CBMS Iden tifie d P oor and th e 4Ps Beneficiaries The Case of Northern Samar Augusto Rodriguez Social Policy Specialist, UNICEF; Vicente D. Letran, Jr. GIS Division Chief, Northern Samar Provincial Government; Edgar F. Dones Executive Director, Eastern Visayas Partnership for Rural Development. Objectives • Determine the extent of CBMS identified poor HH covered under 4Ps; • Determine the extent of families with 0-12 years old notit incl ud ed di in the 4Ps Background • Northern Samar started CBMS data gathering in 2006 and compl et ed th e process i n 2010 cos ting P844,371. • Northern SiSamar is one o fthf the 24 focus areas ofthf the 5th and 6th UNICEF Country Programme for Children (1998 – present). • This study was commissioned by the Social Policy Section of UNICEF in support to strengthening 4Ps implementation in the province. The objective is to determine the strategic role that provincial LGUs can contibttribute to the successf ul li imp lemen ta tion o f 4Ps Methodology • Used Northern Samar CBMS results and matched the 4Ps HH beneficiaries provided by DSWD. DevInfo was used for storage, analysis and presentation • Compare the number of 4Ps beneficiaries with the identified CBMS poor • Extract the number of families with children less than 12 years old Provinces in the Bottom Cluster: 2009, 2006 and 2003 2009 2006 2003 90% 90% 90% Confidence Confidence Confidence Interval Interval Interval Poverty Lower Upper Poverty Lower Upper Poverty Lower Upper Province Incidence Limit Limit Province Incidence Limit Limit Province Incidence Limit Limit Zamboangadel Zamboangadel Zamboanga del 1Norte 46.0 52.9 59.8 1Norte 46.4 54.1 61.7 1Norte 59.5 51.4 67.5 2Agusan del Sur 43.5 51.2 58.9 2Agusan del Sur 38.2 45.5 52.9 2Masbate 50.2 42.3 58.0 Surigao Del 3Norte 43.1 47.9 52.8 3Maguindanao 39.0 44.9 50.9 3Agusan del Sur 48.5 41.3 55.6 Surigao Del 4Eastern Samar 37.6 45.8 54.1 4Bohol 35.8 43.7 51.6 4Norte 42.3 35.2 49.4 5Maguindanao 37.7 44.6 51.6 5Northern Samar 32.9 43.3 53.8 5Maguindanao 41.9 34.4 49.5 Zamboanga 6Sibugay 35.4 43.2 50.9 6Masbate 33.9 42.9 51.8 6Bohol 40.2 33.8 46.7 Surigao Del Zamboanga 7Romblon 36.3 43.0 49.8 7Norte 34.9 41.6 48.3 7Sibugay 43.3 33.3 53.2 8Masbate 36.6 42.5 48.3 8Romblon 34.7 40.6 46.6 8Camarines Sur 38.3 32.5 44.1 9Davao Oriental 36.4 42.5 48.6 9Davao Oriental 28.0 39.0 50.1 9Saranggani 36.7 28.4 45.1 10Northern Samar 32.4 41.7 51.0 10Eastern Samar 31.8 37.6 43.5 10Northern Samar 37.4 27.9 47.0 11Bohol 33.6 41.0 48.4 11Sulu 29.1 36.7 44.2 11Romblon 35.8 27.9 43.7 12Saranggani 34.0 40.7 47.3 12Camarines Sur 31.0 36.6 42.3 12Lanao del Norte 35.6 27.0 44.1 13Sulu 33.0 39.3 45.5 13Lanao del Norte 28.1 34.3 40.6 13Davao Oriental 35.6 26.7 44.4 Zamboanga 14Lanao del Norte 31.9 39.0 46.1 14Sibugay 25.7 34.1 42.5 14Eastern Samar 29.8 20.5 39.0 15Camarines Sur 33.8 38.7 43.6 15Saranggani 29.2 34.0 38.8 15Sulu 20.3 13.4 27.1 CBMS Results, 2006 CBMS No. of Poor HHs (or HH living % of Poor HHs No. of 4Ps below the from the total Beneficiaries Total No. ppyoverty number of Total No. of 4Ps who are also Municipalityof HH threshold) HHs Beneficiaries poor in CBMS LAPINIG 2,035 1,721 85% 796 280 LAS NAVAS 5,836 4,245 73% 3,016 883 LOPE DE VEGA 2, 340 1, 557 67% 1, 051 308 MAPANAS 2,170 1,856 86% 1,177 578 PALAPAG 4,978 4,060 82% 2,792 513 SAN ROQUE 4,320 1,361 32% 1,858 829 SILVINO LOBOS 2,400 2,206 92% 997 329 CATUBIG 3,245 2,520 78% 1,881 108 MONDRAGON 1,696 1,200 71% 3,144 288 PAMBUJAN 3,933 2,970 76% 1,749 592 10 Municipalities 32,953 23,696 72% 18,461 4,708 4Ps Beneficiaries 4 Ps Recipient Barangay and Number of CMBS Poorest Municipalities Beneficiaries (f) Magnitude of Number Per cent of Population with of Per cent of No. of Recipient Top Poor Income Below Recipient Barangay Benefi- Barangay Municipalities Poverty Barangay Covered ciaries Population Silv ino LbLubos 12, 631 26 88.4 998 7.9 Las Navas 12,642 53 100.0 3,016 12.4 Lope de Vega 9, 433 22 100. 0 1, 051 11. 1 Pambujan 17,053 26 100.0 1,749 10.3 San Roque 21,228 16 100.0 1,858 8.8 Mapanas 10,569 13 100.0 1,177 11.1 Catubig (lacking barangays) No data 43 90.7 1,882 No data Mondragon (lacking barangays) No data 24 100.0 3144 No data Palapag 21,348 32 100.0 2,792 13.0 Lapining 7, 054 14 100. 0 796 11. 3 Total 111,958 269 97.9 18,461 Result s (10 4Ps mun ic ipa lities) CBMS Data 4Ps Data 23, 696 18,461 Poor HHs 4Ps Beneficiaries 19.9%4,708 25.5% Poor in 4Ps &&CBMS CBMS 80.1% 74.5% 18,988 13,753 Poor but not 4Ps 4Ps recipients recipients but not poor in “EXCLUSION CBMS ERROR” “LEAKAGE” Conditionality # of Poor % of HHs No. of Households with Total # of HHs with Municipalities (living Children 0- Households children below the 12 years 0-12 poverty old threshold LAPINIG 2,035 1,721 1,306 75.9% LAS NAVAS 5, 836 4, 245 3, 712 87. 4% LOPE DE VEGA 2,340 1,557 1,313 84.3% MAPANAS 2,170 1,856 1,458 78.6% PALAPAG 4,978 4,060 3,095 76.2% SAN ROQUE 4,320 1,361 1,105 81.2% SILVINO LOBOS 2, 400 2, 206 1, 794 81. 3% CATUBIG 3,245 2,520 1,957 77.7% MONDRAGON 1,696 1,200 950 79.2% PAMBUJAN 3,933 2,970 2,386 80.3% 10 Municipalities 32,953 23,696 19,076 80.5% Conclusions and Recommendations • There is a need to reconcile proxy means test with CBMS to reduce exclusion and leakage in the 4Ps program. • The provincial LGUs can play a significant role to improve targeting • Cover all pppoor families in Cluster 1 provinces for the 4Ps expansion.