Effects of Sustainable Livelihood Program of the Bottom – up Budgetting

Program implemented by the Municipal Government of Ternate to the Living

Condition of it Beneficiaries

An Undergraduate Thesis Presented to the

Faculty of the College of Business Administration
Cavite West Point College

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement in

Methods of Research (Res1b)

April 2017
 Chapter I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

INTRODUCTION:

Many development practitioners realized that even with significant national-level

surpluses, many households were still not obtaining adequate amounts of food for a

healthy life. It was determined that many households did not have enough income or

resources to exchange for food to meet their food needs. This led to a shift from national

food security to a concern with the food security and nutritional status of households and

individuals. Farming systems research, focusing on the production activities of poor

households, also provided a new perspective on the way to view the production and

consumption decisions of households.

In the mid-1980s to the early 1990s, researchers began to widen their perspective from

food security to a livelihood perspective. Some of the first writings on sustainable

livelihoods were beginning to appear in the farming systems literature in the late 1980s.

During the 1990s until the present, there has been a shift from a material perspective

focused on food production to a social perspective that focuses on the enhancement of

peoples' capacities to secure their own livelihoods. Much of this thinking is derived from

the participatory approaches that have become well integrated into the various

implementing agencies' activities for project diagnosis and design.

Thus, we can see that the sustainable livelihood approaches in vogue today build on the

experiences of the past. They are not based on dramatically new methods but utilize the

methods that have been developed over the past 20 years. These are the reasons why

the reasearcher decided to focus on the effects of the Sustainable Livelihood Programs

implemented by the Local Government of Ternate.

Statement of the Problem:

This study entitled Sustainable Livelihood Program implemented by the Municipal

Government of Ternate to the Living Condition of its Beneficiaries, Generally aims to

identify the results of the implementation of Sustainable Livelihood Program to the Living

Condition of its Beneficiaries in the Municipality of Ternate, Cavite. It specifically aims to

answer the following questions:

1. What are the different Sustainable Livelihood Program implemented by the

Municipal Government of Ternate?

2. What are the objectives of each Sustainable Livelihood Program identified?

3. Who are the recipients of each Sustainable Livelihood Program identified?

4. What are the effects of Sustainable Livelihood Program implementing to the

identified Beneficiaries in terms of:

A.) Income
 B.) Economic Stability of the Family

C.) Impact on Community

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework:

Input Process Output

 Identify the different Sustainable

Effects of Sustainable
Livelihood Program
implemented by the
Municipal
Government of
Ternate to the Living
Condition of its
Beneficiaries
 Interview to the BUB
focal person of the
Municipal Government
of Ternate
 Objectives of
implementation of
Sustainable Livelihood
Program
 Survey to the
identified recipient
(source of data BUB
focal person)
Livelihood Program implemented
by Municipal Government of
Ternate
 Objectives of Sustainable
Livelihood Program
 Identify Beneficiaries of
Sustainable Livelihood Program
 Effects of Sustainable Livelihood
Program to the Living Condition of
its Beneficiaries:
a.) Income
b.) Economic Stability of
the Family
c.) Impact on Community

Figure 1.1 (IPO Model) This figure shows the process that the researcher used in order

to collect data pertaining to the effects of Effects of Sustainable Livelihood Program

implementing by the Municipal Government of Ternate to the Living Condition of its

Beneficiaries.

Hypotheses:
 Ho: The implementation of Sustainable Livelihood Program in the Municipal of

Ternate, Cavite has no significant effect in the income of its beneficiaries.

Ho: The implementation of Sustainable Livelihood Program in the Municipal of

Ternate, Cavite has no significant effect in the Economic Stability of the beneficiaries

Family.

Ho: The implementation of Sustainable Livelihood Program in the Municipal of

Ternate, Cavite has no significant impact on the Community of the beneficiaries.

Scope and Delimitation:

This study is formed mainly in identifying the effects of implementing Sustainable

Livelihood Program in the Living Condition of its Beneficiaries in the Municipality of

Ternate, Cavite. More specifically it deals with the significant effect on the Income,

Economic Stability of Beneficiaries Family and the Sustainable Livelihood Programs

Impact to the Community.

The target respondents were identified after a thorough one – on – one interview

with the BUB (Bottom-Up Budgeting) Focal Person of the Municipal Government of

Ternate. After identifying the Beneficiaries, the researcher randomly selected fifty (50)

respondents on target population.

Survey method was used by the researcher for data collection and the process

was made from December to February 2016. All data gathered will be treated using mean,

median, mode and percentile ranking.

Significance of the Study:

This study aimed to promote significance to the following proponents:

Municipal Government of Ternate: if this study proves the Sustainable Livelihood

Program implementation has significant effect on the Living Condition of the Beneficiaries

the Municipal Government can be encouraged to promote more programs that will aid

indigents, 4Ps members and less fortunate residents of the Municipality in starting up

putting a Government funded source of income or livelihood.

Sustainable Livelihood Program Beneficiaries: This study were proven significant

will allow the target beneficiaries to appreciate the program implemented by the Municipal

Government and encourage them to prosper their respective Livelihood projects and

actively participate in other similar endeavours of the Local Government.

Definition of Terms:

Sustainable Livelihood Program - community-based capacity building program

which equips participants to actively contribute to production and labor markets by looking

at available resources and accessible markets.

 Income - money that an individual or business receives in exchange for providing

a good or service or through investing capital

Economic Stability- is a common term used to describe the financial system of a

country that shows a consistently low rate of inflation and minor variations in the output

growth

Municipal Government- is a type of local council authority that provides local

services, facilities, safety and infrastructure for communities.

Bottom up Budgeting Program- is a budgeting system in which the involved

budget holders are given the opportunity to participate in the process of settling their own

budgets. It is usually defined as an approach to budget-setting in which managers

determine how much is needed to achieve each of their planned objectives; these

amounts are thencombined to establish the total operating budget

Random Selection- refers to how sample members (study participants) are

selected from the population for inclusion in the study

Survey Method - sampling of individual units from a population and the associated

survey data collection techniques, such as questionnaire construction and methods for

improving the number and accuracy of responses

One – on – One Interview- conversation with one person acting in the role of the

interviewer and the other in the role of the interviewee

Percentile Ranking- percentage of scores in its frequency distribution that are

equal to or lower than it

 Mean- average that is used to derive the central tendency of the data in question

Median- is a simple measure of central tendency. To find the median, we arrange

the observations in order from smallest to largest value. If there is an odd number of

observations, the median is the middle value. If there is an even number of observations,

the median is the average of the two middle values

Mode- statistical term that refers to the most frequently occurring number found in

a set of numbers. The mode is found by collecting and organizing the data in order to

count the frequency of each result. The result with the highest occurrences is the mode

of the set.
 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

It is very difficult in the time allotted to give an overview on all of the work that has

taken place on sustainable livelihood approaches over the past several years. This study

will try to highlight some of the key issues and trends that are taking place as the approach

gets operationalized in the Municipality of Ternate, Cavite

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD APPROACHES

In the 1970s, many development practitioners were concerned about the famines

that were taking place in Africa and Asia, and a concerted effort was made to put more

resources into increasing food supplies globally. Out of this concern, the CGIAR centers

were born, and significant increases in food supplies were created through crop research.

However, as we transitioned into the 1980s, many development practitioners

realized that even with significant national-level surpluses, many households were still

not obtaining adequate amounts of food for a healthy life. It was determined that many

households did not have enough income or resources to exchange for food to meet their

food needs. This led to a shift from national food security to a concern with the food

security and nutritional status of households and individuals. Farming systems research,
focusing on the production activities of poor households, also provided a new perspective

on the way to view the production and consumption decisions of households.

In the mid-1980s to the early 1990s, researchers began to widen their perspective

from food security to a livelihood perspective. Some of the first writings on sustainable

livelihoods were beginning to appear in the farming systems literature in the late 1980s.

During the 1990s until the present, there has been a shift from a material

perspective focused on food production to a social perspective that focuses on the

enhancement of peoples' capacities to secure their own livelihoods. Much of this thinking

is derived from the participatory approaches that have become well integrated into the

various implementing agencies' activities for project diagnosis and design.

Thus, we can see that the sustainable livelihood approaches in vogue today build

on the experiences of the past. They are not based on dramatically new methods but

utilize the methods that have been developed over the past 20 years. This is why SLA

seems so familiar to those who have been involved in systems-oriented approaches such

as farming systems research and household food security.

Common Definitions

There are a number of definitions currently in use that a number of agencies share in

common. These are:

Livelihood. A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets and activities required for a

means of living (Chambers & Conway 1988).

Sustainable livelihood. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover

from the stresses and shocks and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both

now and in the future without undermining the natural resource base (Chambers &

Conway).

Household livelihood security. Household livelihood security is defined as adequate

and sustainable access to income and resources to meet basic needs (Frankenberger

1996).

Different Labels For The Approach Should Not Prevent Partners From Working

Together

It is important not to get hung up on the label, that is, whether you call it SLA, HLS

or something else. When people are not familiar with the terms, labels can create

divisions, even when different agencies may be pursuing similar approaches. It is more

important to understand what are the underlying principles that govern these types of

holistic approaches.

PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD APPROACHES

Holistic diagnosis and analysis

A sustainable livelihood approach attempts to take a holistic perspective in determining

problems and opportunities for programme activities. This holistic perspective involves

taking into account:

Context. What are the social, economic, political, historical, demographic trends that

influence the livelihood options of a given population and what are the risks to which they

are exposed?

Resources. What are the various assets (financial, physical, social, human and natural)

that households and communities have access to and how are they differentiated and

disaggregated? Vulnerability is determined by the risks that households and communities

are exposed to and their ability to use assets to cope with these risks.

Institutions and organizations. The institutions that operate within a given context will

be critical to sustainable livelihood outcomes. It is important to identify which government,

civic and private-sector institutions operate in a given livelihood setting to determine their

relative strengths and weaknesses in delivering goods and services essential to secure

livelihoods. The private sector is usually left out of such analyses. A stakeholder analysis

is a critical first step in any diagnosis.

Livelihood strategies. A holistic diagnosis attempts to identify the various strategies

people use to make a living and how they cope with stress. These are also referred to as

adaptive and coping strategies in the food security literature. To tailor interventions

appropriately, it is important to determine the variability that may exist across ethnic

groups, households and individuals in the pursuit of different strategies

Livelihood outcomes. Outcomes are measured to determine how successful

households are in their livelihood strategies. These outcomes can be based on normative

standards (e.g. nutritional status) or on criteria identified by the communities. Such

outcome measures need to be differentiated and disaggregated across groups,

households and individuals.

Application of participatory, people-centred approaches

SLA uses a wide variety of participatory tools for diagnosis, programme design and

monitoring and evaluation. Participation and empowerment are the basic tenets of the

approach.

Focused strategy

Although the SLA emphasizes holistic diagnosis, this does not mean that

interventions must be multisectoral. Single-sector projects/programmes may be the most

appropriate avenue to pursue based on a good problem and opportunity analysis. There

are multiple entry points through which to begin programme activities. The analysis

should determine which entry point to pursue.

Coherent information systems

The indicators used for monitoring and evaluation are clearly linked to the problem

analysis and the objectives. Cross-sectoral impacts that are measured are derived from

the links that are demonstrated from the holistic analysis. The project should not collect

unnecessary data that is not clearly linked to the objective or the problem analysis.

Reflective practice
 Programme information systems should be set up to capture both the intended

and unintended consequences of programme activities. These lessons can be derived

from participatory monitoring systems and other aspects of the M&E system.

Documenting the lessons will be critical to programme improvements. One of the key

problems that implementing agencies have is allocating time and resources to document

the lessons learned.

MAJOR ISSUES REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF SLP

There are a number of issues that have arisen in the application of SLP in the past

several years.

Programs design

As stated earlier, SL projects/programs can be either single-sector focused or

multisector in scope. What is needed is a range of options that can be applied depending

on where the project is in the programs cycle. Ongoing projects can incorporate a

livelihood perspective during critical moments of their project cycle, such as during mid-

term reviews or evaluations to determine if other factors beyond the sector constraints

that the project is focusing on could influence the achievement of project objectives.

Entry point

Although we may be concerned with the livelihood outcomes at the micro level,

this does not mean that interventions have to be only at the micro level. Macro-level policy

changes can have a significant impact at the local level. The problem analysis should
determine at which level it makes sense to operate program activities. Similarly, the

program strategy may work with different people in the community than the group we wish

to help. If the strategy is correct, then the livelihoods of the target group we wish to support

should be improved. For example, working with merchants may assist poor farmers in

obtaining inputs more easily. It is important to monitor the distribution of benefits to make

program adjustments when needed.

Measuring impact

To measure the impact of a livelihood program, it is important to measure criteria

relevant to communities as well as normative criteria. Criteria derived from participatory

approaches are the changes that are meaningful to communities. If these changes do not

occur, then the project has not brought about the kinds of improvements that are

significant to the community. These measures may be location specific. Normative

measures are important for targeting and allowing for cross-regional comparisons. Such

measures are critical for donors and governments that need to make resource allocation

decisions across regions or countries. Thus, both types of information need to be included

in SLA M&E systems.

Changing structures and processes for sustainable outcomes

To sustain positive livelihood outcomes, effective local institutions that deliver

goods and services must be in place. These include government agencies, civil

organizations and the private sector. An important part of most livelihood programming

activities has been community capacity-building and institutional strengthening. Capacity-

building efforts must focus on service delivery as well as risk-management. Institutions

that are not able to manage risk effectively can quickly become overwhelmed, seriously

jeopardizing their ability to continue to provide services. It is this risk-management aspect

that is often overlooked in institutional strengthening efforts. Finally, much more work

needs to be done on capacity-building indicators. Currently, we have few examples of

indicators for measuring institutional improvements.

Working with multiple partners at various levels

SLA activities may be initiated at different levels (i.e. national, regional, local)

depending on where the greatest leverage can be achieved. For this reason, SLA

program must be able to manage partnerships at various levels. This is a different way of

operating than working with local partners only, and it may require a different set of skills.

Balancing natural resource management objectives with poverty-alleviation

objectives

It is important to take into consideration that natural resource management

interventions that have public benefits do not always have direct benefits for the poor.

Care must be taken to determine whether the poor are participating in project activities.

If the poor are not involved, then consideration must be given to opportunities for including

additional components that address the livelihood needs of the poor. These needs may

be addressed by partner organizations and not directly by the project.

The Bottom-Up Budgeting Program

 The Aquino administration, through the Human Development and Poverty

Reduction Cluster(HDPRC) and Good Governance and Anti-Corruption Cluster

(GGACC), launched the BUB Program in 2012. The BUB aims to empower civil society

organizations (CSOs) including people’s organizations (POs) to engage and make the

government more responsive to the people’s needs, while promoting a “meaningful

devolution” to the local government for service delivery. BUB mandates an annual

participatory planning process where municipal or city governments known as LGUs and

CSOs jointly identify priority poverty reduction projects based on the local needs. The

priority projects are to be within a pre-determined budget ceiling for each LGU, which is

calculated based on the number of poor households in each LGU. The prioritized projects

are consolidated into Local Poverty Reduction Action Plans (LPRAPs). The projects can

be identified on a relatively open basis as per the BUB menu of programs. LGUs are also

allowed to propose a project of their own outside the menu. Once the LPRAPs are

approved, the projects listed in the LPRAPs are included in the subsequent fiscal year

budget of each of the 15 participating line agencies known as the National Government

Agencies (NGAs). BUB is funded from within the existing NGA budget and complemented

by LGUs’ counterpart funds.

The BUB program oversight is provided by five national agencies which include:

1. Department of Budget and Management (DBM)

2. Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

3. National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC)

4. Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)

5. National Economic Development Authority (NEDA)

 An Executive Committee composed of the Secretaries of the five agencies provides

overall policy guidance and addresses any major program implementation issues. A

Technical Working Group (TWG) composed of officials from the five agencies is

responsible for technical and policy oversight of the Program. The TWG serves as the

main focal point for the World Bank’s assistance for BUB. A Program Management Office

(PMO), established within DILG, manages the day-to-day implementation and

coordination of the Program.

A total of 15 NGAs are participating in the BUB Program, and allocate budget for the

prioritized projects that fall under their respective sectors. Actual implementation of the

projects is undertaken either by the NGA Regional Offices (ROs) or the LGUs. LGUs that

meet specific local governance criteria along with financing, administrative, and technical

requirements are allowed to implement the projects using funding disbursed to them from

the concerned sector NGAs. For LGUs that do not meet the requirements, the identified

projects are implemented by the concerned sector NGAs.

 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Research Design:

The study applied the Inductive Method of Research where the researcher

collected data based from the survey results from the target population to be able to

formulate an assessive explanation on the effects of implementing sustainable livelihood

program to the income, economic stability, and community where the target respondent

live

The Inductive Method Approach is also known as inductive reasoning, it starts with

the observations and theories are proposed towards the end of the research process as

a result of observations. Inductive research “involves the search for pattern from

observation and the development of explanations – theories – for those patterns through

series of hypotheses”. No theories or hypotheses would apply in inductive studies at the

beginning of the research and the researcher is free in terms of altering the direction for

the study after the research process had commenced

Respondents of the study:

The target population is composed of one hundred (100) residents of the

Municipality of Ternate who are recipients/beneficiaries of the various Sustainable

Livelihood Programs under the Bottom – up Budgetting implemented by the Department

of Interior And Local Government in partnership with the Local Government of Ternate.

The respondents were identified by gathering the list of Bottom – up Budgetting

Sustainable Livelihood Program through a one – on – one interview with the Bottom – up

Budgetting Focal Person of the Municipal Government of Ternate, Mr Carlo Magno

Llagas. From the list obtained random selection was applied to the population to be able

to select one hundred (100) respondents that will sure as the target population.

Research Instrument of Validation

The data – collection method applied were first, one – on – one interview with the

Bottom – up Budgetting Focal Person of the Municipality of Ternate, Cavite, Mr Carlo

Magno Llagas.

One – on – one Interview is defined as is a conversation where questions are asked and

answers are given. In common parlance, the word "interview" refers to a one-on-one

conversation with one person acting in the role of the interviewer and the other in the role
of the interviewee. The interviewer asks questions, the interviewee responds, with

participants taking turns talking.

Second Method applied was Survey Method. Survey Method is defined as a

method of questioning individuals on a topic or topics and then describing their

responses” (Jackson, 2011, p.17).

In business studies survey method of primary data collection is used in order to

test concepts, reflect attitude of people, establish the level of customer satisfaction,

conduct segmentation research and a set of other purposes.

To proceed with the study, first the researcher submitted an appointment request

with Mr Carlo Magno Llagas (seen as Annex A) with an attached Interview Questions

Forms as seen as Annex B. The form was drafted and its approval was sought from the

researcher’s adviser.

After the request has been scheduled the researcher proceeded with the interview.

From the interview, the researcher obtained the following information:

1. Background of Sustainable Livelihood Program under BUB program.

2. Sustainable Livelihood Programs implemented under BUB program.

3. Objectives of each Sustainable Livelihood Programs

4. List of recipients of each Sustainable Livelihood Programs.

After the pertinent information has been collected, the researcher proceeded with

randomly selecting target population from each list obtained totalling to 100 respondents.

After which, the target population were to undergo survey method. A survey form was
drafted and was submitted for approval to the research adviser. The approved survey

form was attached as annex C. The survey form includes questions that require the

respondent to qualify their answers.

Each survey form has five questions to collect the responses of the target population

pertaining to the effect of Sustainable Livelihood Program on the following aspects:

A: Income of the Family

B: Economic Stability of the Family

C: Effect to the Community

After the survey have been completed, the results were tallied and statistical treatment

was applied to the data.

Statistical Treatment of Data

For preliminary statistical treatment, the researcher used weighted mean. This

was used to measure the respondents’ assessment. It was computed by multiplying the

value in the groups by appropriate weight factors and the products were summed up and

divided by the total number of respondents. This was used to answer the four specific

problems of this study.

The formula for weighted mean is shown below:

 X = F(1)+ F(2)+ F(3)+ F(4)+ F(5)

Where:
X= Weighted Mean
F= Weight of each item
N= the total number of respondents

The data were interpreted using the Five-Point Likert Scale as the criteria. It served as

the basis for the interpretation of the data. The concept boundary of role was used as well

as the options, to wit:

Scale Ratings Description Interpretation

Strongly When the item described by the

5 4.50-5.00 Agree statement is true

When the item described by the

4 3.50-4.49 Agree statement is frequently true.

When the item described by the

3 2.50-3.49 Neutral statement is neutral.

When the item described by the

2 1.50-2.49 Disagree statement is not true all the time.
 Strongly When the item described by the
1 1.0-1.49 Disagree statement rarely true.

Table 3.1 Five Point Likert Scale

Mr. Carlo Magno V. Llagas

Licensing Officer / BUB Focal Person

Municipality of Ternate, Cavite

Dear Mr. Llagas :

I am Joshua A. Arellado currently a graduating student from Cavite WestPoint

College in Business Administration Major in Accounting Management.

I am conducting a research study entitled “Effects of Sustainable Livelihood

Program of the Bottom – up Budgetting Program implemented by the Municipal

Government of Ternate to the Living Condition of it Beneficiaries” relative to this, may I

humbly request for an appointment schedule for a one – on – one interview with you as

BUB Focal Person.

Attached here to in the interview form that I will be using in its conduct, Rest

assured that all the data collected will be applied as foundation of the research study and

solely for that purpose.

 Thank you very much and more power!

Looking forward for your approval

Mr. Joshua A. Arellado

“Effects of Sustainable Livelihood Program of the Bottom – up Budgetting

Program implemented by the Municipal Government of Ternate to the Living
Condition of it Beneficiaries”

Interview Data Sheet

A. Personal Information

Name:

Position:

Years of Service in BUB Focal Person:

B. Format Data Collection

1. Please provide me a brief background of the BUB program?

(If possible, can you provide me references about the BUB Program)

2. What are the various Sustainable Livelihood Programs implemented in

the Municipality?

(If possible, can you provide me a copy of the project proposal for each

Sustainable Livelihood Program)

3. What are the objectives of each Sustainable Livelihood Program?

4. Who are the beneficiaries of each Sustainable Livelihood Program?

(If possible, can provide me a list for each Sustainable Livelihood

Program)

------------------END OF INTERVIEW-----------------------