davao del Norte and Nabunturan & Montevista, Compostela Valley

Contractor : TRI-CAR Builders, Inc.

Contract Cost : PhP 20,220,373.35 Revised Contract Cost : PhP 23,241,073.28

Contract Duration : 300 Calendar Days

Effectivity of Notice to Proceed : July 31, 2002

Expected Completion Date : June 30, 2003 Revised Completion Date : August 30, 2003

Date of MOA with LGU :

Brief Description of the Infrastructure Project

Total Length : 5,902.76 meters Bridge Construction Length (RCDG Type) : 24.60 meters RCPC Construction; No. of 610 mm diameter : 1.00 line RCPC Construction; No. of 760 mm diameter : 8.00 line RCPC Construction; No. of 910 mm diameter : 8.00 line Masonry Lined Ditch; Length : 4,520.00 meters Slope Protection/Wall Length : 65.00 meters Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 12. Annual Work and Financial Plan Planned Actual 1995 1996 ACTIVITIES Planned Actual Planned Actual Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Cost Total Cost Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

I. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM A. SMP 1,014.24 3,549,825.00 675.00 3,549,825.00 5,259.00 3,549,825.00 5,259.00 3,549,825.00 B. CO (Phase 1 & 2) 1,800.00 7,070,400.00 1,760.76 6,916,278.76 1. Old Sites - - - Year 1 - - -Year 2 - - 2. New Sites 7,070,400.00 6,916,278.76 - Year 1 3,888,720.00 - -Year 2 3,181,680.00 - C. CSD ######## ### 31,413,110.65 14,308.95 41,538,879.41 - - Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping 282.28 1,108,784.66 382.18 1,109,468.58 1. Soil Erosion Control - - - - a. Infrastructure - - b. Trails and footpath - - 2. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment) ######## ### 30,304,325.99 13,926.77 40,429,410.83 - - a. Agroforestry ######## ### 5,899,831.87 11,791.96 18,145,583.92 b. Assisted Natural Regeneration - - c. Enrichment Planting - - d. Tree Plantation 7,586.10 24,404,494.12 16,334.84 22,283,826.91 - - d.1. Bamboo 13,456.92 376,793.65 51,516.68 72,123.35 d.2. Rattan - - d.3. Mangrove - - d.4. Plantation Species 7,534.56 24,027,700.47 16,298.70 22,211,703.56 e. Timber Stand Improvement - - 3. Inventory Residual Forest - - 4. Income Enhancement Project - - D. Major Infrastructure 20,220,373.35 22,612,760.95 E. Monitoring & Evaluation 449.87 1,767,095.00 970.60 2,817,664.00 - -Year 1 676,400.00 651,035.00 -Year 2 1,090,695.00 324,994.35 - 1,841,634.65

2. SUSIMO 4,292,100.00 2,462,902.28 Equipment provided to the Office Researches conducted Trainings Others

*GRAND TOTAL 68,312,904.00 79,898,310.40 3,549,825.00 3,549,825.00 - - *costs per component include PMC and contingency Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 12. Annual Work and Financial Plan 1997 1998 1999 ACTIVITIES Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

I. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM A. SMP B. CO (Phase 1 & 2) 3,928.00 3,888,720.00 3,928.00 1,248,512.47 3,928.00 3,181,680.00 3,928.00 2,672,934.10 3,928.00 ########## 1. Old Sites - Year 1 -Year 2 2. New Sites 3,888,720.00 1,248,512.47 3,181,680.00 2,672,934.10 1,345,871.23 - Year 1 3,888,720.00 -Year 2 3,181,680.00 C. CSD - - 20,604,782.88 5,748,261.46 8,976,194.17 ########## Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping 3,928.00 1,108,784.66 2,903.00 1. Soil Erosion Control ------a. Infrastructure b. Trails and footpath 2. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment) - - 3,928.00 19,495,998.22 2,903.00 5,748,261.46 3,928.00 8,976,194.17 2,903.00 2,847,735.26 a. Agroforestry - 711.00 4,977,303.10 1,538.81 1,125,570.12 711.00 922,528.77 1,538.81 1,695,646.99 b. Assisted Natural Regeneration c. Enrichment Planting d. Tree Plantation - - 14,518,695.12 4,622,691.34 8,053,665.40 1,152,088.27 d.1. Bamboo 28.00 376,793.65 1.40 10,324.80 28.00 1.40 61,798.55 d.2. Rattan d.3. Mangrove d.4. Plantation Species 2,189.00 14,141,901.47 1,362.79 4,612,366.54 2,189.00 8,053,665.40 1,362.79 1,090,289.72 e. Timber Stand Improvement 3. Inventory Residual Forest 4. Income Enhancement Project D. Major Infrastructure E. Monitoring & Evaluation ------Year 1 -Year 2

2. SUSIMO Equipment provided to the Office Researches conducted Trainings Others

*GRAND TOTAL 3,888,720.00 1,248,512.47 23,786,462.88 8,421,195.56 8,976,194.17 4,193,606.49 *costs per component include PMC and contingency Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 12. Annual Work and Financial Plan 2000 2001 2002 ACTIVITIES Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

I. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM A. SMP B. CO (Phase 1 & 2) 3,928.00 895,545.20 3,928.00 753,415.76 1. Old Sites - Year 1 -Year 2 2. New Sites 895,545.20 753,415.76 - Year 1 -Year 2 C. CSD 1,832,133.60 ########## - ########### - 8,146,472.40 Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping 105,650.46 293,127.86 397,162.24 1. Soil Erosion Control ------a. Infrastructure b. Trails and footpath 2. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment) 1,832,133.60 4,176,311.65 - 12,513,926.45 - 7,749,310.16 a. Agroforestry 1,538.81 2,869,651.47 1,538.81 7,761,732.50 1,538.81 3,132,209.54 b. Assisted Natural Regeneration c. Enrichment Planting d. Tree Plantation 1,832,133.60 1,306,660.18 - 4,752,193.95 - 4,617,100.62 d.1. Bamboo d.2. Rattan d.3. Mangrove d.4. Plantation Species 2,189.00 1,832,133.60 1,362.79 1,306,660.18 1,362.79 4,752,193.95 1,362.79 4,617,100.62 e. Timber Stand Improvement 3. Inventory Residual Forest 4. Income Enhancement Project D. Major Infrastructure 5.90 3,033,056.00 5.90 3,033,056.00 E. Monitoring & Evaluation 676,400.00 651,035.00 1,090,695.00 - - 324,994.35 -Year 1 1,691.00 676,400.00 1,691.00 651,035.00 -Year 2 1,691.00 1,090,695.00 2,903.00 324,994.35

2. SUSIMO 2,639,200.00 1,250,985.29 678,000.00 627,705.66 Equipment provided to the Office 2,903.00 2,639,200.00 2,903.00 1,250,985.29 2,903.00 678,000.00 2,903.00 627,705.66 Researches conducted Trainings Others

*GRAND TOTAL 2,508,533.60 5,828,542.31 3,729,895.00 14,811,455.36 3,711,056.00 12,132,228.41 *costs per component include PMC and contingency Forestry Sector Project Loan No. Ph-P 135 TABLE 12. Annual Work and Financial Plan 2003 Planned (TOTAL) Actual (TOTAL) ACTIVITIES Planned Actual Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

I. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM A. SMP 5,259.00 3,549,825.00 5,259.00 3,549,825.00 B. CO (Phase 1 & 2) 3,928.00 7,070,400.00 3,928.00 6,916,278.76 1. Old Sites - - - - Year 1 - - - -Year 2 - - - 2. New Sites - 7,070,400.00 6,916,278.76 - Year 1 - 3,888,720.00 - -Year 2 - 3,181,680.00 - C. CSD - 7,707,393.87 3,928.00 31,413,110.65 2,903.00 41,538,879.41 Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping 313,528.02 3,928.00 1,108,784.66 2,903.00 1,109,468.58 1. Soil Erosion Control - - - - - a. Infrastructure - - - b. Trails and footpath - - - 2. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment) - 7,393,865.85 7,856.00 30,304,325.99 2,903.00 40,429,410.83 a. Agroforestry 1,538.81 1,560,773.30 711.00 5,899,831.87 1,538.81 18,145,583.92 b. Assisted Natural Regeneration - - - c. Enrichment Planting - - - d. Tree Plantation - 5,833,092.55 - 24,404,494.12 1,364.19 22,283,826.91 d.1. Bamboo 28.00 376,793.65 1.40 72,123.35 d.2. Rattan - - - d.3. Mangrove - - - d.4. Plantation Species 1,362.79 5,833,092.55 3,189.00 24,027,700.47 1,362.79 22,211,703.56 e. Timber Stand Improvement - - - 3. Inventory Residual Forest - - - 4. Income Enhancement Project - - - D. Major Infrastructure 5.90 17,187,317.35 5.90 19,579,704.95 5.90 20,220,373.35 5.90 22,612,760.95 E. Monitoring & Evaluation - 1,841,634.65 2,903.00 1,767,095.00 2,903.00 2,817,664.00 -Year 1 1,691.00 676,400.00 651,035.00 -Year 2 2,903.00 1,090,695.00 324,994.35 2,903.00 1,841,634.65 - - 2,903.00 1,841,634.65

2. SUSIMO 974,900.00 584,211.33 4,292,100.00 2,462,902.28 Equipment provided to the Office 2,903.00 974,900.00 2,903.00 584,211.33 Researches conducted Trainings Others

*GRAND TOTAL 18,162,217.35 29,712,944.80 68,312,904.00 79,898,310.40 *costs per component include PMC and contingency TREE PLANTATION Cost Estimate Per Hectare & By Activity

UNIT MAJOR CATEGORY / ACTIVITY of Unit Cost ACCOMP Total Cost MEASURE

NURSERY OPERATIONS 1. Nurse spp. (with 30% mort.all.) Gmelina/Eucalyptus/Mahogany sdlg 2.75 348,549 958,509.75

2. Climax spp. Teak/Mangium sdlg 3.12 357,736 1,116,136.32 Kakawate cuttings 0.20 160,000 Siratro/Kudzu seed 0.04 200,000 Banana sucker 1.00 30,000

SUB-TOTAL 958,509.75

PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT 1. Site Preparation 1.1 Clear Brushing ha 926.67 711.07 658,927.24 2. Staking (labor and stake) stake 0.27 651,901 176,013.27

3. Sdlg. Transport ha 779.17 250 194,792.50 4. Hole Digging hole 0.72 702,104 505,514.88 5. Planting sdlg 0.80 913,104.00 730,483.20

SUB-TOTAL 2,265,731.09

MAINTENANCE 1. Ringweed, Cultivate & Fertilizer tree 0.80 1,667 1,333.60 2. Ringweed and Cultivate (3 passes) tree 0.65 1,667 3,250.65 3. Strip Brushing (1 pass) ha 749.90 1 749.90 4. Replanting (10%) sdlg 0.45 167 75.15 SUB-TOTAL 5,409.30

PROTECTION 1. Fireline establishment sq.m. 0.25 130 32.50 2. Fireline with permanent greenbreak sq.m. 0.68 20 13.60 3. Patrol Work tree/qtr 0.10 1,667 166.70

SUB-TOTAL 6,234.35

INFRASTRUCTURE 1. Graded Trail km/100 ha 5,000.00 2.5 125.00 2. Footpath (1 m.wide) km/100 ha 2,500.00 2.5 62.50 3. Bunkhouse unit/100 ha 50,000.00 1 500.00 4. Lookout Tower unit/100 ha 7,500.00 1 75.00 SUB-TOTAL 762.50

PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1. Planting Year (1st 12 mos.) ha/yr 1,650.00 1 1,650.00 2. Second and Third Year ha/yr 1,290.00 1 2,500.00 SUB-TOTAL 4,150.00 G R A N D T O T A L 207,272.95 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1. Planting Year (1st 12 mos.) ha/yr 1,650.00 1 1,650.00 2. Second and Third Year ha/yr 1,290.00 1 2,500.00 SUB-TOTAL 4,150.00 G R A N D T O T A L 8,800.00 Annex 1a

Organizational Chart of

SAUG WATERSHED SUBPROJECT

REGIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

REGIONAL TECHNICAL DIRECTOR (FMS)

REGIONAL FOCAL PERSON PENRO

ASSISTING SUSIMO PROFESSIONAL

CSD CO

DALESAN ELCADEFE SAMABACO

67 Annex 1b

Organizational Chart of

ELCADEFE CBFM Planters Association, Inc. (Peoples Organization)

GENERALSECRETARY ASSEMBLY

CHAIRMAN

SECRETARY

ASOCom EdCom CreCom EleCom

GENERAL MANAGER

Cashier Bookkeeper

CSD Livelihood Forest Education Forest Mgt. Program Program Protection Program & Rehab Program Program

68 Annex 1c

Organizational Chart of

DALESAN Montevista Watershed Multipurpose Cooperative (Peoples Organization)

GENERALSECRETARY ASSEMBLY CHAIRMAN

CHAIRMAN

Board of SAI Credit Election

Directors Committee Committee Committee

Secretary Treasurer

GENERAL MANAGER

Finance Project Project Project Bookkeeper Manager Manager Manager (New Dalaguete) (Lebanon) (San Vicente)

CSD Alternative Livelihood Consumer Transport

Plantation/ Survey Team M & E Agroforestry

NOTE:  SAI – Supervisory, Audit & Inventory Committee

69 Annex 1d

Organizational Chart of

SAMABACO Multipurpose Cooperative (Peoples Organization)

GENERALSECRETARY ASSEMBLY CHAIRMAN

Board of Directors (BOD

GENERAL MANAGER

Clerk

Finance Livelihood CSD Project

 Marketing  Cluster Group (4 (Purchaser) groups headed by Bookkeeper Cluster Leader) Cashier  Consumer (Sales Person)  Survey Team (Member) Money Lending   M & E Team (Lending Officer) (Member)

70 Annex 1e

Organizational Chart of

RDI Philippines Incorporated (Monitoring & Evaluation Component)

RDI Main Office Project Director

M&E Data Coordinator/ GIS Coordinator

Project Sites Field Coordinator

Survey & Inventory Socio- Mapping Team Team Economic (Team Leader) (Team Leader) (Team Leader) Cartographer Research Assts. Research Assts. Survey Aides Enumerators Enumerators Laborers

Environmental Impact Assessment Team (Team Leader)

Research Assistants

71 Annex 1f

Organizational Structure of the SUSIMO

SECRETARY

REGIONAL EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR (RED)

PENRO

CENRO

SUBPROJECT SITE ASSISTING MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONAL OFFICE S (SUSIMO)

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT

COMMUNITY SITE VALIDATION ORGANIZING AND DEVELOPMENT & AND BILLING STRENGTHENING MANAGEMENT UNIT UNIT UNIT

72 Annex 1g

Organizational Chart of

TRI-CAR Builders, Inc. (Infrastructure Component)

PROJECT MANAGER

Administrative Officer

PROJECT ENGINEER

Safety Officer

Geodetic Engineer Materials Engineer - Instrument Man - Laboratory Technician - Survey Aides - Material Aides

Construction Foreman Equipment Engineer - Leadman, Mason, - Electrician, Mechanics Carpenter Welders - Skilled/Unskilled - Equipment Operators, Laborers Drivers

73 TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Saug Watershed Subproject ELCADEFE Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 1-2 N 71 ° 5 ' W 200.39 2-3 N 81 ° 14 ' W 730.76 3-4 S 64 ° 38 ' W 379.45 4-5 S 88 ° 56 ' W 201.90 5-6 N 32 ° 33 ' E 208.64 6-7 N 18 ° 10 ' E 309.14 7-8 N 31 ° 12 ' E 411.25 8-9 N 76 ° 2 ' E 707.15 9-10 N 0 ° 0 ' W 355.60 10-11 N 18 ° 41 ' E 558.90 11-12 N 2 ° 15 ' W 1,535.25 12-13 N 66 ° 17 ' W 243.07 13-14 N 5 ° 0 ' W 785.85 14-15 N 45 ° 38 ' W 480.93 15-16 N 43 ° 7 ' W 391.96 16-17 N 25 ° 22 ' W 1,313.30 17-18 S 54 ° 41 ' W 285.20 18-19 N 89 ° 36 ' W 334.13 19-20 S 81 ° 33 ' E 61.70 20-21 N 51 ° 26 ' W 241.08 21-22 N 46 ° 36 ' W 309.65 22-23 N 45 ° 29 ' E 813.39 23-24 N 3 ° 20 ' E 877.34 24-25 N 35 ° 29 ' E 226.87 25-26 N 86 ° 5 ' E 397.09 26-27 S 53 ° 12 ' E 274.72 27-28 N 79 ° 46 ' E 627.24 28-29 N 33 ° 15 ' E 1,274.74 29-30 N 54 ° 58 ' E 715.21 30-31 N 72 ° 11 ' E 828.54 31-32 S 9 ° 59 ' E 2,542.30 32-33 S 23 ° 59 ' E 688.30 33-34 S 71 ° 52 ' E 2,383.82 34-35 S 58 ° 1 ' E 755.50 TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Saug Watershed Subproject ELCADEFE Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 35-36 S 15 ° 42 ' E 476.31 36-37 S 7 ° 17 ' W 319.55 37-38 S 49 ° 14 ' E 760.11 38-39 S 2 ° 12 ' E 748.88 39-40 S 11 ° 59 ' W 789.07 40-41 S 51 ° 31 ' E 730.47 41-42 S 10 ° 33 ' W 890.96 42-43 S 20 ° 59 ' W 877.41 43-44 S 12 ° 12 ' W 598.28 44-45 S 4 ° 38 ' E 570.01 45-46 N 77 ° 26 ' W 1,046.73 46-47 N 31 ° 21 ' W 791.98 47-48 N 43 ° 28 ' W 1,850.77 48-49 S 62 ° 33 ' W 3,287.25 Reference point: Corner 1: long-X 125 ° 52 ' 44 " lat-Y 7 35 ' 42 " TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Saug Watershed Subproject SAMABACO Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 1-2 S 0 ° 13 ' E 1,190.65 2-3 S 13 ° 7 ' E 518.79 3-4 S 1 ° 5 ' E 201.44 4-5 S 65 ° 29 ' E 340.72 5-6 S 78 ° 23 ' E 577.20 6-7 N 73 ° 14 ' E 560.88 7-8 N 5 ° 21 ' E 494.16 8-9 N 3 ° 29 ' E 470.59 9-10 N 29 ° 5 ' E 635.78 10-11 N 7 ° 25 ' E 586.84 11-12 N 32 ° 44 ' E 345.50 12-13 N 46 ° 53 ' W 435.78 13-14 N 52 ° 35 ' W 479.21 14-15 N 49 ° 33 ' W 573.54 15-16 N 79 ° 12 ' W 327.84 16-17 N 6 ° 5 ' W 317.15 17-18 N 21 ° 11 ' W 371.35 18-19 N 1 ° 31 ' W 565.78 19-20 N 6 ° 37 ' W 461.27 20-21 N 37 ° 29 ' W 1,013.28 21-22 N 86 ° 26 ' W 995.21 22-23 S 84 ° 50 ' W 308.01 23-24 N 26 ° 22 ' W 246.18 24-25 N 4 ° 54 ' E 500.69 25-26 N 24 ° 22 ' E 435.24 26-27 N 58 ° 14 ' W 460.42 27-28 N 25 ° 41 ' W 286.81 28-29 N 42 ° 22 ' W 287.39 29-30 N 13 ° 12 ' W 414.49 30-31 S 81 ° 54 ' E 454.60 31-32 N 13 ° 51 ' W 205.84 32-33 N 38 ° 36 ' W 357.30 33-34 N 10 ° 60 ' E 318.24 34-35 N 74 ° 53 ' W 329.83 TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Saug Watershed Subproject SAMABACO Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 35-36 S 32 ° 49 ' W 347.02 36-37 S 73 ° 41 ' W 242.26 37-38 S 23 ° 59 ' E 214.70 38-39 S 26 ° 27 ' W 311.83 39-40 N 87 ° 13 ' W 383.71 40-41 S 13 ° 7 ' W 692.13 41-42 S 57 ° 49 ' W 250.15 42-43 S 0 ° 12 ' E 569.37 43-44 S 86 ° 27 ' W 385.67 44-45 N 9 ° 50 ' W 588.81 45-46 N 72 ° 7 ' W 151.03 46-47 S 65 ° 52 ' W 678.82 47-48 S 44 ° 55 ' E 718.07 48-49 S 4 ° 0 ' E 6,477.40 49-50 N 43 ° 46 ' E 3,653.42 50-51 S 57 ° 41 ' E 752.71 51-52 S 15 ° 26 ' E 472.22 52-53 S 12 ° 19 ' E 440.75 53-1 N 32 ° 60 ' E 594.97

Reference point: Corner 1: long-X 125 ° 55 ' 49 " 7 37 ' 50 " TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Saug Watershed Subproject SAMABACO Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 1-2 N 1 ° 20 ' W 516.87 2-3 N 49 ° 31 ' E 1,133.72 3-4 S 88 ° 40 ' E 251.18 4-5 N 58 ° 50 ' E 227.46 5-6 S 31 ° 20 ' E 604.15 6-7 S 30 ° 30 ' W 197.61 7-8 N 67 ° 12 ' W 465.63 8-9 S 15 ° 24 ' W 612.54 9-10 S 30 ° 49 ' W 536.14 10-11 S 80 ° 59 ' W 403.71 11-1 N 43 ° 45 ' W 353.59

Reference point: Corner 1: long-X 120 ° 53 ' 36 " lat-Y 16 35 ' 46 " TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Saug Watershed Subproject DALESAN Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 1-2 N 59 ° 16 ' W 832.82 2-3 N 12 ° 43 ' E 577.21 3-4 N 61 ° 38 ' E 286.01 4-5 N 76 ° 9 ' W 638.81 5-6 N 68 ° 57 ' E 254.07 6-7 N 24 ° 50 ' W 287.09 7-8 N 88 ° 28 ' W 445.50 8-9 N 14 ° 37 ' E 617.54 9-10 N 22 ° 44 ' E 450.92 10-11 N 31 ° 53 ' W 476.38 11-12 N 24 ° 3 ' E 1,368.09 12-13 N 38 ° 40 ' E 532.57 13-14 N 36 ° 5 ' E 621.84 14-15 N 56 ° 35 ' E 355.72 15-16 N 78 ° 59 ' E 493.19 16-17 S 65 ° 21 ' E 305.00 17-18 S 61 ° 22 ' E 235.13 18-19 S 27 ° 23 ' E 844.52 19-20 S 70 ° 50 ' E 1,021.44 20-21 N 33 ° 35 ' E 358.29 21-22 S 68 ° 48 ' E 1,571.29 22-23 S 25 ° 10 ' E 466.02 23-24 S 13 ° 56 ' E 324.36 24-25 S 11 ° 5 ' W 257.18 25-26 S 0 ° 19 ' E 371.85 26-27 S 28 ° 4 ' E 258.68 27-28 S 36 ° 5 ' E 260.30 28-29 S 16 ° 41 ' W 222.25 29-30 S 23 ° 55 ' E 208.22 30-31 S 34 ° 11 ' W 368.69 31-32 S 14 ° 37 ' E 412.35 32-33 S 16 ° 30 ' W 407.30 33-34 S 67 ° 24 ' W 1,393.02 34-35 S 50 ° 26 ' E 1,376.62 TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Saug Watershed Subproject DALESAN Corner BEARING DISTANCE (meter) 35-36 N 74 ° 23 ' W 551.71 36-37 S 37 ° 1 ' W 379.60 37-38 S 66 ° 46 ' W 250.87 38-39 S 32 ° 50 ' E 478.40 39-40 N 64 ° 39 ' E 377.29 40-41 S 33 ° 12 ' E 946.92 41-42 S 7 ° 52 ' E 317.51 42-43 S 47 ° 58 ' W 362.46 43-44 S 40 ° 47 ' E 197.59 44-45 S 81 ° 16 ' W 242.31 45-46 S 30 ° 6 ' W 465.09 46-47 S 82 ° 53 ' W 479.62 47-48 S 83 ° 46 ' W 651.00 48-49 N 53 ° 18 ' W 1,431.71 49-50 N 20 ° 48 ' W 438.71 50-51 N 3 ° 40 ' W 1,272.23 51-52 N 37 ° 46 ' W 1,009.90 52-53 N 82 ° 14 ' W 645.39 53-54 S 59 ° 17 ' W 371.65 54-1 N 44 ° 31 ' E 165.91 Reference point: Corner 1: long-X 125 ° 55 ' 17 " 7 40 ' 31 "