rapid assessment of the social impacts of of tropical storm ondoy on urban poor communities
Post on 04-Apr-2018
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 1/76
RAPID ASSESSMENT OF THE SOCIAL IMPACTS OF
TROPICAL STORM ONDOY ON URBAN POOR COMMUNITIES
Institute of Philippine Culture
School of Social Sciences, Loyola SchoolsAteneo de Manila University
July 2010
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 2/76
ii
Foreword
Tropical storm Ondoy devastated communities across Metro Manila in late September,
2009. Following the storm a Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) was prepared by the
Government of the Philippines in partnership with the World Bank, UN agencies, other
international development partners and representatives of the private sector and civilsociety organizations.
As part of the PDNA a rapid Social Impact Assessment (SIA) was conducted in seven urban
poor communities in Metro Manila to document and analyze the effects of the storm. The
main findings of the rapid social impact assessment were immediately integrated in the
overall PDNA. (A separate assessment covering the impact of typhoon Pepeng was
conducted in rural areas.)
The longer report presented here on the social impacts of Ondoy provides more in-depth
analysis of the impacts, responses, and coping mechanisms used by urban poor
communities as they struggle to come to terms with the effects of the storm.
The report also discusses the methodological approach used in the SIA, including an annex
that provides details on the range of questions that were used during interviews with
residents of urban poor communities, their local government representatives, and other
stakeholders.
The report stands as a testament to the resilience of the women, men, and children who
faced the power of a mighty storm and who continue their efforts to rebuild their lives and
livelihoods. We can draw hope from their experience even as we reflect on the many
remaining challenges that require urgent attention.
Mary Racelis
Institute of Philippine Culture
Ateneo de Manila University
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 3/76
iii
Acknowledgments
The research team at the Institute of Philippine Culture (IPC) that prepared this rapid social
impact assessment (SIA) was led by Angela Desiree Aguirre (Project Director) and
comprised Henrietta Aguirre, Ophalle Alzona, Maria Cynthia Barriga, Dioscora Bolong, Kris
Paulette Caoyonan, Ma. Lina Diona, Patrick Dominador Falguera, S.J., Marianne Angela
Hermida, Bernadette Guillermo, Karen Anne Liao, Angelito Nunag, Gladys Ann Rabacal,
Anchristine Ulep, Jon Michael Villaseñor and Ana Teresa Yuson. Mary Racelis and Czarina
Saloma-Akpedonu participated in the study as consultants.
The IPC team would like to thank all the NGO-PO partners who participated in and
facilitated implementation of the study, and especially all the community members who
volunteered their time to share their experiences.
The team would also like to acknowledge staff from the World Bank’s social development
team in the Philippines who provided technical assistance to the research team, including
Andrew Parker, Patricia Fernandes, and Maria Loreto Padua.
Funding for the SIA was provided through the Global Fund for Disaster Risk Reduction as
part of its support for Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng: Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (2009),
which is available for download at pdf.ph.
The views and opinions expressed in the report are solely those of the research team from
the Institute of Philippine Culture.
Front cover – photo credits (clockwise from top left): Evangeline Pe, John Paul del Rosario, Nonie
Reyes, John Paul del Rosario
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 4/76
iv
Contents
Foreword ...................................................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................ iii
Acronyms .................................................................................................................................................................. vii
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 3
Objectives .................................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Site Selection ................................................................................................................................................... ........................... 3
Methodology .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4
Data Collection Methods ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
Data Collection Activities .................................................................................................................................................. .... 6
Initial site visits .............................................................................................................................................. ........................... 6
Profiling of FGD participants .............................................................................................................................................. 6
Focus group discussions ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
Key informant interviews..................................................................................................................................................... 6
Feedback sessions with the community and NGO-PO research partners....................................................... 6
Limitations of the Study ........................................................................................................................................................ 8
The Research Team.................................................................................................................................................. 8
The IPC Researchers ............................................................................................................................................................... 8
NGO-PO Research Partners ................................................................................................................................................. 8
Description of the Research Sites ...................................................................................................................... 8
Riverine Communities ........................................................................................................................................................... 9
Lakeside Communities.................................................................................................. ....................................................... 13
Control Community ............................................................................................................................................................... 14
Changes in Livelihoods and Employment ................................................................................................... 15
Lost livelihood and the self-employed .......................................................................................................................... 16
Loss or suspension of jobs and the employed ........................................................................................................... 17
New livelihood opportunities ........................................................................................................................................... 17
Shifts in livelihood ................................................................................................................................................................. 18
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 5/76
v
Increased debt burden ......................................................................................................................................................... 18
Changes in everyday life ..................................................................................................................................................... 19
Responses to Changed Livelihood Outcomes............................................................................................. 19
Relief assistance ............................... ...................................................................................................................................... 19
Participating in cash for work schemes ....................................................................................................................... 20
Receiving support from family and the workplace ................................................................................................. 20
Borrowing .......................................................................................................................... ....................................................... 20
Saving more, consuming less ............................................................................................................................................ 21
Keeping the faith .............................. ...................................................................................................................................... 21
Children and youth at work ............................................................................................................................................. .. 21
Disruptions to Social Life and Mobilization of Social Relations ......................................................... 21
Displacement and disruptions in social life ........................................................ ....................................................... 21
Gender and intergenerational relations ...................................................................................................................... 22
Social support networks ..................................................................................................................................................... 24
Cracks in the collective conscience ................................................................................................................................ 25
Local Governance and Institutional Responses to the Calamity ........................................................ 25
Rescue and Evacuation ........................................................................................................................................................ 25
Relief Management ................................................................................................................................................................ 26
Recovery ................................................................................................ .................................................................................... 33
Resettlement ................................................................................................................................................... ......................... 34
Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 34
Insights and Recommendations from Communities .............................................................................................. 36
Summary Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................ 39
References ................................................................................................................................................................ 41
Notes ........................................................................................................................................................................... 42
Annex A - NGO-PO Research Partners .......................................................................................................... 44
Annex B – Research Tools .................................................................................................................................. 45
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 6/76
vi
List of Tables, Boxes and Figures
Tables
Table 1 Research sites, by location and organizational arrangement ................................................................... 4
Table 2: Fieldwork schedule..................................................................................................................................................... 6
Table 3: Selected features of the research sitesa
........................................................................................................... 10Table 4: Changes observed in the employment/livelihood activities in KV1 ................................................... 17
Table 5: Key lending features ............................................................................................................................................... .. 18
Table 6: Forms of assistance provided by community groups and individuals .............................................. 27
Table 7: Forms of government assistance ........................................................................................................................ 30
Table 8: Community recommendations for disaster preparedness and prevention .................................... 36
Table 9: Community recommendations to improve relief operations of various groups........................... 39
Boxes
Box 1 Local History of Flooding .............................................................................................................................................. 8
Box 2: Daily living ............................................................................................................................................... ........................... 9
Box 3: Vending as a livelihood ............................................................................................................................................. .. 16
Box 4: Trauma from Ondoy ................................................................................................................................................... .. 17Box 5: Selling purified water .................................................................................................................................................. 18
Box 6: Taking out loans ............................................................................................................................................................. 18
Box 7: Relief Assistance in Camacho Phase II ................................................................................................................. 20
Box 8: Relief Assistance in Kasiglahan Village 1 ............................................................................................................ 20
Box 9: High prices of food ........................................................................................................................................................ 21
Box 10: Daily living at the evacuation center .................................................................................................................. 22
Box 11: Studying at the evacuation center ....................................................................................................................... 22
Box 12: Women to the rescue ................................................................................................................................................ 23
Box 13: Men doing domestic tasks ............................................................................................................. ......................... 24
Box 15: Neighbors embrace each other............................................................................................................................. 24
Box 15: Offering dry clothes ................................................................................................................................................. .. 24
Box 16: Seeking shelter during Ondoy ............................................................................................................................... 26
Box 17: The Filipino as aid recipient .................................................................................................................................. 29
Box 18: Arlene’s request for help ......................................................................................................................................... 38
Figures
Figure 1: Location of Research Sites ..................................................................................................................................... 4
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 7/76
vii
Acronyms
ADMU Ateneo de Manila University
BHW Barangay Health Worker
CARD Center for Agriculture and Development
CFC Couples for Christ
CFC-GK Couples for Christ-Gawad KalingaCIDSS Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services
CO Community organization
COM Community Organizers Multiversity
CP2HOA Camacho Phase II Homeowners’ Association
CSO Civil Society Organization
CWL Catholic Women’s League
DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government
DLSU De La Salle University
DOH Department of Health
DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development
FGD Focus Group Discussion
GK Gawad Kalinga
GO Government OrganizationGRDC Goldenville Realty and Development Corporation
HH Household
HOA Homeowners’ Association
HUDCC Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council
HVG Highly Vulnerable Group
ICSI Institute on Church and Social Issues
INC Iglesia ni Cristo
IPC Institute of Philippine Culture
KAAKAP Kapatiran Asosasyon sa Kapiligan
KAHA Kapiligan Homeowners Association
KII key Informant Interview
KMBI Kabalikat para sa Maunlad na Buhay, Inc.
KMNA Kasiglahan Muslim Neighbors AssociationKUMRA Kasiglahan United Muslim Resettlement Association
KV1 Kasiglahan Village 1
LCE Local Chief Executive
LGU Local Government Unit
MFI Microfinance Institution
MCNA Marikina Couples Neighborhood Association
MLA Montalban Ladies Association
MLCE Municipal local Chief Executive
MMDA Metro Manila Development Authority
MMHA Mejia-Molave Homeowners Association
MRB Medium-Rise Building
MSO Marikina Settlements Office
NGA National Government AgencyNGO Non Governmental Organization
NHA National Housing Authority
NNA Nawasa Neighborhood Association
NOKRAI North Kapiligan Riverside Association Inc.
Pag-IBIG Pagtutulungan sa kinabukasan: Ikaw, Bangko, Industriya at Gobyerno
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 8/76
viii
PDNA Post-Disaster Needs Assessment
PHA Pasig Health Aides
PhilSSA Partnership of Philippine Support Service Agencies, Inc.
PO People’s Organization
PSG Pasig Security Guards
PTA Parents-Teachers Association
PUJ Public Utility JeepneyRASYC Riverside Association of Senior and Youth Corporation
RIBANA Riverbanks Neighborhood Association
RTU Rizal Technological University
SAMAKAPA Samahang Maralita at Kapit-bisig sa Floodway, Maybunga, Pasig
SIA Social impact assessment
SK Sangguniang Kabataan
SNHA Samahang Nagkakaisang-Hanay Association
SNKF Samahan ng Kababaihan sa Floodway, Maybunga
SV 4 Southville 4
TESDA Technical Education and Skills Development Authority
TSPI Tulay sa Pag-unlad Inc.
TUPAD Tulong sa Panghanap-buhay sa Ating Disadvantaged Workers
UERMMMC University of the East Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Medical CenterULAP Ugnayang Lakas ng mga Apektadong Pamilya
UN United Nations
UP University of the Philippines
WB World Bank
WFM West Bank, Floodway, Maybunga
WFMNAI West Bank Floodway Maybunga Neighborhood Association, Inc.
YFC Youth for Christ
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 9/76
1
Executive Summary
Immediately after tropical storm Ondoy flooded large sections of Metro Manila and nearby
areas in September 2009, the Government of the Philippines carried out a Post-Disaster Needs
Assessment (PDNA) with the support of the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery
(GFDRR), World Bank, UN agencies, numerous civil society organizations and academic
institutions. The PDNA included a rapid assessment of seven poor urban settlements in Metro
Manila, Laguna, and Rizal, which focused on the effects of Ondoy on the urban poor’s livelihoods
and employment, social relations, and on local governance. The study chose four riverine and
two lakeside communities that exemplified the situation in urban poor settlements affected by
Ondoy. Of the six, three were relocation sites (national government or local government
supported) while the other three were informal communities. In addition, a control site, not
directly affected by Ondoy (Marikina Heights), served as a reference point to enable the team to
better understand what social changes observed were more directly linked to the disaster. The
selection criteria tested the premise that among urban poor communities equally affected by
the storm, those having closer ties with government were more likely to have access to
resources to address their immediate welfare needs and advocate for their long-term interests.
The research employed qualitative research methods, primarily focus group discussions with
diverse groups of residents and key informant interviews with community leaders and highlyvulnerable individuals (including the elderly and the sick). These were supplemented by the
collection of secondary data, participant observation, and community walkthroughs. The initial
findings were validated through feedback sessions with the residents and NGO-PO research
partners.
A diverse mix of income-generating activities was observed in the research sites. Small
businesses and home-based livelihoods, particularly in the two lakeside communities (e.g.,
shoemaking, vegetable farming, fishing) suffered the most significant losses as a result of
Ondoy. Salaried workers, particularly those who were able to keep their jobs after Ondoy, were
the least affected as they are assured regular wages. The aftermath of Ondoy saw increased
employment opportunities for men in construction and automotive repair, as demand increased
associated with immediate recovery and reconstruction efforts.
Ondoy not only brought economic disruption but also changes in residents’ quality of life.
Purchasing power was reduced. This resulted in limited food availability at the household level
and in the lack of adequate nutrition. Some households coped with help from their immediate
family and from relatives living in the provinces or abroad. Some children and youth engaged in
pangangalakal (“buy and sell” of junk goods) or in scavenging for scrap materials. This wasdescribed as a means of helping their households to cope with reduced income. Some, usually
women, resorted to borrowing further from both formal and informal lending sources.
However, instead of financing productive activities, loans were diverted to cover basic
household needs, such as food, medicine, water, electricity, and school allowances.
The nature of livelihood challenges in the affected communities did not differ significantly fromthe one prevailing in the control site. This trend reflects the precarious nature of livelihoods in
poor urban areas. Irrespective of the impact of Ondoy, poor communities face serious economic
difficulties. The disaster was found to exacerbate these significantly. The coping strategies
observed, however, are those usually resorted to by the urban poor. These included reducing
consumption of basic items including food, taking on additional work where available, and
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 10/76
2
having more members of the household (including children) working, as well as incurring
further debt and relying on financial support from immediate family members.
Ondoy caught the communities in the sites visited unprepared. During the storm, residents
relied on their own families and relatives, friends, and neighbors for help with rescue. Residents
whose houses were flooded sought temporary shelter at evacuation centers often ill equipped
to handle large groups. Overcrowding, lack of electricity and water, locked washrooms, and
inadequate food were some of the complaints reported. Nevertheless, there were a number of instances observed of community solidarity and collaborative behavior as a result of Ondoy. For
example, youth (although unorganized) embraced new social responsibilities, helping to
remove debris, collect garbage, and repack and distribute relief goods.
Civil society mobilization and intra-community relationships were vital during the rescue
phase, and the immediate aftermath of Ondoy. Participants in the discussions reported that
Barangay officials were often unable to respond to community needs largely because they were
attending to the needs of their own families. In addition, officials reportedly did not receive
adequate training in disaster response. Barangays and to some extent the national authorities
were, however, active in the relief and early recovery phase that followed. In the communities
visited, there appeared to be no plans to provide longer-term assistance to affected families.
Most of residents participating in the discussions indicated no interest in leaving their present locations as they did not want to be displaced from their sources of livelihood and employment
and the social networks they established over the course of their stay in the community. A
combination of organizational factors (e.g., existence of well-organized groups within the
community) and geographical location (e.g., accessibility of the community to organizations
providing assistance) enabled riverine communities to cope better with the effects of Ondoy
than those in lakeside areas.
Residents attributed the flooding caused by Ondoy to a variety of factors, including the release
of water from dams, poor garbage management, inadequate drainage systems, poor
implementation of zoning and building laws, and the continued cutting of trees and reclaiming
of land to make way for subdivisions. Research participants across sites offered similar
proposals to prepare for and mitigate the possible impact of similar storms in the future. Most recommendations focused on introducing and/or implementing policies and programs on land
use and housing, protection of the environment, and disaster prevention, rescue, relief and
rehabilitation, and improving the capacities of local communities to respond to disasters.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 11/76
3
Introduction
Immediately after Ondoy flooded large sections of Metro Manila and nearby areas in September
2009, a Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) was carried out in partnership with
government institutions, the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), the
World Bank, the United Nations, civil society and academic institutions. In this context, the
Institute of Philippine Culture (IPC) of Ateneo de Manila University was asked to design and
implement a rapid assessment of seven urban poor settlements in Metro Manila, Laguna, and
Rizal. The study aimed to collect qualitative data on the social dimensions of the tropical
storm’s impact on the urban poor that would complement the assessment of economic damagesand losses.
This report, presenting the results of the rapid assessment, consists of five sections. The first
outlines the objectives and methodology of the study. The second section presents the
situational profiles of the research sites which are categorized into formal and informal
settlements. The third section of the report examines the impact of tropical storm Ondoy on the
livelihoods and employment, social relations, and local governance structures in urban poor
communities. Recommendations and proposals from the communities for disaster
preparedness and relief management comprise the fourth section. The report then concludes
with the summary of the study’s main findings and a presentation of the researchers’ insights.
Objectives
The rapid assessment aimed to determine the effects of Ondoy on the everyday lives of the
urban poor in Metro Manila and surrounding areas. It focused on livelihoods and employment,
social relations, and local governance. Eliciting and listening to the views and feelings of the
urban poor, as well as their recommendations on how best to address their present situation
were crucial to achieving this objective. On the one hand, the data pertained to losses incurred
by communities. This included the loss of houses and belongings, loss of employment,
livelihood, and other assets, deaths, disabilities, illnesses, trauma, and disruption of social
bonds. On the other hand, the appraisal assessed how existing social structures worked during
the disaster and how resilient communities were. The ensuing resolve of various sectors to bebetter prepared for the next calamity offered a narrow window of opportunity to set in motion
processes toward recovery, rehabilitation, and development that recognize and consider the
voices of urban poor communities.
Site Selection
The World Bank and the IPC collaborated with the Community Organizers Multiversity (COM),
the Partnership of Philippine Support Service Agencies, Inc. (PhilSSA) and the Institute on
Church and Social Issues (ICSI) to identify the study sites. The following were the site selection
criteria followed: (1) riverbank settlements; (2) Laguna Lake communities; (3) formal
(government-organized settlement/relocation communities) and informal settlements in the
locations mentioned above; and (4) a community that was not directly affected by Ondoy as the
control site (Table 1).
The selection criteria recognized that among urban poor communities, those directly located
along the shores of Laguna Lake and along the main rivers of Metro Manila and Rizal were the
most vulnerable to flooding. The selection criteria also tested the hypothesis that among urban
poor communities equally affected by the storm, those having close ties with local governments
or civil society organizations were more likely to have access to resources to address their
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 12/76
4
immediate welfare needs and to be better able to advocate for their long-term interests. The
control site served as a reference point to help identify the social changes in the six affected
communities that might directly be associated with Ondoy.
Table 1: Research sites, by location and organizational arrangement
LocationOrganizational arrangements
Formal InformalRiverine Kasiglahan Village 1 in Barangay San
Jose, Montalbana
Barangay Doña Imelda, Quezon City
Gawad Kalinga Camacho Phase II in
Barangay Nangka, Marikina Cityb
Barangay Maybunga, Pasig
Lakeside Southville 4 in Barangay Caingin and
Barangay Pooc, City of Sta. Rosa,
Lagunaa
Barangay Malaban, Biñan, Laguna
Non-flooded area Barangay Marikina Heights, Marikina (Control Group)c
aNational government resettlement site, bLocal government and private sector initiative resettlement site.cA mix of formal and informal settlers.
The study chose four riverine and two lakeside communities that exemplified the situation in
urban poor settlements affected by Ondoy (Figure 1). Of the six, three were relocation sites
(supported by national government or local government) while the other three were informal
communities. The first group, referred to in this study as formal communities, consisted of
Kasiglahan Village 1 or KV1 (Barangay San Jose, Rodriguez, Rizal), Southville 4 or SV4
(Barangay Pooc and Barangay Caingin, Sta. Rosa City, Laguna), and Gawad Kalinga (GK) 1
Camacho Phase II (Barangay Nangka, Marikina City). Barangay Doña Imelda in Quezon City,
Barangay Maybunga in Pasig City (West Bank, Floodway, Manggahan or WFM), and Barangay
Malaban in Biñan, Laguna comprised the informal settlements. The control community,
Barangay Marikina Heights in Marikina City, is a mix of formal and informal settlements
unaffected by Ondoy.
Methodology
The research team designed a qualitative study to ascertain the urban poor’s understanding of
their experiences of the disaster. The study recognizes that the responses and the consequences
of disaster on vulnerable individuals and groups will vary according to their social locations and
positions. It created an opportunity for these vulnerable groups to voice their own perspectives
of the event. Perceived by the community as timely and relevant, the study drew much interest
and cooperation from the residents who were still trying to make sense of their situation.
Data Collection Methods
The research employed qualitative research methods, primarily Focus Group Discussions (FGD)
with different groups from the community and key informant interviews (KII) with community
leaders and highly vulnerable individuals (including the elderly and the sick). Data from the
FGDs and KIIs were supplemented by the collection of secondary data, observation, and
community walkthroughs. The initial findings were validated during feedback sessions with the
residents and NGO-PO research partners (Annex A). Within the project’s limited preparation
time, a set of research instruments consisting of the FGD guide, KII guide, community profile
checklist, and FGD participant profiling tool was developed.2 The pre-test of the FGD guide
which was held in Barangay Payatas, Quezon City highlighted the need to prioritize topics
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 13/76
5
according to the type of FGD group. Key data sets that cut across topics could only be collected if
permitted by time during the two-hour FGD session. Thus, the FGD with individuals from
different occupational groups focused on collecting data on livelihoods and socioeconomic
adaptations. Assuming there was still enough time left, the researchers guided the FGD to a
discussion on social support networks (for the topic on social relations and cohesion) and relief
and recovery response from government, the community, and civil society (for the topic on
local governance). With community leaders, the FGD focused on local governance, followed by
questions on social support networks and life at the evacuation center, communityparticipation, and social accountability (for the topic on social relations and cohesion) and
coping strategies (for the topic on livelihoods and socioeconomic adaptations).
Figure 1: Location of Research Sites
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 14/76
6
Data Collection Activities
Given the need to generate results for inclusion in the PDNA report issued in mid-November
2009, the research team followed a very tight fieldwork schedule based on consultations with
partner-PO leaders and barangay officials (Table 2). Data collection was limited to one week,
with the researchers facilitating two FGD sessions in a day. In each site, four FGD sessions and
at least three key informant interviews were conducted. A community feedback session marked
the end of data collection in each of the areas visited.
Initial site visits
Initial visits to the sites enabled the researchers and their PO partners to orient barangay
officials and PO leaders about the study, finalize the research schedule, conduct informal
interviews with barangay and PO leaders, and gather secondary data (e.g., barangay profile, PO
profile). Community walkthroughs which allowed the researchers to observe everyday life in
the community and to take note of the communit y’s physical conditions were also conductedduring the initial phase of the study.
Profiling of FGD participants
The selection of FGD participants was aided by the use of a profiling tool which provided theresearcher with basic information on potential participants, including name, age, sex, education,
address, religion, number of children, source of family/household income, membership in any
community or barangay association, position or designation in the community or barangay
association. A primary consideration in making the final selection of participants was
representation from male and female community members across age groups, occupations, and
across all residential clusters (near and far from the community center). Care was also taken to
make sure that persons with disabilities were represented.
Focus group discussions
A total of twenty-eight FGD sessions, or four in each site were held, with four different groups
representing various livelihoods, women, youth, and community leaders. Discussions had an
average of seven participants, with women greatly outnumbering men. Inviting maleparticipants proved difficult given the timing of the sessions.
Key informant interviews
A total of twenty-five face-to-face interviews were conducted with representatives of the
barangay local government unit (LGU), community associations, and highly vulnerable groups
(as determined by the community) to provide depth to the FGD data. Among those who agreed
to be interviewed were barangay captains and kagawad (council members), and PO leaders.
Feedback sessions with the community and NGO-PO research partners
To validate the initial conclusions, the researchers facilitated on-site feedback sessions before
leaving the communities. Attendance ranged from 34 (Doña Imelda) to 310 (Malaban)participants. Sessions in non-Metro Manila sites registered a relatively higher attendance
(average of 237) than those Metro Manila sites (average of 49). The IPC also shared the initial
findings with its major research partner, COM, a month after their first meeting and shortly
before the submission of the final report. The meeting was attended by a CO trainer, two
community organizers, and thirteen PO leaders. The group confirmed the communities’observations and recommendations and provided additional information.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 15/76
7
Table 2: Fieldwork schedule
Research
site
Oct 29 to Nov 4 Nov 5 Nov 6 Nov 7 Nov 8
Government relocation site
Camacho
Phase II,
Nangka,MarikinaCity
Courtesy calls to
municipal/city
officials, initialinterviews withbarangay and
community leaders,
selection/invitation/
confirmation of FGD
participants,collection of
secondary data,
research logistics,
some KIIs (BC in
Caingin; community
leader and HVI inCamacho Phase II)
KII BC FGD (Livelihoods,
Women)
FGD
(Leaders,
Youth)
Community
feedback
KV1, San
Jose,
Rodriguez
Profiling and
invitation of
FGD
participants
FGD (Livelihoods
KII (HVG, BC)
FGD
(Women,
Youth)
KII (PO)
FGD
(Leaders)
Community
feedback
Caingin,
Santa Rosa
FGD (Leaders,
Livelihoods,)Women
KII (HVG,PO, CO) FGD
(Youth)
Community
feedback
Informal settlement
Maybunga,Pasig City
Courtesy calls tomunicipal/city
officials, initial
interviews with
barangay and
community leaders,
selection/invitation/
confirmation of FGD
participants,
collection of
secondary data,
research logistics,
some KIIs (BC inMaybunga)
FGD (Leaders,Livelihoods)
KII (PO, HVG)
FGD (Women,Youth)
KII (HVG, Barangay
kagawad council
members)
Communityfeedback
Doña
Imelda,
Quezon City
FGD (Women,
Youth)
FGD (Livelihood,
Leaders)
KII (HGV,
PO, BC)
Community
feedback
Malaban,Biñan
FGD (Women,Youth)
FGD (Livelihood,Leaders)
KII (PO,BC)
Communityfeedback
KII (HVG)
Mix of formal and informal settlers
Marikina
Heights,
Marikina
City
Courtesy calls to
municipal/city
officials, initial
interviews with
barangay and
community leaders,selection/invitation/
confirmation of FGD
participants,
collection of
secondary data,research logistics
FGD (Leaders,
Women)
KII (HVG,BC)
FGD (Livelihoods)
FGD
(Youth)
KII (PO)
Community
feedback
FGD - focus group discussion; KII - key informant interview; HVG - highly vulnerable group (individual);
BC - barangay captain; PO - people’s organization; CO - community organization; GO - government; KV1 -
Kasiglahan Village 1.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 16/76
8
Box 1: Local History of Flooding
Barangay Caingin, Barangay Pooc
According to people from Caingin and Pooc, the
location of Southville gets flooded almost every
six years during the months of September to
November. The first flooding they could
remember was in 1972, with Typhoon Dading.
The flood was chest-high near the lake andhead-high in the rice field, where Southville 4 is
now located. Floodwaters remained for two
months and people used boats to move around.Succeeding floods have occurred every decade
since the 1970s. At present, flooding occurs not
only because of typhoons but also due to
monsoon rains.
Barangay San Jose, Montalban
In 1929, Wawa Dam broke and water swelled inthe Marikina River, leaving San Jose
depopulated. Flooding occurred again in 1934
and 2004. In 1934, residents transferred toother areas. Despite these previousexperiences, community leaders and residents
did not take precaution. Unprepared, more than
two thousand families in KVI were affected
during Ondoy’s onslaught.
Limitations of the Study
Because of time limitations and its nature as a qualitative study, the rapid assessment does not
provide estimates of the affected population in terms of age, sex, or geographic cluster/area. It
is also unable provide data on the number of households or families temporarily or
permanently displaced, staying in other locations, or still in flooded areas, as no such data were
collected or made available by the relevant organizations (e.g., barangay LGU, NGOs).
The Research Team
The IPC Researchers
The research team was composed of seven field teams, each with a researcher and a
documenter, to cover the seven study sites. The researchers served as key informant
interviewers and FGD facilitators. They also analyzed the results of the FGDs, key informant
interviews, and observation notes, and prepared the site reports. The documenters prepared
the notes and the full transcript of the FGDs.3
NGO-PO Research Partners
An important element of the rapid assessment was the IPC’s collaboration with NGO and POpartners which provided the necessary links and facilitated the activities of the research teams
in the communities. In five of seven sites, COM 2
provided assistance to the research team. An initial
meeting which was attended by a CO trainer, three
COM community organizers, and twelve PO leaders
representing the study sites allowed the partners
to discuss the research design, plan initial site
visits, and agree on a schedule for data collection.3
During data gathering, the researchers received
support from Homeowners’ Association (HOA)
officials, mostly women, who guided them duringwalkthroughs, helped identify FGD participants,
and served as respondents themselves. The NGO-
PO research partners, in addition to providing field
support, commented on the draft report at a
meeting convened by the IPC on 28 November
2009. Findings were validated, analyses refined,
and recommendations strengthened through this
discussion.
Description of the Research Sites
The profiles below selected physical, demographic,economic and organizational features of the
research sites that would help explain why there
are similarities and differences in how Ondoy
affected urban poor communities (Table 3). Of the
six affected communities, four have a history of
flooding (Box 1).
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 17/76
9
Riverine Communities
West Bank, Floodway, Barangay Maybunga, Pasig City. Barangay Maybunga is home to
many informal settlements along the banks of the Manggahan Floodway. One of these is West
Bank, Floodway, Manggahan (WFM), which has an estimated population of 23,000 or around
4,400 families. Some 2,011 families among them were still in flooded locations when the
appraisal was conducted.
Even prior to Ondoy, limited livelihood and income generating opportunities were key issues
for the community. The men were employed mainly as wage workers in construction projects
and manufacturing companies in the metropolis. Some were engaged in ambulant vending and
driving public vehicles, such as tricycles and jeepneys. Whether formally employed or working
from home, many women take on part-time employment at manufacturing firms, tending of
sari-sari (variety) stores, food vending, “buying and selling” schemes, dress and crafts making,
and micro-lending. Although regarded as a secondary source of income, what they earn from
informal work augments the household income significantly.
There is a prevailing divide among the various POs in WFM and the LGU in their position on the
issue security of tenure. The Samahang Maralita at Kapit-bisig sa Floodway, Maybunga, Pasig
(SAMAKAPA), which is allied with the Pasig LGU, is amenable to relocation, specifically to a
medium-rise building (MRB) complex in Maybunga. In contrast, the West Bank Floodway
Maybunga Neighborhood Association, Inc. (WFMNAI), which is affiliated with COM, favors on-
site development of their existing community.
Barangay Doña Imelda, Quezon City. Part of District IV
in Quezon City, Barangay Doña Imelda, occupies the land
that stretches from Eulogio Rodriguez Avenue to Aurora
Boulevard. It is a community of 17,647 residents whose
informal housing structures are located on the riverbank
along Rodriguez Avenue, an area vulnerable to flooding
(Box 2). It contrasts sharply from the remaining parts of
the district and their more affluent households.
The informal settlers in the San Juan River vicinity are
found in eight areas, namely, 29 Kapiligan, 42 Kapiligan,
48 Kapiligan, 81 Kapiligan, 100 Kapiligan, 164 Kapiligan,
186 Kapiligan, and Araneta Extension. In each area, a
neighborhood association, also regarded as a homeowners’ association, is formed to further the
interests of the residents. They work in close collaboration with the barangay, city government,
non-governmental and civil society organizations with regard livelihoods and issues such as
security of tenure and eviction.
Men in the community, whether adult or young, are generally employed as security guards,
janitors, construction workers, masons, helpers, carpenters, drivers, bartenders, and sales staff.
Women are generally engaged in small businesses often owning kiosks that are located either inthe first floor of their houses or along the sidewalks. Here, a variety of goods are sold from
candies and toiletries to rice, cooked meals, barbecued meat, bibingka (rice cake) and
bananacue (skewered bananas coated in caramelized sugar). Other residents peddle pirated
DVDs and cigarettes while some, especially younger women, work as salespeople in the nearby
malls.
Box 2: Daily living
Ang baha dito sa amin ay normal na.Karaniwan na ‘yung mababa sa tuhod
ang tubig-baha. Tumaas lang ng konti
ang tubig sa ilog dahil high tide, lubog na
rin kaagad ang bahay namin. (Flooding
has become normal here. Flood that is
below the knee is a common sight. If the
water in the river rises because of hightides, our house immediately gets
flooded, too.) – GINA, 40 YEARS OLD, LIVES UNDER
THE BRIDGE
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 18/76
10
Table 3: Selected features of the research sitesa
Barangay Sources of incomeCommunity
organizationsDemographics
Functionaldisaster,
emergency, orrescue programs
or teams
Riverine Formal Settlements
San Jose, Rodriguez,
Rizal (Phases 1C and
1D, KV1)b, c
Small-scale business
Transport services
(jeepneys, tricycles,
pedicab)
Aircon repair/
maintenance, automotive
Laundry services
Work in beauty parlors
Government/ LGU
employment (utility
workers, street cleaners,
security guards)
Private sector
employment (factory
workers, househelp)
Action Group HOAs
(in all seven
phases)
KMNA
Citizens Crime
Watch
PTA
Parish Social
Services
Montalban Ladies
Association
280,786 residents
Barangay
emergency/ rescue
team
Nangka, Marikina
Cityd (Gawad Kalinga
[GK] Camacho Phase
II)
Sari-sari store
Construction work
Private sector
employment (factory
workers [shoemakers],
gasoline station
attendants)
NNA
CP2CHOA
287 families in GK
Camacho Phase II
Barangay disaster
and management
program and
brigade
Riverine Informal settlements
Doña Imelda, Quezon
City
(29 Kapiligan,
42 Kapiligan,
48 Kapiligan,
81 Kapiligan,
100 Kapiligan,
164 Kapiligan,
186 Kapiligan,
Araneta Extension)
Selling food and non-food
items, direct selling
Scavenging, construction
work (unskilled/semi
skilled laborers, masons,
carpenters), employment
as domestic helpers,
drivers,
Bartending, LGU
employment (street
cleaners), private sector
employment (salesladies,
security guards, janitors)
HOA in each of the
eight areas
ULAP
17,647 residents
Four to five
families in a
household
Average of four
persons per family
16-20 occupants
per shanty or
dwelling unit
No disaster
response team in
place, in the
recollection of
residents
Maybunga, Pasig City
(West Bank,
Floodway,
Manggahan or WFM)
Ambulant vending, buy
and sell
Dress and crafts making
Direct selling
Micro lending
Transport services
(jeepneys and tricycles)
Wage workers in
construction projects
Employees in
manufacturing companies
(full/part time)
SAMAKAPA
WFMNAI
SNKF
23,000 or around
4,400 families in
WFM
Fire and rescue
response team
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 19/76
11
Barangay Sources of incomeCommunity
organizationsDemographics
Functionaldisaster,
emergency, orrescue programs
or teams
Lakeside Formal Settlements
Pooc and Caingin, City
of Santa Rosac (SV4)
Laundry services
Transport services
(including trolley, a form
of rail transport)
Vending
Pataya sa jueteng
(informal lottery)
Farming and fishing
Collecting junk
Employment in
government and private
sector (e.g., factory in
Techno Park)
HOA
Angat Kababaihan
Anak ng Sta. Rosa
4,686 families in
SV4
No data
Lakeside Informal Settlements
Malaban, Biñan,
Laguna (Barangay
Malaban)
Shoemaking
Transport services
(tricycles and jeepneys)
Market labourers
Vending
Fishing (fish pen
operators or small
fishermen)
Vegetable farming
Sulong Kababaihan
ng Malaban,
Malayang Samahan
Kagawad Biñan,
Batang
Manggagawa ng
Malaban
PTA
CWL
FOCC
As of 2008:
41, 404 residents
8,281 households
with an average of
5 to 6 members
3-4 families
comprising a
household, in
some cases
No functional
barangay
emergency or
rescue team in
place, in the
recollection of
residents
Control Site (Riverine)
Marikina Heights,
Marikina Cityc
Food vending (barbecue,
packed snacks; sari-sari
stores
Laundry services
Regular or contractualemployment (drivers,
laboratory workers,
construction workers)
48 HOAs, including
the following three
HOAs in the focus
areas:
Mejia-MolaveHomeowners’Association,
Samahang
Nagkakaisang-
Hanay Association
Marikina Couples
Neighbourhood
Association
440 to 450 people
in 92 households
in the three HOAs
200 people in 40households
200 people in 42
households
4 to 5 members in
each of the 10
households
No data
aData largely obtained from the individual site reports.bItems in parentheses refer to the focus area or site of the rapid assessment in the barangay.cNational government resettlement site.dLocal government resettlement site.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 20/76
12
A number of residents are also involved in direct selling of cosmetic products (e.g., Avon and
Natasha products). Sewing rugs and dolls, or scavenging (for scrap material) within the
community and nearby areas are other common occupations. Inhabitants often turn to formal
lending agencies such as ASA Foundation, Pag-asa, and Tulay sa Pag-unlad Inc. (TSPI); informal
lenders, and relatives from the province and abroad for financial assistance in paying debts,
meeting everyday household needs and financing small businesses (such as kiosks). It is very
unlikely to see someone here who has not incurred any debt.
Kasiglahan Village 1, San Jose, Rodríguez, Rizal. San Jose has a long history of flooding.
Kasiglahan Village 1, popularly known as KV1, was unprepared for Ondoy with more than 2,000
families affected by the tropical storm. KV1 is a resettlement project of the Philippine
government’s National Housing Authority (NHA). It was initially intended for families affectedby the Pasig River Rehabilitation Program. Over time, however, it also served as a resettlement
site for the families displaced by fire, trash slides,4 and government infrastructure projects. Only
less than half (40 percent) of the households originally relocated remain in the area. A greater
number have sold their property or property rights, rented out their units, or transferred to
other places. Because of its distant location from the barangay center, a barangay extension
office known as Barangay Annex B was set up in KV1. Other offices set up by the barangay in the
area are the emergency rescue team, waste management office, and an ecological solid
management committee.
Community-based organizations and local associations present in the area include the Action
Group,5 Homeowners’ Associations (HOAs) in its seven phases, Kasiglahan Muslim Neighbors
Association (KMNA), Citizens Crime Watch, Parents-Teachers Association, and Parish Social
Services. Except for the Parish Social Services, these local organizations coordinate with the
barangay. A majority of the barangay officials and staff belong to these groups.
The residents derive their income from various sources, including working for the municipal
and barangay government and the private sector within or outside Rodriguez, engaging in
small-scale business (e.g., sari-sari stores), selling perishable and non-perishable items, driving
transport vehicles (e.g., pedicab/padyak [foot-pedaled tricycles], tricycles, public utility
jeepneys, taxis), and providing services such as appliance repair and maintenance, automotiverepair, running beauty parlours, and doing the laundry for other households.
Camacho Phase II, Nangka, Marikina City. Camacho Phase II, located just beside the Nangka
River, is in Barangay Nangka in the City of Marikina. Many of the inhabitants reside in row of
two-story houses divided by concrete pavements. The settlement began as a housing project of
the Marikina Settlements Office (MSO) in 2001. Under the supervision of the MSO, informal
settlers in the barangays of Calumpang, San Roque, Sto. Niño, and Parang were organized and
resettled in Balubad. Balubad has been the main contributing factor in Nangka’s changingdemographics. It was designated by the city government, through the MSO, as the formal
relocation site for its evicted informal settlers.6 The resettled communities became known as
NHA Balubad, New Balubad Settlement Site, Camacho, and Bayabas. This was part of the Mr.
Bayani Fernando’s vision of Marikina as a “squatter-free city” when he became mayor in theearly 1990s. At present, the Balubad population (3,014 families) comprises a third of the
barangay’s total population, according to the latest data from the Barangay Office. This number
includes the 287 families (mostly relocated from Tañong, Sto. Niño, Marikina Heights, and
Parang) that comprise Camacho Phase-II.
Gawad Kalinga adopted Camacho Phase II in 2004, when forty families from an informal
settlement in Provident Village in Tañong, Marikina relocated to Camacho. Organized under the
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 21/76
13
Nawasa Neighborhood Association (NNA), these families sought the help of GK for their housing
needs. Since 2005, GK has facilitated the building of two-story houses for about sixty
households, which include not only the forty NNA families but also about twenty other families.
GK, under its sweat equity program, plans to help continue this initiative of building and
renovating two hundred houses.
Before Ondoy struck the community, there was little interaction among the forty NNA families
and most of Camacho Phase II residents. Although NNA and the Camacho Phase II CommunityHomeowners’ Association (CP2CHOA) are civil to each other, many in the Camacho Phase II
community are wary of NNA families. In contrast, interactiona between GK and the MSO, and
between CP2CHOA and the local barangay, have been very positive as demonstrated by their
cooperative efforts whenever GK implements livelihood programs in the community.
Lakeside Communities
Southville 4, Barangay Pooc-Barangay Caingin, City of Santa Rosa. Southville 4 (SV4),7 is a
six-phase 70-hectare government relocation site located between the barangays of Caingin and
Pooc in the city of Sta. Rosa, Laguna. Construction has been completed in five of the six sites,
with housing in the first three blocks (or Phases) already occupied. The biggest in terms of the
number of settlers is Phase 1 (situated in Caingin), while the largest in terms of land area are
Phases 2 to 6 (found in Pooc). A young community of diverse origins and backgrounds, SV4 is
presently made up of 4,686 families, more than half of which came from the informal settlement
along the railways in Sta. Rosa. They were the first to be settled in March 2008.
SV4 is a typical resettlement area where settlers seem to have a difficult time adjusting to one
another. Groups of settlers tend to socialize based on their former places of residence. For
instance, households originally from Taguig or Sta. Rosa would tend to remain together. Their
old neighbors in their former residences are also their neighbors in SV4. While this behavior
increases intra-group unity, it tends to encourage divisions within the community. Hence, there
is little sense of cohesiveness in SV4, and limited integration of SV4 with the surrounding
neighborhood. A concrete wall separates SV4 from the rest of Caingin, symbolizing the divide
between the “insiders” (SV4 settlers) and “outsiders” (residents outside SV4). In a way, SV4 has
taken the characteristics of a private village, especially since there is a gate bounding SV4 from
the rest of Caingin. Having their own infrastructure inside the community likewise projects an
image of an exclusive settlement managed by the HOA.
When the settlers moved to SV4, they tried to find means to earn a living in formal and informal
work settings. Men took on casual employment in construction work, while some were
employed on a regular basis as drivers and machinists in nearby towns. Those who are not
employed in salaried jobs drive pedicabs or work in electrical or scrap material shops and food
stalls. A number of them go as far as Manila to collect scrap material. Women have salaried jobs
(e.g., service crew in Laguna Techno Park, an industrial zone located in Sta. Rosa, Laguna) or
provide laundry services or do domestic work in households outside SV4. Many are also
engaged in small enterprises, such as tending variety stores and selling cooked food. Despite
having regular income-earning activities, some women believe they were better-off in their
former settlements, where livelihood opportunities such as vegetable farming and livestock
rearing (pigs) were plenty. They reported that in their former settlements, they had enough
money for their daily subsistence. The nearby Techno Park provides jobs to young men and
women who work as integrated circuit (IC) technicians. Some have likewise received free
training from the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA). However,
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 22/76
14
participation in the training is limited to a certain number of participants and not everyone who
completed the training is able to find a job.
Credit opportunities abound in SV4. Most of those who have small enterprises borrow from
“lending” organizations and “5-6.”8 Those who cannot access credit, such as the elderly and
those with irregular employment, turn to their neighbors, who also charge interest for loans.
SV4 is under the jurisdiction of two barangays, Caingin and Pooc, an arrangement that createsdifficulties in the delivery of basic services as it is unclear which barangay is responsible for
what services. The NHA-supervised HOA manages SV4. It consists of twelve elected officials
drawn from the roster of thirty-five leaders, with each leader representing a residential cluster
of one hundred households. SV4 has its own set of barangay tanod (community police, all of
which are men) and barangay health workers (BHWs, all women).
Malaban, Biñan, Laguna. Malaban is one of the densely populated barangays in Biñan. In 2008,
it had 41,404 residents in 8,281 households, with each household having an average of five to
six members. In some cases, as many as three to four families share a housing unit. It has one
health center, an elementary school, a high school and seven pre-schools and day care centers.
Shoemaking is the primary occupation of the residents. When cheaper footwear from China hit
the Philippine market, the demand for Biñan-made footwear lessened. Shoemakers then
focused on making slippers, and workers in shoe factories shifted to other occupations, such as
driving tricycles, doing construction work, helping out in the wet market, and lakeside fishing.
Others (both men and women) tried their luck abroad as contract workers. Some households
rely on vegetable farming along the side of the lake. Women usually sell the produce in Biñan
market. Still a number of residents, usually men, go to the municipality of Liliw, considered “the
slippers capital of the Philippines”, to work as “maglalapat ” (shoe factory workers). Those whoengage in fishing are either “ pante” (fish pen) operators or hook -and-line fishers.
Because it has an extensive wet market that carries wholesale offers of meat, vegetable and fish
products, Biñan is able to attract buyers and traders from nearby Sta. Rosa City and the town of
San Pedro. Consequently, selling meat, vegetables and fish products, providing market labor,
and driving transport public vehicles have become the main occupations for the people of
Malaban. As a result, more and more families have sought to establish residence in the barangay
as renters or informal settlers. Likewise, the number of people selling vegetables and fish and
operating sari-sari stores has ballooned. Barangay officials are reportedly only present during
barangay meetings and required official functions. According to the residents they have not
been very active in carrying out their tasks in the barangay. POs come and go, especially in Zone
7. Often short-lived, these POs are either created because a project is being implemented in the
barangay or because membership in a PO is a requisite for accessing loans. These projects
mostly focus on medical assistance, especially for children. Other POs assist in the social
immersion activities in marginalized communities that Metro Manila-based colleges and
universities organize for their students.
Control Community
Marikina Heights, Marikina City. Barangay Marikina Heights was established in April 1978
through a Presidential Decree signed by then President Ferdinand Marcos. The natural high
terrain of the land and its structure made it a likely choice for a control group in this rapid
assessment. The only area in the barangay that was briefly flooded was a small portion of
Champaca at Apitong Street which is situated near the creek. To date, there are seven purok
(sub-villages) in the barangay with a population of almost forty-eight thousand individuals in
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 23/76
15
about eight thousand households. The barangay’s elevated land area of 325 hectares is now
being used for residential, commercial, and industrial purposes. The Homeowners’ Associations
(HOAs) now total 48.9 Facilities in the area include fourteen private schools and two public
schools.
The study focused on three HOAs found along Ipil Street, Purok 1, of Barangay Marikina
Heights. Representing a total of ninety-two households with an average of four to five members
each, they are Samahang Nagkakaisang-Hanay Homeowners Association (SNHA), Mejia-MolaveHomeowners Association (MMHA) and Marikina Couples Neighbourhood Association (MCNA).
The MMHA covers two hundred individuals in forty households, of which twenty-six are
members of Gawad Kalinga (GK). Members of GK tended to have houses built with better
quality materials, when compared to those of non-members.
The SNHA covers around two hundred individuals in forty-two households who would soon
have ownership of their land through direct purchase. The leaders of the association are
actively pursuing and facilitating the settling of the land title. The MCNA is the smallest of the
three associations in the barangay. It has only ten households. Half of the members have
decided to continue paying the owner of the land while the other half have stopped, believing
that the direct purchasing scheme is in fact fraudulent.
In most households, both parents are working, whether on a self-employment, regular or
contractual basis. Men are usually employed in construction projects, while women typically
own small business ventures, (sari-sari stores and barbecue stalls). Some women also offer
laundry and ironing services for nearby households. A number of teenagers who are high school
graduates or college undergraduates have stopped schooling to help supplement the family
income. Most of them are employed in laboratories and companies in nearby cities, such as
Pasig.
Changes in Livelihoods and Employment
A diverse mix of income-earning activities was observed in the research sites. The decision to
engage in particular forms of livelihood and employment depends on the opportunities orresources available on-site and in nearby areas. This is true for all sites, whether the community
was affected by Ondoy (such as Camacho Phase II) or not (such as Marikina Heights). Most
residents draw income from small-scale home-based livelihood and employment in government
and private firms. Small-scale, home-based commercial businesses include sari-sari (variety)
stores, food vending, and direct selling. Some of the residents make a living by driving public
utility vehicles, doing air-conditioning or automotives repair and maintenance, washing or
ironing clothes for other households, or operating beauty parlors. Others are construction
workers, masons, domestic or market helpers, carpenters, or drivers. Fishing and vegetable
farming are also found to be sources of income in lakeside areas.
In most of the study sites, a number of residents were employed by the local government as
utility workers, street cleaners, or watchmen (in the case of KV1) or in the private sector ascontractual workers in factories, manufacturing plants and construction projects, or as gasoline
station attendants, salesladies, drivers, or janitors. In SV4, the youth are employed in an
industrial park as technicians or members of utility and food services crew.
Despite not having been directly affected by the tropical storm, residents in Marikina Heights
did mention the effects of Ondoy on their sources of income. On the one hand, customers were
often victims of Ondoy and were unable to pay their debts. Participants in the discussions
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 24/76
16
pointed out that customers could not be forced to settle their debts, considering the losses they
had incurred. In affected areas, drivers of public utility vehicles had to stop working for
approximately a week, since their usual routes were not passable due to the flood. An FGD
participant reported not being able to resume her sewing business, as her sewing machine was
submerged in water and was still at the repair shop. Other income opportunities, however,
emerged. Some young men were hired by Tzu Chi Foundation, a Taiwanese faith-based NGO, to
clean houses in affected communities. Some residents have also found alternative sources of
income, such as selling snacks and vitamins to their neighbors and nearby communities.
Lost livelihood and the self-employed
Small businesses and home-based livelihoods, particularly in the two lakeside communities
(e.g., shoemaking, vegetable farming, and fishing) suffered severe losses as a result of Ondoy.
Other affected livelihoods were the “buy and sell” business, sari-sari (variety) stores, eateries,
food stalls or ambulant selling/kiosks, and livestock rearing (pigs). The flood caused by
continuous heavy rains destroyed or washed out critical resources, including physical
structures, construction equipment, working capital, raw
materials, stocks and goods (Box 3). Those in the rug-
making business, for instance, could not take advantage of
the high demand for rugs after Ondoy due to the loss of rawmaterials. Debts remained unpaid, as goods or services
were not translated into sales. Ambulant street vendors in
WFM lost their carts. Even sari-sari store owners unaffected
by the flood incurred losses, as they could not compete with
the influx of relief goods.
In Malaban (Biñan, Laguna), those making slippers lost their
homes, which also served as their workshops. Some
shoemakers turned their rooftops into workshops. But even
as operations continued for them, sales were low as
potential customers spent whatever money they had on
immediate needs. Vegetable farms were flooded, affectingthe daily subsistence and livelihood of (mostly) female
vegetable vendors. Fisher-folk were slightly better-off, as
Ondoy brought about a large fish harvest. However, these gains were short-lived, as the waters
turned murky after a few days. Those providing services (such as driving public utility vehicles)
could not carry on with their usual economic activities, as there was no or low consumer
demand. A female resident in Maybunga (Pasig) shared that her husband, who operated a “tri-
bike” school service, lost a week’s income when classes were cancelled.
Changes in livelihood outcomes due to reduced/lost income is the common sentiment of those
engaged in “buy and sell” activities in KV1 (Table 4). For example, a slipper vendor who used to
earn PhP500 to PhP700 daily, or PhP15,000 to PhP21,000 monthly, tended to earn PhP1,800 to
PhP2,400 monthly in the aftermath of Ondoy. To supplement her household income, she beganaccepting laundry work which enabled her to earn an additional PhP2,000 per month.
Box 3: Vending as a livelihood
Ang hanapbuhay ko po ay nagtitinda ngDVD, mga salamin, charger sa bangketa . . .
naanod po lahat. ‘Yung mga paninda ko,
‘yung lamesa ko inanod. ‘Yung mga tinda ko
na mga charger, mga DVD, utang pa yun saASA, hindi ko pa nababayaran ‘yun. (I sell
DVD, mirrors, chargers on the sidewalk for
a living. The flood wiped out my
merchandise and my table. [The capital for]the goods that I sell, such as chargers and
DVDs, was just a loan from ASA [lending
agency]. I have yet to pay that loan.) – MARIA, 32 YEARS OLD, DOÑA IMELDA
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 25/76
17
Table 4: Changes observed in the employment/livelihood activities in KV1
Before Ondoy After Ondoy
Livelihood/ Employment Income (PhP) Livelihood/ Employment Income (PhP)
Vending slippers (outside
KV1)
500–700/day
(15,000– 21,000/mo)
Vending Slippers (outside
KV1)
150–200/day for three
days a week (1,800–2,400/month)
Laundry (outside KV1) 500/day for one day aweek (2,000/month)
Rug/bag making 200/week Rug/Bag making 200/week
Local employee (day care
worker)
5,000/month Local employee (day care
worker)
Payment delayed for 1.5
months, as parents could
not pay day care center
fees
Domestic helper 2,500/month Garlic/black pepper
repacking and vending
150/day
Loss or suspension of jobs and the employed
Salaried workers, particularly those who had been able to keep their jobs after Ondoy, were
relatively less affected as they were assured regular wages. However, their income wasinsufficient to cover the costs of recovery. There were, however, instances observed during
fieldwork where salaried workers had also lost their jobs. In some cases, employers ceased
operations temporarily or permanently, such as the shoemaking or sewing businesses in
Marikina and factories in Rizal. In other cases, prolonged absences from work (for construction
workers, domestic workers, and gasoline station attendants, for example) after Ondoy resulted
in job losses. Some of the participants in the
discussions had been unable to report for work due to
the increase in transport fares. The floods in Caingin
(Sta. Rosa), for instance, made the roads impassable.
Commuters had therefore to allocate almost a third of
their daily wages to cover transportation costs
(PhP100, up from PhP34). In addition, a number of theresidents cited trauma as the reason for not attending
work. Participants reported not wanting to leave for
work when it rained, for example (Box 4). No work
meant no pay and hence no income and food for the
family.
New livelihood opportunities
The aftermath of Ondoy saw increased employment opportunities for men in the construction
and automotive sectors, as the demand for house and car repair increased. Drivers of tricycles,
jeepneys or pedicab, who had been unable to make their usual trips because of the floods,
adapted to the situation by providing transport, oftentimes by improvised boats, to passengerswho did not want to wade in the water, collecting PhP50 as fee. They also built makeshift
bridges for which they also charged a user’s fee. Some also offered cleaning services to better
off neighbors in Doña Imelda (Quezon City), receiving PhP100 for each house cleaned, enough
to buy a day’s meals. The huge volume of junk/scrap material brought more income to peoplewho do pangangalakal (“buy and sell”) and scavenging. Scavengers are believed to have
generated higher earnings per day, at PhP1,000 than water transport operators, who earned
Box 4: Trauma from Ondoy
Pag-umuulan sasabihin, “Mama, alis tayo.”
(When it rains, she would say, “Mama let’s
leave.”) – WAWA, 9 YEARS OLD, KV1
Ayoko pong mamatay (I don’t want to die) –
JUDY, 5 YEARS OLD, KV1
Kapag mag-isa ako, umiiyak ako. Tapos ito ay
nangangatal. Bakit ganon? (When I amalone, I cry. Then this [pointing to her jaw]
shakes. Why is it like that?) – NANA PURING, 65
YEARS OLD, SV4
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 26/76
18
Box 5: Selling purified water
Malaki ang pagbabago, parang naging times
two , kasi yung tubig na business malakas.
Pero po tindahan ko, hindi po. Sabi ko sa
kanila iinom kayo diyan, ang dumi baka
madisgrasya pa kayo. Eh di bumibili sila sa
akin ng tubig. (There was a great change [in
the business], [the profit] seemed to have
doubled. It was because the water businessbecame stronger, but not my store [variety
store]. I told the people about the danger of
drinking contaminated water. So they boughtwater from me.) – ELSA, 43 YEARS OLD, DOÑA
IMELDA
approximately PhP300-PhP400. The higher demand for
purified drinking water also doubled the income of sellers,
partly compensating for the loss of sari-sari store profits
(Box 5).
Shifts in livelihood
In Marikina Heights, residents were forced to find otherwork when the shoemaking business closed or slowed
down in the past year – before Ondoy. Most of those who
had lost their jobs put up their own small enterprises.
Some residents also took on multiple jobs or livelihood
activities, resulting in longer working hours. Those
engaged in vending, for instance, also did laundry work
once a week. There were a number of residents in these
areas who traded during the day and worked as
watchmen at night. Similarly, in the communities affected
by Ondoy, those unable to return to their old jobs or businesses ventured into new ones. Some
examples of these transitions observed during field work were, shifting from farming to being a
market helper or from shoemaking to being a tricycle driver.
Increased debt burden
A trend across all research sites was the increasing debt burden among the residents,
particularly women. A vicious debt cycle was apparent. Difficulties in repaying existing loans
led to difficulties in accessing new loans from microfinance institutions (MFIs). Without new
loans (and without recovery assistance), those engaged in livelihood activities will be unable to
re-establish their businesses and earn income to settle their outstanding obligations. If this
remains unaddressed, the economic and social impact of
Ondoy on community life can be expected to continue in
the long term.
Even before Ondoy, procuring loans from formal andinformal sources to finance small enterprises had been a
common practice in all of the communities visited (Table
5). The women usually obtain loans from MFIs, with
interest rates ranging from 10 to 15 percent. They make
weekly repayments for six months. Others seek out
informal lending sources, including “5-6” moneylenders,who are easily accessible but charge higher interest rates
and collect repayments every day for thirty to forty days
(Box 6). The residents reported that they did not have
difficulty paying debts before Ondoy.
The effects of the storm have indeed disrupted and altered the livelihood of the residents.Lacking working capital for their business or resources to purchase a new stock of
merchandise, or having no harvest from their damaged fish pens and vegetable farms, people
do not have the income they normally use to repay debts. Compounding these difficulties is the
need to repair houses and provide for basic needs. Apparent in all sites was the concern about
how debts will be settled and livelihood activities re-established while leaving enough money
for basic household needs. The likely implications of this debt cycle could be profound. Debts
are likely to rise. There is a significant probability that residents engaged in livelihood activities
Box 6: Taking out loans
Kung wala ka talagang makukuhanan ng pera,
sa Bombay ka uutang. Pero kung ako maypera, hindi ako uutang sa Bombay kasi
magkano ang interes? Malaki, tapos uutang
ka na, kailangan mo pa bumili sa kanila ngmga items nila. (If you have no one to borrow
money from, you go to the “5-6”. But if I have
money, I will not borrow money from them.
Aside from the fact that the interest is high,
you are compelled to buy items from them.)
– NIDA, 40 YEARS OLD, 42 KAPILIGAN
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 27/76
19
will be unable to obtain further credit and that community economies will remain depressed
and employment opportunities reduced. The research team considered that higher levels of
migration out of these communities in search of employment or alternative livelihoods would
be a possible scenario.
Table 5: Key lending features
Lending features MFIs (formal lending) Other typesa Informal lending (5-6)
Program requirements MFI requirements
(social/client
investigation, training,
group meetings)
Business proposal None
Terms
Loan amount PhP3,000 –PhP5,000
(first cycle) b
PhP10,000 Starts at PhP1,000
Interest rate 10-15% 0% 10-20% (depending on
amount and payment
schedule)
Amortizationscheme
Weekly for six months Daily (30–40 days,depending on
agreement)
Forced savings Amount depending on
MFI
Others With 1-2 months’
moratorium (Biñan)
Purchase of
merchandise required
from borrower
Collateral (Sta. Rosa)aRepresentative Mar De Guzman’s “Roll a Business” project in Marikina Heights (control site). bMFI borrowers have to complete payments for first-cycle loans before they can avail themselves of the
second loan cycle.
Changes in everyday life
The economic disruptions brought by Ondoy also involved changes in the quality of life in the
six affected communities. Purchasing power was reduced, resulting in limited food availability
at the household level and lack of adequate nutrition. The residents had to cope with the loss of
household assets, depriving them of the comforts they used to have. Some household heads
took on multiple livelihood activities or jobs that lengthened their working hours, which also
meant less time spent with family.
Responses to Changed Livelihood Outcomes
Relief assistanceRelief and recovery assistance reached all the affected sites, albeit with varying levels of
efficiency. Support came from a wide range of providers, including government (national and
local levels), private sector, local and international NGOs, religious organizations, schools, and
private groups and individuals. Except for SV4, all sites received numerous types and varying
levels of relief aid (Box 7 and Box 8). Relief goods helped meet the residents’ immediate needsfor approximately a after Ondoy. They mostly consisted of food (e.g., canned goods, usually
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 28/76
20
Box 7: Relief Assistance in Camacho Phase II
GK assistance:
Food
Clothes
Blankets
Slippers
School supplies
Cleaning materials and equipment (e.g., soap,wash basins, shovels)
Medical missions (including medicines)
Free use of washing machine (limited to 5kilograms of load per family)
Tzu Chi Foundation’s “Cleaning Work for Pay”
benefited 210 of 287 households. With the
income they derived from participating in this
initiative, the residents were able to store up to a
month’s supply of food and purchase some
kitchen wares.
sardines, noodles, and rice), bottled water, clothing, cleaning equipment and non-food items,
such as blankets and towels, as well as school supplies. Health assistance was also provided in
some of the areas visited.
Participating in cash for work schemes
While the bulk of the relief provided was in-kind,
there were two instances of cash assistance observedin the study sites. Immediately after Ondoy, Tzu Chi
Foundation and the Quezon City government offered
cash for work schemes to residents of Camacho Phase
II and Doña Imelda, respectively. In Camacho Phase II,
Tzu Chi Foundation’s “Cleaning Work for Pay,”allowed residents to earn extra money (PhP400) per
day per person, which some used to purchase lost
kitchen wares. A family of five earned PhP2,000 a day,
or PhP14,000 per week. The Quezon City
government’s “Tulong sa Panghanapbuhay sa Ating
Disadvantaged Workers” (TUPAD) scheme generated
income for Doña Imelda residents (initially onlywomen but later also men) in the amount of PhP272
for a day’s work. The program lasted three days andbenefited fifteen street cleaners who were chosen by
the community leaders among those most in need of
financial assistance.
Receiving support from family and the workplace
Some households received support from the
immediate family and relatives living in the province
or abroad, both in kind (rice, temporary shelter) and
cash (remittances). Some of the interviewed salaried
workers had been given cash assistance by theiremployers.
Borrowing
A general coping mechanism among urban poor
households is borrowing. In the control site (Marikina
Heights), in spite of a minimal civil society presence
one source of financial support that women often rely
on is microfinance groups. Kabalikat para sa Maunlad
na Buhay , Inc. (KMBI) is the more prominent one and
is easily recalled by the respondents. It is the women
who, perhaps due to their traditional role in managinghousehold resources, seek out and obtain loans. To
make ends meet, residents from the affected
communities resorted to borrowing money from
formal and informal lending sources. However,
instead of financing productive activities, in the aftermath of Ondoy, loans were diverted to
cover basic household needs, such as food, medicine, water, electricity, and school allowances.
Box 8: Relief Assistance in Kasiglahan Village 1
Salvation Army Relief Assistance provided each
household member with a relief sack containing
10 kilos of rice, canned goods, one mat, one
blanket, one 5-liter bottled water, and one bottleof antiseptic.
“There are six of us in the household so we
received 60 kilos of rice, assorted canned goods,six mats, six blankets, six 5-liter bottled water and
six bottles of Betadine. The relief assistance will
provide enough food for my family for a month. Idon’t have to worry where to get money for my
family’s food needs. I have shared some of these
relief goods with my neighbors. Thanks to
Salvation Army.” – ATO, 54
“Each SA relief pack was based on humanitarian
standards that would allow each householdmember to cope with the emergency situationthey are in for a number of days or weeks.” –
BERING, 63
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 29/76
21
Saving more, consuming less
Even before Ondoy, residents in the control site
(Marikina Heights) reported cutting down on certain
household expenses, usually modifying the type of food
they eat and at times eating only noodles and rice .
Given the increase in the prices of food and their very
tight budget, households in the affected communitiesinstituted additional measures such as asking children
to bring food instead of cash to school, reducing school
allowances, and reducing food portions for lunch and
dinner (Box 9). Some women also reported reducing
their own share of the food so that other members of
the household would have more to eat.
Keeping the faith
With GK and other faith-based groups working in Camacho Phase II and a portion of Marikina
Heights, residents reported that a strong and constant relationship with God helped see them
through life’s difficulties. Thus, faith and prayers played a significant role in the recovery
process. Participants in the discussions in this sites reported that religious belief strengthened
their resolve to survive and not lose hope.
Children and youth at work
In Marikina Heights, out of school youth, usually college undergraduates worked in laboratories
and research companies to help in the household expenses. Children and youth were also found
to engage in pangangalakal (“buy and sell” of junk goods) or scavenging. A similar situation wasobserved in SV4 and Maybunga, were some children (mostly boys) collected scrap material as a
means of supplementing family income before Ondoy. The significant volume of junk material
generated by Ondoy was associated with younger children being observed to engage
pangangalakal probably for the first time. Parents also appeared more eager to have young
people (aged 17 years and above) find work. Graduating college students who were unable toregister for the second semester felt they had to find a job to save for their own tuition.
Disruptions to Social Life and Mobilization of Social Relations
The mediations of social capital, defined as the “features of social organization such as
networks, norms, … trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit”
(Putnam 1993, 35ff) are central to the recovery of individual households and communities. The
rapid assessment thus examined forms of displacement and disruptions in social life, changes in
gender and intergenerational relationships, and the mobilization of social support networks
within and outside of the communities.
Displacement and disruptions in social life
In the six affected sites, residents were evacuated to temporary shelters at the height of the
storm. With few exceptions families managed to remain together after Ondoy notwithstanding
the overnight or extended stay at evacuation centers. Immediately after the storm, family
members reunited to clean their houses and restore normalcy to their lives. In Doña Imelda,
those who moved to nearby high-rise buildings or shelters returned to their homes the
following day as soon as the water subsided. The same situation was reported in Camacho
Box 9: High prices of food
Kasi dati nakakabili kami ng limang pisong
talbos ng kamote, ngayon sampung piso na.
Ngayon talaga mas mahirap kasi mas mahal.
Dati nakakatikim kami ng baboy, ngayon,wala na. (Before, we could still afford to buy
a stalk of sweet potato leaves for PhP5, but
now, it costs PhP10. Life is harder now
because of the high prices of commodities.
Before, we could still eat pork, but notanymore now.) – FLORY, 59 YEARS OLD, DOÑA
IMELDA
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 30/76
22
Phase II. Families who stayed in neighboring houses went home once the water receded. In
KV1, the evacuees returned to their homes the morning after the storm.
To make it easier to clean their houses, parents in Camacho Phase II sent their younger children
(babies and toddlers) to live with their relatives in other barangays of Marikina or towns
outside the city. To aid in their healing process,
a number of children were also reported to
have stayed temporarily with relatives in theprovinces. Such arrangements were, however,
not observed in the other study sites. In
Malaban, as the flood took longer to subside,
the families were distributed to various
locations: evacuation centers (school buildings,
concrete bridge); houses of relatives, friends,
or employers; or houses for rent. With women
and children at the evacuation centers, the men
were the first to return home or to begin
looking for work.
Adjusting to the uncomfortable conditions at the evacuation center was challenging for the
residents. Participants in the discussions
reported increased expenditures on food
(because they prepared separate meals at
home and at the evacuation centers) and
transportation (because they shuttled between
their homes and the evacuation center). In
addition, they had to queue to fetch water.
They could not do what they normally did at
home and had to be careful not to offend or
disturb the other evacuees (Box 10).
Participants in the discussion also reported
fearing that conflicts might arise, and there
were reports of disagreements about
neighbors being noisy, for example. Children
attending school had difficulties studying at
night (Box 11), while women reported feeling
uneasy about the lack of privacy and wary of
potential sexual harassment.1012
Gender and intergenerational relations
The aftermath of Ondoy further added to the
burden typically carried by women. At the
height of Ondoy, all able-bodied persons (male,
female; adult, young) in the affected sites
performed the demanding task of rescuing
people, belongings, and important documents.
In households where the men were away at
work, women took charge of rescuing family
Box 10: Daily living at the evacuation center
Malaki po. Nung andun po kami [sa aming bahay] lahat
magagawa mo, magpatugtog ka walang magagalit. Eh
diyan po hindi po pwede dahil natutulog ang mga bata. So
makikisama ka din sa mga ibang nakatira, para hindi kayo
mag-away. Hindi ka makakilos ng maayos, hindi ka
kumportable di katulad ng sa amin. (There is a big
difference between living at home and at the evacuation
center. At home you can do whatever you want. You can
play music without annoying anyone. There [at the
evacuation center], this is not allowed because thechildren are sleeping. You have to get along with the
other evacuees to avoid any fight. You are not
comfortable, unlike when you are at home.) – JOVEN, 19
YEARS OLD, MALABAN
Box 11: Studying at the evacuation center
Mahirap ho sa evacuation center kasi ho katulad ko
estudyante, nag-aaral, siyempre po bago pumasok saschool maliligo po muna . . . eh nagigising po ako mga 4 ng
madaling araw dahil po sa poso, igiban po ng tubig eh
pipila pa ho kayo bago ka makaligo kaya po minsan po late
na po ko nakakapasok.’Yung nasa amin po ako, halimbawa
may quiz kinaumagahan, nakakapag-aral po ako. Peronung dito po hindi na po ako makapag-aral ng maayos,
tulad po kanina eh periodical test hindi po ako nakapag-
aral kagabi dahil nga po mahirap ang tubig eh ako po ang
panganay so mag-iipon pa po ako ng tubig eh konti lang
ho balde namin. Kaya ho yung time ng pag-re-review kopinalit ko po sa pag-iimbak ng tubig, kesa naman po
kami’y mawalan ng tubig. (It is hard at the evacuation
center for students like me. Of course, before you go to
school, you have to take a bath. I have to wake up at 4:00a.m. to line up by the artesian well to draw water for
bathing, so sometimes I am late for school. When I was at
home, if there was a quiz in the morning, I could study thenight before. Here, I could not really study. Like earlier,we had a periodical test, I was not able to study last night
because I had to fetch and stock water because we only
had a few pails, and I am the eldest. Instead of reviewing,I fetched and stocked water; otherwise, we would nothave enough water to use.) – JOLAS, 15 YEARS OLD, MALABAN
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 31/76
23
members, especially children, elderly, and the sick (Box 12). In Maybunga, after the tropical
storm, women were also the ones lining up to receive relief goods. Men, nonetheless, helped in
cleaning and repairing their houses. But as they resumed work, women had the responsibility
for fixing the house. This added to their usual tasks of maintaining the home, budgeting, and
dealing with community concerns, as well as
working to augment the family income. Similarly,
in Doña Imelda, the women were the ones who
led at the height of the tropical storm, in theabsence of men. Following the immediate
aftermath it was still the women who decided on
matters concerning rehabilitation and
reconstruction. Understandably, they were in
charge of budgeting and knew the immediate
needs of their families and homes. Men were
reportedly primarily concerned with providing
the necessary income to meet the family’s dailyneeds.
Constrained by a tight family budget, there was
greater urgency for women to work or restart orengage in a small business or livelihood. In
Maybunga, the women engaged in a number of
additional jobs (informal work). For instance,
one woman compensated the slow sales of her
sari-sari store by selling cosmetic products.
There were also women, who took on jobs as
domestic helpers in well-off households within
the city. In both formal (Camacho Phase II, KV1)
and informal settlements (Maybunga, Doña
Imelda), the aftermath of Ondoy saw women
taking on additional family responsibilities. Women, responsible for daily household chores,
simultaneously undertook productive activities, such as small trading (e.g., operating sari-sari stores, vending, and rug/bag making), to add to their husbands’ income.
While Ondoy may have exacerbated the economic burden on women, it nevertheless brought
some temporary respite from the gender and generational division of labor within the
household. After Ondoy, women had more clothes to wash and cleaning up to do. Performing
household chores was harder, as they had often lost their appliances due to the flood. Because
of the extent of the damage brought by Ondoy, everyone in the family, regardless of gender and
age, generally took part in cleaning the house and in preparing meals. In Camacho Phase II,
house chores, such as cooking, doing the laundry, cleaning, and caring for the children, were no
longer deemed exclusively women’s tasks. In Malaban, women and men had to “make do withwhat the situation dictates.” Some young women rowed boats to fetch water from a well located
far from their residence. In Doña Imelda and WFM, men and women helped in washing dirtyclothes and cleaning the area surrounding their homes (Box 13). Older girls fetched water, and
young men learned how to cook rice and take care of younger siblings. Women, children, and
the elderly lined up to receive relief goods. There was also a greater desire by youth to find jobs
in order to help the family.
Box 12: Women to the rescue
Kapag nandyan na, kailangan magligtas ka, wala ngbaba-babae. Usually pag ordinaryong araw, yungmga washing machine, ref, lalaki ang nagbubuhat.
Nung araw na ‘yun ang babae kahit gano kabigat,
binubuhat niya. Wala silang pakialam basta maisalba
nila yung gamit nila kasi syempre pinundar nila ‘yun.
Isa pa, usually pag maghuhugas ng pinggan at
maglalaba babae lang, e sa kapal ba naman ng putik
na dumapo sa damit, hindi po kakayanin ng mga
babae. Kaya pati tatay, lolo at lola tulong-tulong sa
paglalaba. (If it’s there already, you ought to save
[lives], [there’s+ no female *issue+. On ordinary days,
men lift washing machines and refrigerators. But on
that [stormy] day, women, were doing the lifting, no
matter how heavy. They did not mind as long as they
were able to save their belongings which they had
worked hard for. One more thing, usually, if it’s
washing plates and doing the laundry, *that’s+ female
[work]. But because of the huge amount of mud that
stuck to the clothes, the women could not do italone. That is why even fathers, grandfathers and
grandmothers help in doing the laundry.) – CHARI, 18
YEARS OLD, DOÑA IMELDA
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 32/76
24
In Camacho Phase II, the chance to contribute to the household’s income through Tzu Chi
Foundation’s cash for work scheme boosted the
youths’ role in the family. Having helped save elderly
family members and younger siblings, as well as
neighbors, during the storm, young people felt more
responsible and confident in taking on bigger and
more tasks and responsibilities within and outside
the home.
However, the collective action that took place in the
aftermath of Ondoy generally did not extend to the
needs of children. Children’s places of play (e.g.,basketball court, park) in WFM, for instance,
remained flooded or muddied. The concerns of this age group were not on the priority list of
formal or informal community organizations.
Social support networks
Family members and relatives. Many of those affected by Ondoy received help in cleaning up
their houses from relatives and friends living within Metro Manila. In hard-hit Camacho Phase
II, families placed their babies and toddlers in the care of relatives for about two weeks, or until
their houses were clean. Relatives (in the Philippines and abroad) sent remittances and goods,
such as food, medicines, and money for school
allowances. A woman from WFM shared that she
requested a share of the production of her family’s
small farm in the Visayas. In a household in Doña
Imelda, financial help from relatives abroad and in
the province, which was originally intended as seed
money to restart a business, was reallocated for
hospitalization and basic necessities such as food.
Neighborhood support. At the height of Ondoy, there
were a number of instances of community solidarity
and collaborative behavior reported (Box 14 and
Box 15). Differences were set aside as community
members found themselves sharing cramped spaces
and food in temporary shelters. Parents looked after
each other’s children in evacuation centers. In
addition to taking on domestic chores, the youth
(although unorganized) helped remove debris,
collect garbage, and repack and distribute relief
goods. Community sharing of resources, such as
food and sleeping quarters (taking turns in
sleeping), extended to cover rehabilitation activities.In Maybunga (Pasig City), residents built makeshift
bridges and wooden walkways in each flooded
pasilyo (alley). They continued to work together in
maintaining these temporary structures.
Box 13: Men doing domestic tasks
Nung bumaba na ‘yung baha, sabi ng nanay ko,
“Tutal ikaw naman ang nandyan gawin mo na
lahat.”Ang ginawa ko naglaba ako ng damit,
tapos naghugas ng plato at nagsaing. (After theflood subsided, my mother told me, “Since you’re
there, you might as well do everything.” I did the
laundry, then washed the dishes and cookedrice.) – FELIX, 21 YEARS OLD, 48 DOÑA IMELDA
Box 15: Neighbors embrace each other
Praise the Lord talaga. Five years na kaming di
nag-iimikan ng kapitbahay ko. Nung bagyong
Ondoy, nagyakapan kami, di namin alam . . . na
kami na pala ‘yun . . . dahil sa bagyong Ondoy.
(Praise the Lord really. For five years, my
neighbor and I had not been talking to each
other. At the height of Ondoy, we embraced. . .we were surprised to learn we were embracing
each other . . . all because of typhoon Ondoy.) –
MERCY, 57, DOÑA IMELDA
Box 14: Offering dry clothes
Marami akong kapitbahay na hindi ako
kinakausap, pero nung time na yun basta
tumulong ako. Pagdating nila sa taas, walangdamit, papahiramin ko sila, maski kausapin mo
ako o hindi, heto damit, magbihis ka kasi basa ka.
(I have neighbors who do not talk to me, but
during that time, I just helped them. When theyarrived in my house, with no [dry] clothes I
offered them dry clothes. Whether you talk to
me or not, here’s a set of clothes, put it on
because you’re wet.) – ZENY, 38, DOÑA IMELDA
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 33/76
25
Cracks in the collective conscience
There were a number of examples of collaborative behaviour noted during rescue operations
and the immediate aftermath of the storm. However, FGD participants also reported instances
of theft and inequitable distribution of relief. At the height of Ondoy, family members, mostly
men took considerable risks to stay behind and guard their homes. In KV1 (Rodriguez, Rizal),
FGD participants who were residents of two flooded areas (Phases 1B and 1D) cited instances
of sari-sari stores and unoccupied homes being robbed. In SV4, there were allegations that onlythose close to the community leaders had been able to benefit from the relief assistance. A
similar concern was noted in Doña Imelda, where most residents perceived some favoritism in
the distribution of relief, with only those close to the barangay officials and pook (community)
leaders reportedly receiving help.
Local Governance and Institutional Responses to the Calamity
In this rapid assessment, governance is viewed as both process and context in which individuals
and groups take ownership or control of the management of social networks, information
sharing and other activities that enable and empower them to manage community resources
and needs (adapted from Chong 2004). In particular, the study examined the processes and
contexts of rescue relief and rehabilitation. The local government unit is the main actor in localgovernance. However, organized community groups also contribute to governing a locality.
Rescue and Evacuation
The flooding caused by Ondoy caught communities by surprise, even if in many of the study
areas, flooding and storm warnings are normal and part of everyday life. Lakeside communities
are in fact recurrently flooded, as monsoon rains also bring moderate seasonal flooding.
Believing that Ondoy was hardly threatening, since the flood warning issued was “Signal No. 1”,most residents went about their usual weekend activities, going to work, attending church or
sleeping in late. During the height of the storm, community residents, barangay officials among
them, relied on their own families and relatives, friends, neighbors, and, to some extent, HOA
leaders, to rescue them from the flood. After securing their families, the block leaders in SV4
managed to bring the sick to the hospital. In KV1, the Action Group was able to borrow private
vehicles to evacuate the residents. A female PO leader in KV1 stated that the residents’ claim
that they relied on each other, as “. . . government was not there to help us. It was only us inside[referring to KV1]. Nobody asked [for help], what happened was instant volunteerism . . .”
FGD participants and key informants reported that no systematic rescue operation was carried
out in any of their communities. One reason given was that the barangay officials had
themselves been victims of the flood. They had to secure their families and belongings before
dealing with the needs of other community members. Although three sites – the formal
settlements of Nangka and San Jose and the informal settlement in Maybunga – reported having
emergency rescue teams in place, these were not adequately mobilized to respond to the
disaster. In Nangka, the unprecedented speed and height of the flood prevented the barangay
disaster brigade from giving adequate support. Stranded by the floods, barangay officials
admitted feeling helpless as they monitored the situation from the barangay hall. Only in two
informal communities (Malaban, Doña Imelda) and one formal settlement (SV4) did barangay
officials manage to issue storm warnings which, for the residents, came too late. Using a
megaphone, two barangay councillors (kagawad ) of Malaban went around the flooded area on a
motorcycle, asking residents to evacuate, especially those living nearest the lake and already
under deep floodwater. This was after the barangay received news from municipal officials that
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 34/76
26
three dams located in Central Luzon and the Greater Manila Area would release water and
possibly cause further flooding in areas along Pasig River and around Laguna Lake.
Residents in barangay Doña Imelda (informal settlement) and barangay Nangka [Camacho
Phase II] and San Jose [KV1], both formal settlements reported that rescue operations had been
inadequate. In San Jose, municipal-led rescue efforts were hampered by floods at the entry to
the resettlement site in KV1 and the lack of rescue personnel and equipment. Moreover, the
barangay focused its rescue efforts on the center of San Jose, which is 8 kilometers away fromKV1. Although the municipal LGU has an extension office in KVI, the personnel assigned to the
barangay could not provide significant assistance, due to lack of equipment. Barangay officials
in two sites, one formal community and the other, an informal settlement (San Jose and
Maybunga respectively), however, disputed this claim, citing that residents refused to evacuate
in spite of warnings. In Maybunga, barangay officials deployed members of the Maybunga Fire
and Rescue Response Team to various flooded areas. The barangay provided transportation for
displaced people from the roadside to the evacuation center. Moreover, barangay tanod
requested residents to move to higher ground or to a temporary shelter. Together with other
residents, they helped evacuate people and belongings from the flooded homes.
Residents whose houses were flooded sought
temporary shelter at the evacuation centers (e.g., publicschools, day care centers, health centers, barangay
multipurpose halls). In SV4, people rushed to public
buildings for shelter. Those who could not be
accommodated in these buildings were sheltered in an
unfinished school and unoccupied housing units in
Phases 3 to 5. Evacuees to these units, however,
resented the NHA’s requirement that they sign a waiverstating that they would return to their respective
housing units once the floods receded (Box 16). Poor
conditions in the evacuation centers would later
prompt many residents of SV4 to return to their houses
a few hours after the storm even though their homeswere still flooded.
In Camacho Phase II, thirty families moved to nearby Camacho Gym Covered Court, where
“home” was a makeshift cardboard partition. Of 2,900 families living at WFM, 1,682 evacuated
to Maybunga Elementary School Annex, where they stayed for a week. Those who could still not
return to their homes were transferred to the Rosario (Pasig) Complex, where they stayed for
another two weeks. KV1 residents who stayed at temporary shelters even for a night could not
endure the living conditions there. There was no electricity and water. Space was limited, and
food was not enough. The evacuees could not use the washrooms, as these were locked. In
Malaban, where residents still could not return to their houses weeks after the storm, they had
to share one school room with as many as four families, with curtains serving as partition.
Relief Management
Schools, churches, civic and business groups, NGOs, charitable groups and private individuals
mobilized aid to the affected communities (see Table 6). Because there was no assessment
undertaken based on reliable data and no clear process of relief distribution and management,
problems emerged in the distribution of relief goods in all six sites visited. Many affected
households were unable to receive goods, particularly those whose members remained in their
Box 16: Seeking shelter during Ondoy
Hindi ito ang oras para ipagkait natin ang
kaonting tulong na masisilungan ng mga
pamayanan dito sa Southville. Kahit sino,
dapat tanggapin kasi hindi ito ang oras ng
pataasan ng ano eh, ng katungkulan. Ito ang
oras ng pagdadamayan. (This is not the time
to deprive people of the little shelter we can
provide here in Southville. Anyone should be
accepted because this is not the time toassert who has more authority. This is the
time to help one another.) – ARTEM, 40 YEARS
OLD, SV4 (BARANGAY POOC/CAINGIN)
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 35/76
27
homes, those living in inner/lower areas, those in areas farthest from the barangay center, and
those in severely flooded areas. Research participants noted that those with links or relations
with individual donors, facilitating, or coordinating groups were often given priority in relief
distribution. As a result, social relations were strained in some sites (KV1, formal settlement) or
deteriorated further in others (SV4, formal settlement). The types of relief goods provided were
not always adequate to meet the needs of affected people. Participants reported they received
too much of one type of good (noodles and sardines for example) and too little of other items
(insufficient relief items catering to the specific needs of women, children, and the elderly). Thiswas noted in Camacho Phase II, KV1, Doña Imelda, and Maybunga.
Table 6: Forms of assistance provided by community groups and individuals
Site Category of assistance
Organization Form of assistance
Doña Imelda Rescue Neighborhood Associations
Kapiligan Homeowners’ Association(KAHA)
Riverside Association of Senior and
Youth Corporation (RASYC)
North Kapiligan Riverside
Association Inc. (NOKRAI) Riverbanks Neighborhood
Association (RIBANA)
Bonita Compound Association
48 Kapiligan Neighborhood
Association
81 Kapiligan Neighborhood
Association
Kapatiran Asosasyon sa Kapiligan
(KAAKAP)
Conducted rescue operations
Relief Neighborhood Associations
KAHA
RASYC
NOKRAI RIBANA
Bonita Compound Association
48 Kapiligan Neighborhood
Association
81 Kapiligan Neighborhood
Association
KAAKAP
Coordinated with the barangay,
LGU, NGOs and religious
organizations
Identifed indigent residents Distributed ration tickets
Cooked food (females)
Recovery
West Bank,
Floodway,
Maybunga
Rescue
Relief Neighborhood Associations:
WFMNAI
SAMAKAPA
Samahan ng mga Kababaihan sa
Floodway, Maybunga (SNKF)
Youth volunteers
Sourced, prepared and distributed
relief items to non-evacuees
Accounted for households that
needed to be covered and handed
out tickets for a systematic
distribution
Coordinated with COM for relief
sourcing
Malaban,
Biñan
Rescue Male residents Assisted in rescue operations
Relief
Recovery
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 36/76
28
Site Category of assistance
Organization Form of assistance
SV4, Caingin/
Pooc,
Sta Rosa
Rescue
Relief HOA Distributed relief
Recovery
Camacho
Phase II,Nangka
Recovery
Rescue
Relief Neighborhood Associations
CP2CHHOA
NNA
Devised a stub system for
distributing relief goods
Served as intermediaries and in
most cases facilitated the
distribution system in the
community
Showed accountability for
managing relief activity that
involved a huge amount of money
RecoveryKV1, San Jose,
Rodriguez
Rescue Action Group
Montalban Ladies Association (MLA)
Homeowners’ Associations
From different phases
Kasiglahan Muslim Neighbors
Association (KMNA)
Vulcanizing shops
Hardware stores
Mobilized rescue vehicles to
evacuate the affected residents,
particularly the women, children
and elderly
Relief Action Group
HOAs
KMNA
MLA
Set up an ID system/green card for
relief distributions
Coordinated with other groups for
relief assistance and distribution
Facilitated relief distribution from
external groupsRecovery Action Group
HOAs Assessed storm victims
Marikina
Heights
Rescue Residents Provided shelter to relatives and
friends who were victims
Relief Helped in the packing and
distribution of goods
Recovery Youth Helped in community cleanup
SV4 residents were reportedly dissatisfied with the distribution of relief goods, as they did not
have a clear understanding of the process. For them, the ticket stub system put in place to
manage aid distribution did not work for two reasons. Firstly, they did not like having to prove
their residency status by showing identification cards (IDs) or proof of billing at a time of disaster. Secondly, not enough stubs were distributed which raised concerns about the fairness
of the distribution. In addition to issues about prioritizing evacuees, there were allegations that
only those close to the leaders were able to receive benefits.
In SV4, which is under the jurisdiction of two barangays, Pooc and Caingin, it was the city LGU,
NHA and politicians who provided relief goods to residents. No relief assistance came from
barangay officials. Aware of the insider-outsider divide between SV4 residents and Caingin
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 37/76
29
residents, an SV4 settler participating in the discussions referred to the fact that the barangay
captain of Caingin would naturally give aid to his constituency first, (referring to Caingin
residents who were also badly hit by Ondoy). Phase 1 residents in SV4, on the other hand, felt
the barangay captain of Pooc prioritized their needs as he looked into their living conditions
after the storm.
Lines were long and goods were also not
sufficient in SV4. There were instances reportedof distributors throwing relief goods from the
back of trucks into the crowd, which resulted in
injuries. According to SV4 HOA officers, this
problem was caused by the inadequate supply of
relief goods (Box 17). In KV1, social relations
(between LGU and residents, among residents,
between community groups and residents,
between LGU and PO) were strained as relief
assistance did not reach all affected areas and
residents of Phases 1B and 1D. For most residents
of Doña Imelda, the management of aid was
severely deficient, as there was no systematicprocess for the distribution of goods. Moreover,
they perceived those close to barangay officials
and purok leaders as being favoured in the
distribution of relief. On the contrary, barangay
officials believed their system was efficient. They
relied on purok leaders in giving out assistance.
For them, the “insensitivity, greed and lack of
discipline” of community members was the cause of problems in relief distribution. In Malaban,
residents had opposing views about the relief operations. Those who did not leave their homes
complained that only the evacuees in the schools and the zones nearest to the barangay center
had benefited from the relief and medical assistance. Evacuees countered by saying there were
relief goods distributed to the residents who did not move to the evacuation center which theydid not get access to. However, they were unanimous in saying that those living in areas where
floodwater was deep received only a limited supply of relief goods. On their part, those still in
their houses or from the barangay claimed they did not get any food items and medical supplies.
The perception that there was “politics” involved in the relief distribution was common in thesix sites visited. “Political influence” was most felt in the two lakeside sites which received
comparably short supply of relief goods perhaps because they were farthest from the center or
source of relief (Metro Manila). Residents of three sites (two formal settlements [SV4, KV1] and
one informal settlement [Doña Imelda]) noted the way national and local politicians seized the
opportunity to advance their own agenda. Community leaders at a lakeside relocation site
observed that when high-ranking government officials came to distribute relief goods, they just
took pictures. “…[They] just used the people.” A female resident of an inf ormal settlement waslikewise critical of a local politician’s staff who asked for residents’ precinct number before
distributing rice gruel. She asked if it was necessary to “…ascertain if we are voters from his
district before help is extended to us.”
In KV1, the distribution of relief goods by the municipal LGU highlighted the political divide. A
community leader confirmed the residents’ view that they were unable to receive LGU
assistance because their block leader was allied with the suspended local chief executive.
Box 17: The Filipino as aid recipient
Ang Pilipino ang pinakamahirap i-organize sa oras ng
sabayang delubyo sa bigayan ng relief goods.
Nabigyan mo na lahat, meron pa rin talagang
masasabi at ‘yun naman ay hindi namin inaalis sa
kanila. Hindi naman kasi rin halos lahat nabigyan.
Pag may dumating rin naman kasi ang NGO,
example , ang dala lang naman nila ay 100 pieces na
relief goods. E, sa dami ng tao, mahigit isang libo ang
apektadong pamilya, isang daang piraso lang. (TheFilipinos are the most difficult to organize at a time of
massive catastrophe in the distribution of relief
goods. Those who got something still had somethingto negative to say. Not everyone was given. And wedon’t take that away from them *people complaining
for not having received anything]. If an NGO comes,
for example, they just bring 100 pieces of relief goods
while more than 1,000 families were affected.) – JUN, 40 YEARS OLD, SV4
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 38/76
30
Further confirmation of this perception was given by a PO leader who reported that relief goods
bearing the names of donors (a presidential candidate and a TV network) were replaced by the
name of the LGU official who replaced the suspended local chief executive.
Assistance to the six affected communities came largely from civil society organizations. NGO-
PO collaboration borne out of many land tenure/housing fora was used as a mechanism for
facilitating relief efforts in five of the visited sites. As they had good knowledge of their
community composition, including the number of families/households and the composition of each household, the leaders of HOAs and neighborhood associations, mostly women, assumed
the lead role in distributing relief goods, drawing on their own contacts or networks (Table 7).
To systematize the distribution process, each purok or cluster leader was made responsible for
his or her own cluster, identifying the most affected households and distributing ticket stubs
and relief goods. Research participants perceived the HOA-led relief operations Camacho Phase
II and KV1 to be the most organized. In Camacho Phase II, PO leaders adopted the “stub system”
for distributing relief goods, in coordination with GK, to ensure an orderly and equal
distribution. In addition, they made themselves accountable for the implementation of Tzu Chi
Foundation’s cash for work scheme. Any able-bodied family member could join by registering
his or her name with the purok leader. This program involved entrusting a large amount of
money to the alley leaders, who would disburse the payments to the volunteers. No irregularity
was noted in the handling of payments by alley leaders.
Table 7: Forms of government assistance
SiteCategory of
assistanceBarangay
City/
Municipality
Other
government
agencies
Politicians
Doña Imelda Rescue Made “simple”
public announce-
ments
Relief Coordinated with
community
leaders in
administering
relief operations
Administered
relief operations
Distributed relief
goods (DSWD)
Distributed relief
goods
Sen. Manny Villar
Sen. Loren
Legarda
Sen. Mar Roxas
Rep. Nanette Daza
Mayor Sonny
Belmonte
Recovery Launched TUPAD
West Bank,
Floodway,
Maybunga
Rescue Went around
the community
to warn people
to evacuate;
helped
evacuatepeople and
belongings
property from
flooded homes
(tanod )
Provided L300
vans to
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 39/76
31
SiteCategory of
assistanceBarangay
City/
Municipality
Other
government
agencies
Politicians
transport
people
Mobilized the
Fire and Rescue
Response TeamRelief Coordinated with
the LGU and, in
some cases,
directly managed
the distribution of
relief goods
Coordinated with
SAMAKAPA (PO)
and mobilized the
Pasig Security
Guards, Pasig
Health Aides, and
CIDSS volunteers
to distribute relief
items and
prepare foods for
evacuees
Recovery
Camacho Phase II,
Nangka
Rescue
Relief Gave out grocery
items
Gave out grocery
items, used
clothes, footwear
(shoes and
slippers), cooked
food, and
medicine for
leptospirosis
Distributed relief
goods or cooked
food
Rep. de Guzman
Mayor Marides
Fernando
Vice Mayor
Andres
Councilor Boy
Ponce
Tañong barangay
captainRecovery Fielded trucks/
payloader for
clearing
operations
KV1, San Jose,
Rodriguez
Rescue
Relief Assessed storm
victims (did
ocular visit,
listed number of
affected
households)
Coordinated
with
government
offices and
private sectors
for relief
assistance
Helped in the
repacking and
distribution of
relief goods (LGU-
organized Batang
Montalban
Volunteers)
Assessed
affected
families (NHA)
Distributed
grocery items
Distribute relief
goods or cooked
food
Sen. Noynoy
Aquino
Sen. Mar Roxas
Sen. Manny Villar
Recovery
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 40/76
32
SiteCategory of
assistanceBarangay
City/
Municipality
Other
government
agencies
Politicians
Malaban, Binan Rescue Announced the
impending
flooding using a
megaphone
(kagawad )Relief Distributed relief
cards/tickets and
relief goods from
DSWD and DO)
Conducted
medical missions,
in partnership
with the BHS and
BHWs
Recovery Distributed
bamboo poles to
construct
makeshift
bridges
(barangay
officials)
Helped partnerNGOs and
community
leaders in relief
goods
distribution
Implemented
garbage collection
and sanitation
activities
Provided medical
assistance
Assisted in the
cleanup
initiated by an
NGO
SV4, Caingin/
Pooc, Sta Rosa
Rescue
Relief Escorted
government agencies and
politicians to
SV4
Assessed the
condition of SV4
residents
(barangay
captain from
Pooc)
Gave out
grocery items,blankets, and
mats
Conducted
medicalmission
Distributed relief
goods and tents; put up portable toilets
Makati City Myor
Jejomar Binay
Sec. Joey Lina
Sen. Manny Villar
Vice President
Noli de Castro
with NHA
Former LGU
officials of
relocatees from
Taguig City and
Barangay DilaRecovery
In KV1, the Action Group was considered the most active in facilitating rescue, relief and
rehabilitation efforts. After the storm, they instituted a scheme for assessing/validating affected
households and families and distributing relief goods. Its members prepared the list of
households most affected by the storm by conducting interviews and visits. They set up a
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 41/76
33
system of ID cards for relief distribution, volunteer orientation, and documentation. In the other
informal settlement sites, community leaders likewise took charge of handing out relief goods.
The same NGO-PO network scheme was observed in the two other informal settlements in Doña
Imelda and Malaban. In the latter, external groups such as Open Heart Foundation, Seventh-Day
Adventist, and COM/Ateneo de Manila University linked up with their respective contacts to
coordinate the distribution of relief goods.
The main role played by barangay officials was coordinating relief efforts of city/municipalLGUs, national government agencies, politicians, and other groups (see table 7). In Doña Imelda,
which covered many informal communities, barangay officials worked closely with the
neighborhood associations in the barangay-led relief operations. In the other informal
settlements of Malaban, their role was to mobilize affected residents to avail themselves of
health services provided onsite in the different zones on different dates by the Department of
Health (DOH), Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC), Save the Children International, Care
International, and Australian Aid International – Disaster Assessment and Response Team
(AAI–DART). They also assisted in the cleanup drive initiated by Save the Children International
as part of its relief and rehabilitation program. Together with teachers and barangay health
workers, they gave out tickets to the residents to facilitate the distribution of relief goods from
the municipal social welfare and development office and DOH. They also coordinated the relief
operations of external assisting groups, such as Perpetual College, De La Salle University, ABS-CBN Foundation, and Save the Children International. Some religious groups also gave out relief
goods, albeit in smaller quantities.
Except in one of the informal settlements visited (Maybunga), at least one national government
agency was seen providing relief response to the affected communities. These agencies
included: (i) DSWD, who provided relief goods to selected households in the informal
settlements in Doña Imelda and Malaban; (ii) DOH, who carried out medical missions in the
informal settlement in Malaban and the formal settlement in SV4; (iii) NHA, who distributed
grocery items in the formal settlement in KV1, and carrying out an assessment of affected
families; (iv) and the Metro Manila Development Authority, who provided trucks and
payloaders for the clearing operations in Nangka (Marikina City).
City and municipal LGU assistance that was evident in all affected sites came in the form of
relief goods, medicines, deployment of volunteers, and the one-time cash for work scheme
implemented in Doña Imelda by the Quezon City LGU. In two barangays (Maybunga and San
Jose), leaders received help from volunteers associated with the city/municipal LGU. Alongside
the city LGU, barangay officials in Maybunga coordinated and, in some cases, directly managed
the distribution of relief goods. The Pasig City LGU worked with its partner PO, SAMAKAPA, in
mobilizing volunteers (Pasig Security Guards, Pasig Health Aides, volunteers from the
Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services (CIDSS) to distribute relief goods and
prepare food for evacuees. In San Jose, volunteer youth group (Batang Montalban Volunteers)
associated with the LGU joined in repacking goods for distribution to storm victims in KV1.
Together with PO leaders, LGU officials coordinated with representatives of organizations
providing relief assistance on how to proceed with these activities. They played a role indetermining target areas, number of recipients and in handling requests for volunteers.
Recovery
Beyond coordinating and assisting external groups in relief operations, barangay LGUs do not
appear to have plans or to have initiated activities to provide long-term assistance to affected
families. Nor were the national/local government recovery efforts observed in the communities
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 42/76
34
visited considered adequate. In Malaban, barangay officials reportedly waited for cues from the
municipal and provincial LGUs on how to assist or relocate residents who had lost their homes.
The mayor’s office raffled ownership to one hundred housing units in SV4 in Langkiwa, Biñan.This initiative targeted around 10 percent of the families staying at evacuation centers. The
provincial governor referred to providing temporary shelter (using tents) at the back of the
municipal hall, but at time of fieldwork, no structures were being put in place. In Maybunga, the
LGU took action to clear the WFM danger zones. City personnel marked the post-Ondoy water
level of the Manggahan floodway to identify the area that would be cleared of structures.However, at the time of the visit there was still no official word from government about its
plans for the residents.
There were no definite recovery plans or efforts being initiated or planned by any civil society
group in the affected sites at the time of the rapid assessment. Two exceptions were the
interventions by Save the Childern in Malaban and by the Tzu Chi Foundation in Camacho Phase
II. The recovery plan of Save the Children International consisted of the distribution of relief
goods, conducting medical missions, garbage collection, sanitation, and the establishment of a
preschool education program and a day care center. Except the last two activities, which are
long term in nature, the organization has implemented its plan in the community. Barangay
officials assisted in the cleanup, but residents did not participate actively. The focus of the Tzu
Chi Foundation recovery intervention was the cash for work program described above.
Resettlement
The damages caused by Ondoy forced the government to confront the relocation issue of
informal settlers, many of whom are already aware of government resettlements plans and
concerned about the conflicting information received. Three informal communities in
Maybunga (Pasig City), Doña Imelda (Quezon City), and Malaban (Biñan, Laguna) are expected
to be relocated. Maybunga (Pasig) and Doña Imelda (Quezon City) residents have long been
aware of government plans to resettle them. In Doña Imelda, notices to evict informal settlers
along the riverbanks were given before Ondoy. In Maybunga, the informal settlers’ awareness of
the various government options appeared inadequate to the research team, primarily because
there has been no formal dissemination of information and consultations with the people. In allcases, the renters are excluded from discussions and coverage of relocation program. They are
not aware of the options for securing land and housing tenure. When asked about their
willingness to relocate, all participants in the discussions indicated no interest in leaving their
present locations as they did not want to be displaced from their sources of livelihood and
employment and the social networks they have established over the course of their stay in the
community. Children, they say, would be taken away from the comfort zones of schools and
friends. Poor conditions in known relocation areas further lessen their desire to move. The
threat of eviction has become very real for residents in Maybunga (Pasig), who are pushing for
on-site development. The situation of informal settlers in Doña Imelda appears to be somewhat
different with tentative plans for relocation within the same barangay being discussed. 11 Some
relocation activities have started to take place with more than a thousand informal settlers from
Marikina City being relocated to Southville 5A in Sta. Rosa, Laguna by the Marikina SettlementsOffice during the period of the rapid assessment.12
Conclusions and Recommendations
In both formal and informal resettlement communities, the significant socioeconomic impact
brought about by Ondoy was the loss of resources for small businesses and self-employed
residents. Those most affected were people who relied on small home-based livelihoods
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 43/76
35
(mostly women), as well as those involved in fishing and farming in lakeside communities. This
was accompanied by the increased vulnerability of women, children, elderly, and the sick. The
comparative lens provided by the inclusion of Marikina Heights, does indicate that some
challenges in employment and livelihoods have long persisted in poor urban communities and
seem to have worsened in the last year.
Civil society mobilization and intra-community relationships were vital during the rescue
phase. Barangay officials were unable to respond to community needs largely because theywere attending to their own families. In addition, the assessment indicated that they did not
seem to have received appropriate training in emergency disaster responses. Barangay officials,
and to some extent national authorities, would however play a significant role in the following
phases of relief and immediate recovery.
Ondoy highlighted the general lack of government and community structures for disaster
prevention and rescue and relief. In the aftermath of the storm, there was also little or no
indication in the areas visited that LGUs and communities were putting in place measures to
avert future disasters. Residents in the study sites expressed their desire to participate in and
present their concerns and needs, particularly in what concerns relocation, relief management,
and environmental management. The knowledge of the number and location of the members of
their own community enabled intra-community groups and barangay authorities to organizeaid distribution. To cope more efficiently with the effects of any disaster, this knowledge,
however, should be complemented by demographic and socioeconomic data of affected
communities which would also be useful in rehabilitation efforts and in developing or
improving rescue and relief management systems.
Points specific to organized and linked communities. The level of organization and external
links that a community had were important factors in its subsequent ability to recover from
Ondoy. Camacho Phase II in barangay Nangka (Marikina City) and KV1 in barangay San Jose
(town of Rodriguez), formal resettlement sites, stood out for having received assistance earlier
and in greater quantities from their partners and networks. Camacho II benefited from the
immediate relief assistance of Gawad Kalinga and of Tzu Chi Foundation. GK quickly mobilized
its network of private sector partners, including a telecommunications company and privateuniversities, to deliver relief goods beginning on the day following the storm to its HOA
partners in Camacho Phase II, who then facilitated the distribution over a fifteen-day period.
Many of the respondents think that GK support greatly facilitated the quick recovery of the
community which they claimed was accomplished in two weeks’ time. In barangay San Jose, anumber of donors had direct linkages with POs operating in the community and the barangay
LGU. This included faith-based groups through their local congregations (e.g., Diocese of
Antipolo through the local Parish Social Services), Ateneo de Manila University, De La Salle
University, Japanese Embassy-Christian Aid, the Salvation Army through COM-assisted Action
Group/HOAs, and the “Mango Children’s Home and Papaya School” of Asian Students’ Christian
Foundation. Civil society groups (e.g., private sector, NGO, universities) assisting the urban poor
communities drew upon their own social capital to mobilize resources for rescue and relief.
Politicians and civil society groups tended to favor their own contacts or networks. Assistanceto the four communities (one formal settlement [KV1] and three informal settlements
[Maybunga, Doña Imelda, Malaban]) being assisted by COM was also coursed through partner
POs/HOAs. These associations included Action Group in KV1, various neighborhood
associations in Doña Imelda, WFMNAI and SNKF in Maybunga, and partner POs in Malaban. The
Pasig City LGU coordinated with its PO partner in WFM (SAMAKAPA) in its relief work and
mobilized city volunteers (CIDSS, PSG and PHA volunteers) to receive and distribute the relief
items.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 44/76
36
Thus, there was an overflow of assistance in areas where the communities were organized and
accessible and had close relations with the LGUs and civil society. Those that were difficult to
access and less organized remained mostly unreached, and unorganized (e.g., Southville 4 in
Sta. Rosa City [a government resettlement site with governance issues], Malaban in Biñan,
Laguna). Tensions among neighboring communities which were similarly flooded but whose
needs were addressed with varying degrees of efficiency were, therefore, observed.
Points specific to the control site. Some of the same economic issues faced in the affectedcommunities were also identified in the control site in Marikina Heights. This finding
demonstrates the nature of urban poverty, so whether or not they have been directly affected
by Ondoy, urban poor communities face some of the same challenges. Thus, while employing a
control site allowed some form of comparison between communities not directly affected by
Ondoy and those affected by it, there are limits to the research design’s power of inference. One
cannot neatly categorize life in these communities into “before Ondoy” and “after Ondoy.” Forthe individuals and families in these communities, Ondoy was one in a series of social and
economic “emergencies” that they regularly encounter and which aggravated an alreadydifficult situation.
Insights and Recommendations from Communities
Many residents attributed the flooding to several factors, including the release of water from
dams, poor garbage management, inadequate drainage systems, and the continued cutting of
trees and reclaiming of land to make way for subdivisions. In KV1, quarrying was also
mentioned alongside illegal logging and tree cutting to give way to the construction of
subdivisions and factories. These have also resulted in the narrowing of the river. The same set
of reasons was given in other study sites, whether formal or informal settlements. In SV4,
residents referred to the fact that the low-lying area they occupy used to be a rice field.
However it is now fully cemented which makes it difficult for water to be absorbed. Added to
these are poor garbage disposal practices and lack of proper drainage facilities.
Measures for disaster prevention and preparedness. Residents in the control and affected
sites gave similar proposals to avert another flooding event. Most of these relate to working
with nature and protecting the environment, increasing community awareness of disaster
preparedness and prevention, and improving local capacities to respond to the disaster. To
achieve this, the residents believe there must be active and sustained collaboration between
LGUs, government agencies, civil society and community groups, and residents (Table 8). These
are addressed to government, civil society groups, and to the communities themselves.13
Residents of WFM and Malaban (both informal settlements), SV4 (formal settlement) and
Marikina Heights (the control site) believe it is important to address issues related to
infrastructure. For WFM residents, flooding continues because the Manggahan Floodway and
Laguna de Bay have become shallower due largely to the deforestation of surrounding
mountains. Thus, they suggested dredging the floodway and Laguna de Bay so that these could
hold more water. They also suggested opening up the Napindan Dike to allow water to drain
into Manila Bay. Another proposal put forward was the construction of dikes along the
Manggahan Floodway and stopping the construction of the Laiban Dam. Participants in the
discussion see the latter as destructive to the environment and a potential cause of future
flooding in Quezon and Rizal Provinces. Dredging was similarly recommended (in the case of
Laguna de Bay) by residents of Malaban and Marikina Heights, where the only area that
experienced flooding during Ondoy was a small portion near the creek.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 45/76
37
Table 8: Community recommendations for disaster preparedness and prevention
Specific recommendations Addressed to
Infrastructure
Dredge and clear the floodway and Laguna de Bay
Open water outlet to Manila Baya
Construct dikes along the Manggahan Floodway
Stop the construction of the Laiban DamResettlement/Relocation Programs
Resettle households near creeks, rivers, danger zones
For NHA to reconsider resettlement sites that are at risk and provide
the necessary structures to ensure the safety of relocatees (two-story
or multi-rise buildings instead of one-story housing units)
Institutional/ national
government/LGU
Prepare localized disaster management plans (municipal and
barangay)
Institute an advance/early warning system
Train the disaster-response teams in quick rescue and relief operations
and provide them with the necessary equipment
Conduct continuous information education among residents to
highlight vulnerability to such disaster and to keep them alert and
prevent complacency (including community initiated flood drills) Enforce local ordinances on solid waste management and land use, and
designate areas where building of houses/dwelling units is dangerous
and therefore not allowed.
Barangay, municipal, and
city LGU
Cultivate community discipline particularly on solid waste
management and proper waste disposal
Be prepared for disasters (survival kit (e.g., flashlight, rope, life jacket,
for each household)
Participate in disaster management planning process
Reconstruct/clean drainage system
Recycle waste materials, plant trees
Communities/households
aThe prevalent view in the communities is that while the Napindan Dike protects Manila from flooding, it
also keeps flood water from draining into Manila Bay. Opening outlets to Manila Bay is necessary toaddress the flooding in the Rizal and Laguna areas.
Residents of Malaban, SV4, and Marikina Heights were in favor of clearing areas beside or near
the waterways of structures to “recover the creek” and allow the water to flow. SV4 residents
recommended that the NHA allow the construction of a second floor in their housing units (in
Phase 1) and, together with the community, build a concrete wall at the back of Phase1.
During consultations, residents likewise called on local governments to prepare disaster
management plans with their inputs. Participants in the discussion from Camacho Phase II and
Malaban stressed the importance of an effective and credible early warning system to give
people ample time to evacuate. Communities in Doña Imelda and Camacho Phase II mentioned
the need to form disaster-response teams with the needed know-how and skills. Communities
also recommended that disaster-response teams should have motorized rescue boats, ladders
and materials that may be used as bridges, as well as appropriate communication equipment.
Dona Imelda and Marikina Heights residents suggested that information
dissemination/education activities be conducted among residents to keep them alert and
prevent complacency. It was further suggested that community associations partner with local
governments in conducting flood drills and similar activities. Residents of KV1 and WFM
suggested that local governments strictly enforce ordinances on solid waste management.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 46/76
38
Participants in the discussions held in Malaban recommended that the barangay develop and
implement ordinances on land use, and designate areas where building of houses or dwelling
units is considered dangerous and therefore should not be allowed.
Residents in Marikina Heights, while not directly affected by the floods, mentioned the need for
assistance to enable them to improve their living conditions. This point was similarly raised by
FGD participants in the affected sites who pointed out that the response to Ondoy should take
into account the longer-term needs of communities (i.e, livelihoods). While short-term actions,such as the provision of clothes, temporary jobs, and money, could help them, a steady and
secure job, land tenure, and education would go further (see Box 18). They also called for action
at the level of the barangay through the implementation of regulations concerning
environmental management. The residents pointed to the need to clear the creek of structures
as a case in point. As one of the women interviewed stated: “There would be no need for relief if
there were no floods in the first place.”
Box 18: Arlene’s request for help
Hindi lang relief ‘yung kailangan ng mga nasalanta. Kailangan nila ng as in talagang tulong. Hindi lang nila
kailangan ng pagkain para maka-survive. Kailangan nila ng ng ano, ng tulong talagang tulong. Kailangan
natin ng aksyon para hindi na mangyari ulit yung nangyari sa kanila.” Ngayon kase sila, ‘yung mga nasa taas,sila yung may mga kapangyarihan na gumawa isang proyektong makakatulong sa amin. Akala namin itong
project na to e mas makatulong siya saamin. Hinde, paran...Naiiyak ako. Naawa ako sa sarili ko na dati hindi
kami ganito. Parang, “Ganito na ba talaga ang buhay namin?” Yung gano’n. Kase project nila ito e. ‘Yung
project na ‘yun inaasahan namin na mas makakatulong, pero parang yung project na ‘to mas nakapwewisyo
pa siya. Kase walang trabaho, tapos hirap pa sa buhay, lubog pa sa baha. Dapat na highlight ito e, kasi project
niya. Kailangan dapat gawan ito ng paraan. Hindi e. Pero nung dumaan siya dito, wala lang. Nagbigay lang ng
relief, tapos wala na. Ganon lang. Tanggap naman kase namin . . . na ano na . . . na ano ‘to, na relocation.
Pero h’wag naman sana i -ano na, “O, relocation lang yan. Tinapon kayo dyan, kaya pagtyagaan niyo.” Parang
ang sakit-sakit na, “Hay naku! Bahala kayo sa buhay niyo.” Tinapon na lang kami ng gan un. (We need more
than relief assistance here. We need real help, and not only food, to survive. They [barangay officials] need to
act to prevent this from happening again. At present, those at the top have the power to create projects that
could help us. We thought this *housing+ project would help us. But…it’s like…I want to cry. I pity myself
because our life before *SV4+ was not like this. Is this what our life really is now? This is their *government’s+project. We expected that this would help us; instead, it brought us more trouble. There is no employment.
We are hard-up to start with, and then we got submerged in flood. This should have been highlighted becausethis is his *a high government official’s+ project. Something must be done here. But no. W hen he visited here,
it was just like nothing. Relief goods were just distributed, then nothing more. Just like that. We accept that
this is a relocation area. “Hey, that is just a relocation *area+. You were thrown there, so you endure *the life
there+.” It’s so painful. “You manage on your own.” We were thrown just like that.) – ARLENE, 25, SV4
Improving relief operations. At the onset of an impending disaster, residents of the study
sites believe government institutions, LGUs, civil society groups, the private sector, and the
communities should take immediate action to mitigate impacts (Table 9). For the communities
visited, it was considered important for government and community leaders to carry out onsite
assessments of the affected sites and of those areas, that were most affected. This, together withproper coordination of GO and NGO actions at the community level, was considered crucial in
ensuring that the response or relief reaches all the affected areas, especially those in most need
of assistance. In addition, both formal and informal settlers believe that a proper assessment of
the specific needs of the affected communities, with special attention to the needs of vulnerable
groups (women, elderly, and children) will help better plan relief assistance.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 47/76
39
Table 9: Community recommendations to improve relief operations of various groups
Recommendationsaddressed to
Major tasks/activities
Municipal and barangay
LGUs; community
(HOAs, other local
groups/ organizations )
LGU and purok /cluster leaders to conduct a joint assessment of affected areas to identify
the most affected groups/households/areas. Purok /cluster leaders should be involved,
since they know the conditions of their communities.
Ocular survey
House-to-house visits
Identification and listing of affected areas and groups, including highly vulnerablegroups
Profiling of communities (tagging and mapping)
LGUs, external and
community groups
Coordinate with assisting organizations (LGU, external or community groups) to:
assess specific needs of affected peoples/areas to ensure that relief goods are evenly
distributed;
set up adequately equipped evacuation centers;
consider the type/amount of relief goods needed (for example, during the immediate
emergency phase: food, shelter, healthcare needs/medicines [coughs, colds, asthma,
wounds and fungal infections]); and
implement cash for work schemes and a post-disaster strategy to replace lost income
and expedite the recovery process (cleaning) with the involvement of affected
residents; provide corresponding equipment and materials (boots and cleaning
materials)
External groups Preparations for relief distribution
Set up a systematic relief distribution scheme, including measures for transparency
and accountability
Dissemination of information on relief activities to be conducted
Distribute tickets/stubs to affected households
Prepare logistics (venue for distribution, volunteers, schedule, etc.)
Municipal and barangay
LGUs
Relief distribution
Implement a transparent and equitable relief distribution system and/or other formsof assistance to the residents affected by the calamity
House-to-house distribution through the ticket/stub system. Only community
residents with valid tickets/stubs will be allowed to receive their relief packs.
Community (HOAs,
other local groups/organizations
Ascertain whether the relief goods are being used as intended, and not being sold or
used for gambling.
Summary Recommendations
Communities’ proposals for participatory planning called for effective collaboration between
governments, civil society groups, and POs in disaster preparedness and response. To plan for
better disaster response the following are considered important to support implementation of
community recommendations:
Needs and risk assessment s: Establish a history of past disasters, and collect information
on local organizations involved in disaster management, their resources, and
capabilities, among others.
Aid effort s: Determine the specific needs of vulnerable groups such as women, elderly,
children (e.g., medicines, sanitary pads for women, diapers for infants, underwear for
men, women, and children).
Targeting aid and equity : Establish mechanisms for identifying affected individuals,
geographic areas, and groups including highly vulnerable groups.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 48/76
40
Aid delivery processes: Clarify who will be involved, transparency and accountability
mechanisms, cultural suitability, and establish complaints mechanism.
Following are a summary of the key recommendations drawn from this rapid assessment of the
social impacts of tropical storm Ondoy:
For the national and local government units to review their policies, ordinances,
programs and plans on (1) land use and housing; (2) resettlement, relocation andevacuation; (3) infrastructures along waterways (e.g., dams, lakes, rivers/creeks); and
(4) disaster prevention, rescue, relief and rehabilitation to determine whether or not
these are appropriate for and responsive to social needs and are being implemented or
complied with, and if not, to revise these and enforce their implementation and
compliance.14
For the barangay LGU and HOAs to lead in the development of community-based
disaster preparedness and prevention (including the implementation of construction
and environmental management ordinances), rescue, and relief management programs,
and to link these programs to the wider programs and facilities of the municipal/city
and national government and non-government sectors.
For government and civil society groups to provide training programs that will develop
group values and leadership skills among members of community groups and the
barangay LGU, who will lead in community-based disaster preparedness, prevention,
rescue, and relief management efforts.
For local communities and affected groups to participate actively in the planning of flood
control, waste management, and relocation/resettlement programs, and for the
managers and implementers of such programs to ensure participation that is inclusive
and not just limited to leaders or representatives.
For institutions charged with disaster-related program planning and implementation to
develop a reliable community database to enable programs to address the needs of
communities, especially of children and other highly vulnerable groups, and identify
priority groups and areas.
For agencies planning and implementing relocation of urban poor communities (both in-
city and distant) to make provisions for livelihood and employment opportunities,
education, health and security needs, and basic utilities (e.g., water, electricity,
transportation) that make up for quality living.
For government and civil society groups to provide zero- or low-interest loans to enable
those who lost property and livelihoods in a calamity to restart and to cover basic
household needs as well as house repairs, and psychosocial counseling for the
traumatized.
The findings of the rapid assessment indicate that the transformation of communities – whether
or not in response to disasters – requires two lines of engagement: making existing institutions
better fulfill their functions and enabling different actors and groups to interact with one
another in new ways. The Ondoy experience has highlighted that among poor communities,
some are poorer than others. The poorest of the poor are those without functional barangay or
city LGUs, or HOAs, and are therefore unable to mobilize resources within the community (e.g.,
use of the existing organizational structures in the identification of victims and delivery of relief
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 49/76
41
goods) and outside (e.g., links with various groups providing relief assistance). Addressing the
economic and social needs of affected individuals and communities therefore requires a model
of community organizing that integrates local governments (e.g., barangay or city/municipal),
intra-community groups (e.g., HOAs) and external groups (e.g., private corporations,
universities, philanthropic and social development organizations) to each other. Such an
approach would help to meet the needs of poor communities for livelihoods and improve their
access to social resources.
References
http://www.comultiversity.org.ph/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44&Itemid=61.
Date accessed: 2 December 2009
http://gk1world.com/ aboutus.html. Date accessed: 2 December 2009
http://www3.hlurb.gov.ph/law/FRAMEWORK_FOR_GOVERNANCE.pdf. Date accessed: 10 February
2010.
Lim, Joseph. N.d. “Impact of the Global Financial and Economic Turmoil on the Philippines: National
Responses and Recommendations to Address the Crisis.” Unpublished paper.
Chong Sheau Ching. 2004/ Empowering homemakers to become homepreneurs and e-homemakers
through a gender governance framework. A final research report submitted to Canadian Center for
Health and Safety.eHomemakers/Mothers for Mothers, Kuala Lumpur.
Putnam, Robert. 1993. The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. The American Prospect
13:35–42.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 50/76
42
1 GK or Gawad Kalinga (translated as to “give care”) is a church-based social development program that
follows a community development model. It has been fuelled by a massive army of volunteers and
partners working together in bayanihan (cooperation) to bring about change and restore the dignity of
the poorest of the poor, through community housing programs, as shared in its website:
http://gk1world.com/aboutus.html.
2 Community Organizers Multiversity (COM) is a non-government organization based in Quezon City. As a
CO learning center, it develops, enhances and nurtures capacities of community organizers, people’s
organizations and other development organizations (http://www.comultiversity.org.ph/index.
php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44&Itemid=61).
3 The start of data collection was set for 3 November 2009, after the observance of All Souls’ Day, which is
a Philippine national holiday. Tropical Storm “Santi,” however, delayed the start of data c ollection
activities by a day.
4 In 2000, an open dumpsite located in Area B, Barangay Payatas in Quezon City collapsed due to heavy
rains, resulting in at least 200 confirmed deaths. Families affected by the trash slide were moved to
Kasiglahan Village 1.
5 Action Group is a community-based organization in KV1 composed of men, women and youth organized
to address the various needs of their own community.
6 Balubad used to be a large tract of idle rural land lying on the outskirts of Barangay Nangka in Marikina
City and thus was targeted by the local government as a relocation site for evicted informal communities
around the city.
7 There are five Southville communities in Southern Luzon, numbered from 1 to 5.
8 “5-6” refers to a lending system where lenders charge 20 percent interest on the loan. Those who are
selling merchandise would also require borrowers to buy from them. These range from items that can be
consumed by the borrower’s household to supplies for his/her small business.
9 A homeowners’ association (HOA) is composed of the residents in a given subdivision or housing
structure. It endeavours, among others, to “serve the interest of its members through equity and access in
the decision making process, transparency and accountability, and the promotion of security in their
living areas…, actively cooperate with local government units and national government agencies for the
benefit of the residents, and complement, support and strengthen these units and agencies in providing
vital services to its members and in helping implement local government policies, programs, ordinances
and rules.” http://www3.hlurb.gov.ph/law/FRAMEWORK_FOR_GOVERNANCE.pdf. Date accessed: 10
February 2010.
10 Examples mentioned by FGD participants included women being “stared at” by men, in particular when
“in bath towels” and having to be “watchful at all times for sexual advances.”
11 Residents of Maybunga are fearful they will be relocated and lose their claim to the land awarded them
previously by Presidential Proclamation 1160. Their worries stem from the LGU's post-Ondoy reactions
to President GMA's Directive that informal settlers inundated by flood waters should not be allowed to
return to their riverside locations pending the conduct of a Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Accordingly,
the LGU informed the Maybunga affected group of some 6000 households that their land Proclamation
may be revoked. People are thus very concerned not only that they will lose their already established
entitlements, but also be evicted in the process. They are currently questioning the legal aspects of
revocation. Unlike other riverside victims, informal settlers in Doña Imelda do not fear eviction because
they have started implementing their People's Plan at a relocation site within the same barangay offered
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 51/76
43
by the barangay captain. The Plan brings together the combined efforts of the people's organization, COM
for organizing assistance, Foundation for the Development of the Urban Poor (FDUP) for technical
assistance, Oxfam GB for funding the planning process, and the Institute on Church and Social Issues for
mapping the site. As the near relocation has the approval of the barangay and City Councils and is viewed
as a pilot project drawing on the combined resources of civil society, government, and an external donor,
the 96 vulnerable households formerly residing under the bridge are assured of secure tenure and decent
housing, and thus optimistic about remaining.The PO and COM are currently negotiating with GK on the
construction of Medium Rise Buildings as part of the People's Plan, with the occupants furnishing sweat
equity counterparts.
12 As disclosed by a staff of the Marikina Settlements Office.
13 A section of the key informant interview and focus group discussion guides were designed to collect
the views of residents, PO and barangay officials on the causes of flooding and how to avert future
disasters. These various recommendations were then validated during the IPC’s presentation of initial
findings to its major research partner, the Community Organizers Multiversity, in November 2009.
14 An example is the Marikina City’s implementation of ordinances and resolutions related to emergency
preparedness and disaster management (e.g., easement from Nangka (Marikina) River, flood control
project, site improvement, dike construction) as mentioned by the community members themselves.
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 52/76
44
Annex A - NGO-PO Research Partners
Name Barangay/city Organization
Abas, Moslemin Central, Quezon City COM
Almodovar, Jacinto Caingin, Sta. Rosa, Laguna CFARMC
Amon, Jessica Central, Quezon City COM
Arevalo, Belen Malaban, Biñan, Laguna Sulong Kababaihan ng Malaban
Barrinuevo, Rodolfo Caingin, Sta. Rosa, Laguna CFARMC
Bonagua, Kreeger Central, Quezon City COM
Chua, Jonathan Central, Quezon City COM
Cosino, Leonilo Maybunga, Pasig City WFMNAI, ULAP Pasig
Dinglasa, Elena Kasiglahan Village 1, Rodriguez, Rizal HOA I-B
Francisco, Ma. Any Maybunga, Pasig City SNKF, WFMNAI, ULAP Pasig
Gipit, Rodrigo Malaban, Biñan, Laguna PINAGPALA
Labrador, Onizimo Camacho, Nangka, Marikina City Pagkakaisa
Miranda, Ricardo Kasiglahan Village 1, Rodriguez, Rizal HOA I-C
Morales, Jose Doña Imelda, Quezon City RASYC, ULAP-Doña Imelda
Morante, Vicky Maybunga, Pasig City ULAP Pasig
Padida, Sancha Malaban, Biñan, Laguna Lingap ng Kababaihan ng Ilaya, Malaban
Quindap, Nelda Maybunga, Pasig City WFMNAI, ULAP Pasig
Real, Roy San Isidro, Rodriguez, Rizal HOA
Saberon, Teresita Doña Imelda, Quezon City RASYC, ULAP-Doña Imelda
Serrano, Vangie Kasiglahan Village 1, Rodriguez, Rizal Action Group
Torres, Sally Kasiglahan Village 1, Rodriguez, Rizal HOA 1-D
Veslinos, Candida Caingin, Sta. Rosa, Laguna SAMAKA
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 53/76
45
Annex B – Research Questions
Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)
1. FGD Guid e for Women’s Group
Data Set Guide Questions
Personal Experience of Ondoy/Flooding
1. Where were you when Ondoy hit?/What were you doing at the height of typhoon Ondoy?
2. How did you manage to keep your family safe during Ondoy? What kind of information did you
receive on the storm before it hit? (Who provided this information? How much advance warning did
you get?)3. How is your family now? Where is everyone now? How did you manage to keep everyone together?
Did you have to move temporarily? How are you able to care for your children/elderly
relatives/disabled members now? Who among the family/household was most affected? Why?4. (If moved temporarily) When did you return home? What made you decide to return? Who in your
family has now returned home? Are there still members of your family in temporary
accommodation? Do you expect them to return? When? Under what circumstances?5. What caused the flooding in your area?
Livelihood and Socioeconomic Adaptations
Employment/livelihood(Priority questions in bold
font)
1. What are the main changes in employment and livelihoodopportunities of men and women (and children, youth, and elderly) in
the community since Ondoy?
a. What were the sources of living here in your area before Ondoy?
b. What were the sources of income after Ondoy? Are these still thesame sources of income or have they changed? What were these
changes?
c. Are children/youth (male and female) moving out of the community
or relocating to find work? Where do they go and why? What new
types of work do they take up?d. Did people need to learn new skills for these new kinds of work or
new occupations?2. What employment or livelihood opportunities (inside or outside the
community) were lost/gained by men and women
(children/youth/elderly) because of Ondoy?
a. What economic resources and opportunities remain or are now
present for women? Men? Male/female youth, male/female
children, male/female elderly?
b. What markets were opened? Lost?
c. Whose economic activities gained or lost access to markets?
d. What new types of work/livelihood have men, women, male/female
youth/children, elderly taken up? What are the conditions of work
for each of these groups?
3. Were there changes in your daily income? Your monthly income? Are
there other sources of income?
a. Who manages and decides on how to spend the income?
b. What are the usual/regular budget items or expenses (food,
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 54/76
46
Data Set Guide Questions
medicine, cigarettes)?
c. Which items are not budgeted/allotted? Or which budget items
were lessened, e.g., school allowance?4. Have there been changes in the division of domestic chores (cooking,
taking care of children/elderly/sick, washing clothes, fetching water)
among men, women, male children/youth, female children/youth as aresult of flooding or change in livelihood? In what ways?
5. With these changes in economic activities, how are the needs of
children, pregnant women/women who had just given birth, elderly
taken cared of?
6. In what ways were the livelihoods/income sources of [families of]vulnerable groups in the community (such as women, children, persons
with disabilities, elderly, etc.) affected by Ondoy?
a. What were the sources of living here in your area before Ondoy?b. What were the sources of income after Ondoy? Are these still the
same sources of income or have they changed? What were these
changes?
Coping strategies/mechanisms(Priority questions in bold
font)
1. What strategies do HHs/families adopt in order to cope with thedisruptions in economic activities? By whom (women, men, children,youth, elderly)? What are entailed of them?
a. Did you receive government assistance such as cash/food for work?
b. Were there assisting groups (such as the church, private sector,
NGO/civil society, schools, OFWs, etc) who helped you? What typesof assistance did you receive from what group/organization?
c. To whom/To which group (in the community/family/household) was
the assistance or help directed to? Were female-headed households
given equal attention and help?
d. Did you receive help from your own family/relatives? Which
relatives and what types of help did they give? To those who receive
remittances (local or abroad), how much did they send before and
after Ondoy (US$ of PhP)?
2. Are there any particular groups (women, men, children, elderly, inside
or outside the area, etc.) unable to access any external support (formal
and informal)? How are they (indicate which group) coping?
3. How did you finance your business/livelihood before Ondoy? After
Ondoy?
a. How easy/difficult is it to secure business loan now after Ondoy?
What are the sources of credit/loan (formal and informal)?
b. Who (male, female) is securing, using, and/or deciding on the use of the loan?
4. Are households getting into debt to deal with loss of assets or income?
a. How much debt did they have before and after Ondoy?
b. Who among the community members have the most debt and why?c. Who do they owe to? Are these the same lenders as before Ondoy?
Have there been any changes to interest rates since Ondoy?
d. Who (male/female) are getting into debt or paying the debt?
e. How is the loan spent by whom?
5. Who is/are the most vulnerable group/s in the community? Why?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 55/76
47
Data Set Guide Questions
Among the vulnerable groups in the community, have there been
changes in daily habits, such as changes in school, work, eating habits?
a. Are there changes in schooling patterns/habits? (e.g., children beingremoved from school to work)
b. Are there changes in work patterns? (e.g., doing more work/risky
work than before)c. Are there changes in eating habits (e.g., the number of meals per
day, type of meals served)
6. What are the additional tasks/work of families/HHs after Ondoy? Who
(female, male, children, youth, elderly) is assuming or doing the
additional task/work (indicate the particular type of task/work?
7. Are there cases/has there been a change in the number of human
trafficking cases, particularly of women and children after Ondoy?
Social Relations and Cohesion
Displacement
(Priority questions in bold
font)
1. Has there been an increase (or reduction) in HH size since Ondoy? Are
children (boys, girls) being sent to relatives/provinces? Or, Are relatives(males/females, young/old) arriving from the province/other areas inManila to help?
2. Are some people from this community still living elsewhere (temporary
shelter, evacuation center)?
3. Why did families decide to return to the neighborhood?
What made them decide to relocate? (probe for temporary and
permanent relocation)
What made them decide to evacuate or remain in the area?
4. Are there relocation/resettlement options offered by the government?
What are these? How did you know of these programs?Changes in gender and
intergenerational relations
(Priority questions in bold
font)
1. What are the changes in household roles and outside work roles since
Ondoy? What are the new tasks or roles of women? Men? Children?
Youth? Elderly?
2. Have men/women taken over particular duties from women/men in
some cases?
3. Have women (and the male/female youth/children) become moreactive in decision making or in group meetings in the community?
4. What did male youth think/feel about themselves after Ondoy? What
did female youth think/feel about themselves after Ondoy? What did
male youth think/feel about female youth after Ondoy? What didfemale youth think/feel about male youth after Ondoy?
5.
Did the additional burden and difficulties result to violence on women?Resulted to abuses on children and youth?
Social support networks,
family-based, community-based or otherwise
(Priority questions in bold
1. What forms of support or assistance have male/female children and
youth received from family members, relatives, neighbors, community,external groups since Ondoy?
a. What are strategies for accessing/securing support/aid?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 56/76
48
Data Set Guide Questions
font) b. What are the roles of men, women, children, youth, elderly in
securing support/aid?
Prepare 2 matrices: [a] assistance received from within community, and[b] assistance from external groups]
2. Are people (women, men, children/male/female youth/children,
elderly) in the neighborhood/community more participative now sinceOndoy? In what ways are they helping each other? Who is helpingwho?
3. Do people (men, women, children/male/female youth/children,
elderly) in the community feel more/less secure since Ondoy, when
physical facilities such as homes, lighting, roads were destroyed? Whatforms of risks/dangers are different groups exposed to?
4. Have problems or tensions arisen in the neighborhood, perhaps in
terms of access to community resources/facilities (e.g.,water pump) forreconstruction? Which among men, women, leaders, those who are
living inside or outside the area) has access or control over the
resource/facility?
Impressions on quality of life in the evacuationcenter: food service/
ration; health, sanitation,
illness, grooming
(Priority questions in boldfont)
1. How were/are the living conditions (for women, men, children, etc.) inthe evacuation site? What basic services (water, light, health) werepresent/missing in the site?
2. What are the specific needs of women, men, male/female
youth/children, elderly etc.?
a. Were there specific needs of women, children and elderlyneglected or addressed at the evacuation centers?
b. How addressed? By whom? (or) Why neglected?
Local Governance
3. What are your recommendations to improve the living conditions for
men, women, children, elderly in evacuation sites?
Relief and recovery
response
(Priority questions in bold
font)
1. What institutions or groups within or outside of the community
(formal and informal) responded to the emergency?
For each group,
a. What were the main activities undertaken by each group
immediately/days after Ondoy?
b. How was the relief response implemented?
c. How quickly did they mobilize people? How mobilized?
Prepare matrix indicating name of group, activities undertaken, how
implemented, how mobilized.2. How did the barangay LGU manage aid/relief received?
a. How did the barangay identify aid recipients?
b. Which groups/individuals in the community benefited? Why them
in particular?
c. What problems, complaints, issues were encountered in identifyingaid recipients, distributing relief, etc? How were these managed?
3. Was the response/assistance from [type of group] effective,
appropriate, sufficient, immediate, and equitable? Why? (Were theregroups which received more support, or received support faster?)
What concerns or issues about the relief or assistance provided were
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 57/76
49
Data Set Guide Questions
raised by the community?
4. Were there specific needs of women, men children and elderly that
were neglected or addressed by the relief operations?a. How/who identified/asserted the needs?
b. How addressed? By whom? (or) Why neglected?
Community contributions
to relief and recovery
response(Priority questions in bold
font)
1. Did the community participate in the relief and recovery response?
a. Who/which groups in the community were most involved? Why?
b. How were they involved?c. What facilitated the involvement of which group?
d. What constrained the involvement of which group?
Prepare matrix.
2. What are your recommendations to improve relief and recoveryresponse by GO? by civil society groups?
3. What are the immediate needs of men, women, male/female
youth/children/elderly?
4. What can the community contribute to the relief and response effort?Who (women, men, male/female youth/children, etc.) could join and
what would be the role of each one/group?Role of civil society in
responding to Ondoy(Priority questions in bold
font)
1. Who were the informal leaders/groups, or civil society or community-
based organisations that actively participated in the relief/earlyrecovery?
For each group:
a. What were the main activities undertaken?
b. How quickly were they able to mobilize?
c. Are they specific to certain neighborhoods?
d. Do they have links across neighborhoods? Have they drawn on
these in the response to Ondoy? For example: Did they provide
assistance directly (distribution of relief goods) and/or did they actas intermediaries between local government and the community?
Prepare matrix.2. How were men, women, male/female youth/children, etc. involved in
these community mobilizations?
3. How effective and appropriate (for women, men, male/female
youth/children, rich, poor, etc.) was the relief/recovery response?
Community participation
and social accountability (inresettlement sites)
Community participation and social accountability
1. How was the decision made to move? Who chose this particular site?Was this a family/community decision or barangay/municipality
decision? What factors influenced the decision? Because there is space
for new housing? Because basic services are available? Because people
are able to pursue same livelihoods as before? Other considerations?Were there differences in the factors considered by women and men?
Whose interests (men, women, male/female youth/children, etc.) wereprioritized?2. What are the living conditions in this site? Provide a brief description of
basic services available and housing conditions. What is missing and
what needs improvement so that life can return to normal? (Most
pressing needs/concerns of the community (and specific groups
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 58/76
50
Data Set Guide Questions
therein ) and how might these differ from those in other sites)
3. How do communities get information of the
resettlement/reconstruction process? (Who are targeted as recipientsof the information?) Who is their main interlocutor? Have they
(women, men, etc.) been consulted on their future needs in the post-
disaster phase? What is their role and what are their linkages to localgovernment?
4. Are there active CBOsin these sites? Who are their members? Leaders?
Are vulnerable groups within the community able to participate?
(why/why not? What would help them participate more actively?)
2. FGD Guide for Livelihoods Group
Data Set Guide Questions
Personalexperience of
Ondoy/flooding
1. Where were you when Ondoy hit?/What were you doing at the height of typhoonOndoy?
2.
How did you manage to keep your family safe during Ondoy? What kind of information did you receive on the storm before it hit? (Who provided this
information? How much advance warning did you get?)
3. How is your family now? Where is everyone now? How did you manage to keep
everyone together? Did you have to move temporarily? How are you able to care
for your children/elderly relatives/disabled members now? Who among the
family/household was most affected? Why?
4. Did you have to move temporarily? When did you return home? What made you
decide to return? Who in your family has now returned home? Are there still
members of your family in temporary accommodation? Do you expect them toreturn? When? Under what circumstances?
5. What caused the flooding in your area?
Livelihood and socioeconomic adaptations
Employment/
livelihood
1. What are the main changes in employment and livelihood opportunities of men
and women (and children, youth, and elderly) in the community since Ondoy?
a. What were the sources of living here in your area before Ondoy?b. What were the sources of income after Ondoy? Are these still the same sources
of income or have they changed? What were these changes?
c. Are children/youth (male and female) moving out of the community or
relocating to find work? Where do they go and why? What new types of workdo they take up?
d. Did you need to learn new skills for these new kinds of work or new
occupations?2. What employment or livelihood opportunities (inside or outside the community)
were lost/gained by men and women (children/youth/elderly) because of Ondoy?
a. What economic resources and opportunities remain or are now present forwomen? Men? Male/female youth, male/female children, male/femaleelderly?
b. What markets were opened? Lost?
c. Whose economic activities gained or lost access to markets?
d. What new types of work/livelihood have men, women, male/female
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 59/76
51
Data Set Guide Questions
youth/children, elderly taken up? What are the conditions of work for each of
these groups?
3. Were there changes in your daily income? Your monthly income? Are there othersources of income?
a. Who manages and decides on how to spend the income?
b. What are the usual/regular budget items or expenses (food, medicine,cigarettes)?
c. Which items are not budgeted/allotted? Or which budget items were lessened,
e.g., school allowance?
4. Have there been changes in the division of domestic chores (cooking, taking care
of children/elderly/sick, washing clothes, fetching water) among men, women,
male children/youth, female children/youth as a result of flooding or change inlivelihood? In what ways?
5. With these changes in economic activities, how are the needs of children,
pregnant women/women who had just given birth, elderly taken cared of?
6. In what ways were the livelihoods/income sources of [families of] vulnerablegroups in the community (such as women, children, persons with disabilities,
elderly, etc.) affected by Ondoy?a. What were the sources of living here in your area before Ondoy?b. What were the sources of income after Ondoy? Are these still the same sources
of income or have they changed? What were these changes?
Coping
strategies/
mechanisms
1. What strategies do HHs/families adopt in order to cope with the disruptions in
economic activities? By whom (women, men, children, youth, elderly)? What are
entailed of them?
a. Did we receive government assistance such as cash/food for work?
b. Were there assisting groups (such as the church, private sector, NGO/civil
society, schools, OFWs, etc) who helped you? What types of assistance did you
receive from what group/organization?
c. To whom/To which group (in the community/family/household) was the
assistance or help directed to? Were female-headed households given equalattention and help?
d. Did we receive help from our own family/relatives? Who are these and what
types of help did they give? To those who receive remittances (local or abroad),
how much did they send before and after Ondoy (US$ of PhP)?
2. Are there any particular groups (women, men, children, elderly, those who living
inside and outside the area , etc.) unable to access any external support (formal
and informal)? How are they (indicate which group) coping?
3. How did you finance your business/livelihood before Ondoy? After Ondoy?
a. How easy/difficult is it to secure business loan now after Ondoy? What are thesources of credit/loan?
b. Who (male, female) is securing, using, and/or deciding on the use of the loan?
4. Are households getting into debt to deal with loss of assets or income?
a. How much debt did they have before and after Ondoy?b. Who among the community members have the most debt and why?
c. Who do they owe to? Are these the same lenders as before Ondoy? Have
there been any changes to interest rates since Ondoy?d. Who (male/female) are getting into debt or paying the debt?
e. How is the loan spent by whom?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 60/76
52
Data Set Guide Questions
5. Who is/are the most vulnerable group/s in the community? Why? Among the
vulnerable groups in the community, have there been changes in daily habits,
such as changes in school, work, eating habits?a. Are there changes in schooling patterns/habits? (e.g., children being removed
from school to work)
b. Are there changes in work patterns? (e.g., doing more/risky work than before)c. Are there changes in eating habits (e.g., the number of meals per day, type of
meals served)
6. What are the additional tasks/work of families/HHs after Ondoy? Who (female,
male, children, youth, elderly) is assuming or doing the additional task/work
(indicate the particular type of task/work)?7. Are there cases/has there been a change in the number of human trafficking
cases, particularly of women and children after Ondoy?
Data Set ASK IF THERE IS STILL TIME
Social Relations and Cohesion
Social support
networks,family-based,
community-
based or
otherwise
1. Are people (women, men, children/male/female youth/children, elderly) in the
neighborhood/community more participative now since Ondoy? In what ways arethey helping each other? Who is helping who?
2. Do people (men, women, children/male/female youth/children, elderly) in the
community feel more/less secure since Ondoy, when physical facilities such as
homes, lighting, roads were destroyed? What forms of risks/dangers are different
groups exposed to?
3. Have problems or tensions arisen in the neighborhood, perhaps in terms of
access to community resources/facilities (e.g.,water pump) for reconstruction?
Which among men, women, leaders, those who are living inside and outside the
area) has access or control over the resource/facility?
Local Governance
Relief and
recoveryresponse
1. How did the barangay LGU manage aid/relief received, how did they identify aid
recipients? Which groups/individuals in the community benefited and why themin particular?
2. Was the response/assistance from [type of group] effective, appropriate,
sufficient, immediate, and equitable? Why? (Were there groups which received
more support, or received support faster?) What concerns or issues about the
relief or assistance provided were raised by the community?
Community
contributions to
relief andrecovery
response
1. What are your recommendations to improve relief and recovery response by GO
and civil society groups?
2. What can the community contribute to the relief and response effort? Who(women, men, male/female youth/children, etc.) could join and what would be
the role of each one/group?
Role of civil
society inresponding toOndoy
1. Who were the informal leaders, or civil society or community-based organisations
that actively participated in the relief/early recovery?2. What were the main activities undertaken by civil society groups? How quickly
were they able to mobilize? Are they specific to certain neighborhoods? Do they
have links across neighborhoods? Have they drawn on these in the response to
Ondoy? For example: Did they provide assistance directly (distribution of relief
goods) and/or did they act as intermediaries between local government and the
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 61/76
53
Data Set ASK IF THERE IS STILL TIME
community?
3. How were men, women, male/female youth/children, etc. involved in these
community mobilizations? 4. How effective and appropriate (for women, men, male/female youth/children, rich,
poor, etc.) was the relief/recovery response?
3. FGD Guide for Youth Group
Data Set Guide Questions
Personal Experience of Ondoy/Flooding
1. Where were you when Ondoy hit?/What were you doing at the height of typhoon Ondoy?
2. How did you manage to keep your family safe during Ondoy? What kind of information did youreceive on the storm before it hit? (Who provided this information? How much advance warning did
you get?)
3. How is your family now? Where is everyone now? How did you manage to keep everyone together?
Did you have to move temporarily? How are you able to care for your children/elderly
relatives/disabled members now? Who among the family/household was most affected? Why?4. Did you have to move temporarily? When did you return home? What made you decide to return?
Who in your family has now returned home? Are there still members of your family in temporary
accommodation? Do you expect them to return? When? Under what circumstances?
5. What caused the flooding in your area?
Local Governance
Community
contributions to
relief and recovery
response
1. Did the community (children and youth) participate in the relief and recovery
response?
a. Who/which groups of children/youth in the community were most
involved? Why?
b. How were they involved?
c. What facilitated the involvement of which group?
d. What constrained the involvement of which group?Prepare matrix.
2. What are your recommendations to improve relief and recovery response by
GO? By civil society groups?
3. What are the immediate needs of male/female youth/children?
4. What can children/youth (male/female) contribute to the relief and response
effort? What would be the role of male/female children/youth?
Relief and recovery
response
1. How did the barangay LGU manage aid/relief received?
a. How did the barangay identify aid recipients?b. Which groups/individuals in the community benefited? Why them in
particular?
c. What problems, complaints, issues were encountered in identifying aid
recipients, distributing relief, etc? How were these managed?2. Was the response/assistance from [type of group] effective, appropriate,
sufficient, immediate, and equitable? Why? (Were there groups which
received more support, or received support faster?) What concerns or issues
about the relief or assistance provided were raised by the community?
3. Were there specific needs of women, men, children and elderly that were
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 62/76
54
Data Set Guide Questions
neglected or addressed by the relief operations?
a. How/who identified/asserted the needs?
b. How addressed? By whom? (or) Why neglected?
Role of civil society
in responding toOndoy
1. Who were the informal leaders/groups, or civil society or community-based
organisations that actively participated in the relief/early recovery?For each group:
a. What were the main activities undertaken?
b. How quickly were they able to mobilize?c. Are they specific to certain neighborhoods?
d. Do they have links across neighborhoods? Have they drawn on these in
the response to Ondoy? For example: Did they provide assistance directly
(distribution of relief goods) and/or did they act as intermediariesbetween local government and the community?
Prepare matrix.
2. How were male/female youth/children involved in these community
mobilizations?3. How effective and appropriate (for women, men, male/female
youth/children, rich, poor, etc.) was the relief/recovery response?Social Relations and Cohesion
Displacement 1. Are children (boys, girls) being sent to relatives/provinces? Or, are relatives
(males/females, young/old) arriving from the province/other areas in Manila
to help?2. Are some people (men, women, children, elderly) from this community still
living elsewhere (temporary shelter, evacuation center)?
3. Why did families decide to return to the neighborhood?
What made them decide to relocate? (probe for temporary and permanent
relocation)
What made them decide to evacuate or remain in the area?
What was the most important consideration in making the decision?
Who [man, woman, both] decided for the whole family?How were other members of the household involved in decision making?
4. Are there relocation/resettlement options offered by the government? What
are these? How did you know of these programs?
5. Have relations in the family and the community been affected by
displacement, separation, or migration of families? In what ways?
Changes in gender
and inter-generational
relations
1. What are the new tasks or roles (within/outside home) of male/female
children/youth since Ondoy?2. Have male children/youth taken over particular duties from female
children/youth in some cases? Have female children/youth taken over
particular duties from male children/youth in some cases?
3. Have male/female youth/children become more active in decision making or
in group meetings in the community?4. What did male youth think/feel about themselves after Ondoy? What did
female youth think/feel about themselves after Ondoy? What did male youth
think/feel about female youth after Ondoy? What did female youth think/feelabout male youth after Ondoy?
5. Did the additional burden and difficulties result to violence on women?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 63/76
55
Data Set Guide Questions
Resulted to abuses on children and youth?
Social support
networks, family-
based, community-
based or otherwise
1. What forms of support or assistance have male/female children and youth
received from family members, relatives, neighbors, community, external
groups since Ondoy?
a. What are strategies for accessing/securing support/aid?b. What are the roles of men, women, children, youth, elderly in securing
support/aid?
Prepare 2 matrices: [a] assistance received from within community, and [b]assistance from external groups]
2. Are people (women, men, children/male/female youth/children, elderly) in
the neighborhood/community more participative now since Ondoy? In what
ways are they helping each other? Who is helping who?3. Do people (men, women, children/male/female youth/children, elderly) in
the community feel more/less secure since Ondoy, when physical facilities
such as homes, lighting, roads were destroyed? What forms of risks/dangers
are different groups exposed to?4. Have problems or tensions arisen in the neighborhood, perhaps in terms of
access to community resources/facilities (e.g.,water pump) forreconstruction? Which (among men, women, leaders, inside or outside thearea) has access or control over the resource/facility?
Impressions on
quality of life in the
evacuation center:
food service/ration;
health, sanitation,
illness, grooming
1. How were/are the living conditions (for women, men, children, etc.) in the
evacuation site? What basic services (water, light, health) were
present/missing in the site?
2. What are the specific needs of male/female youth/children in evacuation
centers?
a. Were there specific needs of male/female children and youth neglected or
addressed at the evacuation centers? b.How addressed? By whom? (or)
Why neglected?3. What are your recommendations to improve the living conditions of children
and youth (male/female) in evacuation sites?Data Set ASK IF THERE IS STILL TIME
Livelihood and Socioeconomic Adaptations
Employment/
livelihood
(Priority questions in
bold font)
1. What are the main changes in employment and livelihood opportunities of
children and youth (male and female) in the community since Ondoy?
a. What were the sources of living here in your area before Ondoy?
b. What were the sources of income after Ondoy? Are these still the same
sources of income or have they changed? What were these changes?
c. Are children/youth (male and female) moving out of the community or
relocating to find work? Where do they go and why? What new types of
work do they take up?
d. Did you/young people/people in general need to learn new skills for these
new kinds of work or new occupations?2. What employment or livelihood opportunities (inside or outside the
community) were lost/gained by children/youth because of Ondoy?
a. What economic resources and opportunities remain or are now present
for male/female youth, male/female children?b. What markets were opened? Lost?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 64/76
56
Data Set Guide Questions
c. Whose economic activities gained or lost access to markets?
d. What new types of work/livelihood have male/female youth, male/
female children taken up? What are the conditions of work for each of these groups?
3. Were there changes in your daily income? Your monthly income? Are there
other sources of income?a. Who manages and decides on how to spend the income?b. What are the usual/regular budget items or expenses (food, medicine,
cigarettes)?
c. Which items are not budgeted/allotted? Or which budget items were
lessened, e.g., school allowance?4. Have there been changes in the division of domestic chores (cooking, taking
care of children/elderly/sick, washing clothes, fetching water) among men,
women, male children/youth, female children/youth as a result of flooding orchange in livelihood? In what ways?
5. With these changes in economic activities, how are the needs of children,
pregnant women/women who had just given birth, elderly taken cared of?
Coping strategies/mechanisms (Priorityquestions in bold
font)
1. What strategies do HHs/families adopt in order to cope with thedisruptions in economic activities? By whom (women, men, children,youth, elderly)? What are entailed of them? a. Did you receive government
assistance such as cash/food for work? b. Were there assisting groups
(such as the church, private sector, NGO/civil society, schools, OFWs, etc)
who helped you? What types of assistance did you receive from whatgroup/organization? c. To whom/To which group (in the
community/family/household) was the assistance or help directed to?
Were female-headed households given equal attention and help?
d. Did you receive help from your own family/relatives? Who are these and
what types of help did they give? To those who receive remittances (localor abroad), how much did they send before and after Ondoy (US$ of PhP)?
2. Who is/are the most vulnerable group/s in the community? Why? Among thevulnerable groups in the community, have there been changes in daily habits,
such as changes in school, work, eating habits?
a. Are there changes in schooling patterns/habits? (e.g., children being
removed from school to work)
b. Are there changes in work patterns? (e.g., doing more work than before)
c. Are there changes in eating habits (e.g., the number of meals per day, type
of meals served)
3. What are the additional tasks/work of families/HHs after Ondoy? Who
(female, male, children, youth, elderly) is assuming or doing the additionaltask/work (indicate the particular type of task/work)?
4. Are there cases/has there been a change in the number of human trafficking
cases, particularly of women and children after Ondoy?
Communityparticipation and
social accountability
(in resettlement
sites)
Community participation and social accountability1. How was the decision made to move? Who chose this particular site? Was this
a family/community decision or barangay/municipality decision? What factors
influenced the decision? Because there is space for new housing? Because
basic services are available? Because people are able to pursue same
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 65/76
57
Data Set Guide Questions
livelihoods as before? Other considerations?
Were there differences in the factors considered by women and men?
Whose interests (men, women, male/female youth/children, etc.) wereprioritized?
2. What are the living conditions in this site? Provide a brief description of basic
services available and housing conditions. What is missing and what needsimprovement so that life can return to normal? (Most pressingneeds/concerns of the community (and specific groups therein) and how
might these differ from those in other sites)
3. How do communities get information of the resettlement/reconstruction
process? (Who are targeted as recipients of the information?) Who is theirmain interlocutor? Have they (women, men, etc.) been consulted on their
future needs in the post-disaster phase? What is their role and what are their
linkages to local government?4. Are there active community-based organizations in these sites? Who are their
members? Leaders? Are vulnerable groups within the community able to
participate? (why/why not? What would help them participate more actively?)
4. FGD Guide for Community Leaders Group
Data Set Guide Questions
Personal Experience of Ondoy/Flooding
1. Where were you when Ondoy hit?/What were you doing at the height of typhoon
Ondoy?
2. How did you manage to keep your family safe during Ondoy?
3. How is your family now? Where is everyone now? How did you manage to keep
everyone together? How are you able to care for your children/elderly
relatives/disabled members now? Who among the family/household was most
affected? Why?
4. Did you have to move temporarily? When did you return home? What made youdecide to return? Who in your family has now returned home? Are there still
members of your family in temporary accommodation? Do you
expect them to return? When? Under what circumstances?
5. What caused the flooding in your area?
Local Governance
Displacement 1. Has there been an increase (or reduction) in HH size since Ondoy? Are children(boys, girls) being sent to relatives/provinces? Or, Are relatives (males/females,
young/old) arriving from the province/other areas in Manila to help?
2. Are some people from this community still living elsewhere (temporary shelter,
evacuation center)?3. Why did families decide to return to the neighborhood?
What made them decide to relocate? (probe for temporary and permanentrelocation)What made them decide to evacuate or remain in the area?
What was the most important consideration in making the decision?
Who [man, woman, both] decided for the whole family?
How were other members of the household involved in decision making?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 66/76
58
Data Set Guide Questions
4. Are there relocation/resettlement options offered by the government? What are
these? How did you know of these programs?
5. Have relations in the family and the community been affected by displacement,separation, or migration of families? In what ways?
Relief andrecovery
response
1.
Was the community warned in advance about Ondoy?a. What information was received from whom/what type of information
source/channel?
b. How was the information relayed? Through what channels?c. Who were the target recipients?
2. What institutions or groups within or outside of the community (formal and
informal) responded to the emergency?
For each group,a. What were the main activities undertaken by each group immediately/days
after Ondoy?
b. How was the relief response implemented?
c. How quickly did they mobilize people? How mobilized?Prepare matrix indicating name of group, activities undertaken, how implemented,
how mobilized.3. How did the barangay LGU manage aid/relief received?
a. How did the barangay identify aid recipients?
b. Which groups/individuals in the community benefited? Why them in
particular?
c. What problems, complaints, issues encountered in identifying aid recipients,distributing relief, etc? How were these managed?
4. Was the response/assistance from [type of group] effective, appropriate,
sufficient, immediate, and equitable? Why? (Were there groups which received
more support, or received support faster?) What concerns or issues about the
relief or assistance provided were raised by the community?
5. Were there specific needs of women, men, children and elderly that were
neglected or addressed by the relief operations?
a. How/who identified/asserted the needs?
b. How addressed? By whom? (or) Why neglected?
Community
contributions to
relief and
recovery
response
1. Did the community participate in the relief and recovery response?
a. Who/which groups in the community were most involved? Why?
b. How were they involved?
c. What facilitated the involvement of which group?
d. What constrained the involvement of which group?
Prepare matrix.
2. What are your recommendations to improve relief and recovery response/toavert future disasters by GO? by civil society groups?
3. What are the immediate needs of men, women, male/female
youth/children/elderly?
4. What can the community contribute to the relief and response effort? Who(women, men, male/female youth/children, etc.) could join and what would be
the role of each one/group?
Role of civil
society in
1. Who were the informal leaders/groups, or civil society or community-based
organisations that actively participated in the relief/early recovery?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 67/76
59
Data Set Guide Questions
responding to
Ondoy
For each group:
a. What were the main activities undertaken?
b. How quickly were they able to mobilize?c. Are they specific to certain neighborhoods?
d. Do they have links across neighborhoods? Have they drawn on these in the
response to Ondoy? For example: Did they provide assistance directly(distribution of relief goods) and/or did they act as intermediaries betweenlocal government and the community?
Prepare matrix.
2. How were men, women, male/female youth/children, etc. involved in these
community mobilizations?3. How effective and appropriate (for women, men, male/female youth/children,
rich, poor, etc.) Was the relief/recovery response?
4. What is the relationship of these organizations with local government structures?Has this changed since Ondoy? For example: Is there a history of collaboration
(on what activities?), is this collaboration new (restricted to the relief assistance
after Ondoy?) Is the role one of advocacy, or service delivery (complementing
that of government), etc.?5. How were women, men, male/female youth/children, etc. involved in these
collaborations? In what venues/levels (formal/informal discussions,
barangay/municipal/city levels) were these different groups involved?
ASK IF THERE IS STILL TIME
Social Relations and Cohesion
Social support
networks,
family-based,
community-
based or
otherwise
1. Are people (women, men, children/male/female youth/children, elderly) in the
neighborhood/community more participative now since Ondoy? In what ways are
they helping each other? Who is helping who?
2. Do people (men, women, children/male/female youth/children, elderly) in the
community feel more/less secure since Ondoy, when physical facilities such as
homes, lighting, roads were destroyed? What forms of risks/dangers are different
groups exposed to?3. Have problems or tensions arisen in the neighborhood, perhaps in terms of
access to community resources/facilities (e.g.,water pump) for reconstruction?
Which among men, women, leaders, those who are living inside or outside the
area has access or control over the resource/facility?
Impressions onquality of life in
the evacuation
center: food
service/ration;health,
sanitation,
illness,grooming;
1. How were/are the living conditions (for women, men, children, etc.) in theevacuation site? What basic services (water, light, health) were present/missing in
the site?
2. What are the specific needs of women, men, male/female youth/children, etc.?
a. Were there specific needs of women, children and elderly neglected oraddressed at the evacuation centers?
b. How addressed? By whom? (or) Why neglected?
3. What are your recommendations to improve the living conditions in evacuationsites?
Livelihood and Socioeconomic Adaptations
Copingstrategies/
1. What strategies do HHs/families adopt in order to cope with the disruptions ineconomic activities? By whom (women, men, children, youth, elderly)? What are
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 68/76
60
ASK IF THERE IS STILL TIME
mechanisms entailed of them?
a. Did we receive government assistance such as cash/food for work?
b. Were there assisting groups (such as the church, private sector, NGO/civilsociety, schools, OFWs, etc) who helped you? What types of assistance did you
receive from what group/organization?
c. To whom/To which group (in the community/family/household) was theassistance or help directed to? Were female-headed households given equalattention and help?
d. Did you receive help from your own family/relatives? Which relatives and what
types of help did they give? To those who receive remittances (local or abroad),
how much did they send before and after Ondoy (US$ of PhP)?2. Who is/are the most vulnerable group/s in the community? Why? Among the
vulnerable groups in the community, have there been changes in daily habits, such
as changes in school, work, eating habits?a. Are there changes in schooling patterns/habits? (e.g., children being removed
from school to work)
b. Are there changes in work patterns? (e.g., doing more/risky work than before)
c. Are there changes in eating habits (e.g., the number of meals per day, type of meals served)
Community
participation and
social
accountability (inresettlement
sites)
Community participation and social accountability
1. How was the decision made to move? Who chose this particular site? Was this a
family/community decision or barangay/municipality decision? What factors
influenced the decision? Because there is space for new housing? Because basicservices are available? Because people are able to pursue same livelihoods as
before? Other considerations?
Were there differences in the factors considered by women and men?
Whose interests (men, women, male/female youth/children, etc.) were prioritized?
2. What are the living conditions in this site? Provide a brief description of basicservices available and housing conditions. What is missing and what needs
improvement so that life can return to normal? (Most pressing needs/concerns of the community (and specific groups therein) and how might these differ from
those in other sites)
3. How do communities get information of the resettlement/reconstruction process?
(Who are targeted as recipients of the information?) Who is their main
interlocutor? Have they (women, men, etc.) been consulted on their future needs
in the post-disaster phase? What is their role and what are their linkages to local
government?
4. Are there active community-based organizations in these sites? Who are their
members? Leaders? Are vulnerable groups within the community able toparticipate? (why/why not? What would help them participate more actively?)
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 69/76
61
Key Informant Interviews (KII)
KII Guide for Interviewee from a highly vulnerable group (as indentified by the community)
A. General background information and personal experience of Ondoy
Suggested questions
1. How long have you lived in this community?
How did you come to live in this community?
2. Where were you when Ondoy hit? How did youmanage to keep safe during the typhoon?
3. How is your family? Where is everyone at the
moment?
Probing questions (additional information)
1. Where are you (parents/grand-parents) originally
from? What was it about this neighborhood that
made you decide to settle here (rather than
somewhere else?)
2. What kind of information did you receive on the
storm before it hit? (Who provided this
information? How much advance warning did youget?)
3. How did you manage to keep everyone together?How are you able to care for your
children/elderly relatives/disabled members
now?
4. Did you have to move temporarily? When did
you return home? What made you decide to
return? Who in your family has now returned
home? Are there still members of your family in
temporary accommodations? Do you expect
them to return? When? Under what
circumstances?
B. Livelihoods and coping strategiesSuggested questions
1. How damaged was your house? Your
possessions?
2. Can you tell me what a typical “work week” was
like for you before Ondoy? What about now?
3. How do you feel about the changes since
Ondoy?
4. What kind of support have you received fromgovernment since Ondoy? (national government
or local government)
5. What about NGOs or other groups (church)?
What kind of help have you received from
Probing questions (additional information)
1. In what condition is your house now? Can you
describe for me the main (valuable) items that
were damaged during the floods? What were you
able to recover from your possessions?
2. How far away from home do you go to find work?
(Did you/do you do any work from home?) Who
employs you? How much do you earn on average?What about other members of the family? (Before
and after Ondoy)
3. Is your/family’s earning sufficient for your basic
expenses? What kinds of expenses are you
adjusting/reducing? Does anyone else in your
family work? Who works? What kind of work do
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 70/76
62
them?
6. Who else has been helping you to cope? Can
you tell what kind of help you are receiving from
your family/friends for example?
7. What else are you/the family doing to deal withthe situation since Ondoy?
they do? How about the children? Are they
helping? In what way?
4. Have you thought about leaving this area? If yes,
where would you think of going? What type of
work would you do if you moved (would you beable to continue with your existing work/job?)
If the answer is yes - What do you think about thehelp you have received from government/from
other groups?
Or
If the answer is no – What makes it difficult for youto receive help?
If some help from family is being received -Do you have relatives living/working abroad? Do
they usually send you money? How much? How
much since Ondoy?
Did you get some help from friends abroad?
For example – Are you able to borrow? How much
(did you borrow before?) For what? From whom?
Are you able to make your payments?
If they had loans/were in debt before Ondoy: Were
you in debt at the time Ondoy struck? From whom?
Are you able to continue payments? What new
arrangements have been made regarding payments?
Have other members of the family taken on morework? Who and what kind of work are they doing?
How about children, how are they helping?
C. Social relations and cohesion (looking at the participation of vulnerable groups in community activities)
Suggested questions
1. Could you give me an example of activities
people in this neighborhood have been doingtogether since Ondoy?
Or Could you tell me about the activities thecommunity associations have been doing in the
last two weeks. Identify the associations. Clarify
which did what.
Or When was the last time the neighborhood did
something together as a group? Could you
Probing questions (additional information)
1. What about before the floods? What kinds of
things did people used to do together?
What has changed/not changed in the way
neighbors behave towards each other since thefloods?
Have you participated in these activities? What
was your role? Or What made you participate/not
participate? What would have helped you to
participate?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 71/76
63
describe it for me?
2. What is the security situation like since Ondoy?
Or How do you feel about the safety of your
family since Ondoy?
2. What do you think contributed to make the
neighborhood safer/less safe?
D. Local Governance and Social Accountability
Suggested questions
1. How/Was the local government before Ondoy
able to deliver basic services to the community?
If yes, how? How did it respond during/after the
floods?
2. What is your relationship like with the local
government? Did you approach barangay
leaders for assistance? Other government
leaders and offices? If yes, who/what offices?
what was their response? If not, why not?
3. How do you feel about the way in which
support was distributed after the floods? (bylocal government/by civil society organizations)
Probing questions (additional information)
1. What structures in the barangay are in place to
respond to disaster (e.g., barangay
disaster/emergency response team), to maintain
security, provide health services, mediate conflicts
– structures which are needed after the floods?
2. What major activities were implemented by the
barangay to respond to the disaster?
3. What kind of information did you receive about
the help being provided?
Did some groups receive more/less support thanothers? If yes – which ones? Why do you think
they received more/less help?
Did you have any specific complaints? How did youhandle that (whom did you complain to? What
happened as a result?)
E. Concluding remarks and closing1. How can the local government support be improved?
2. How can the support provided by NGOs be improved?
3. What are your most pressing needs to get your life back to normal now? How can government/NGOs
help?
4. Are you aware of the government’s resettlement schemes? What information do you have about them
(from whom?)? What do you think about these schemes?
KII guide for Community Leader (Community Association or People’s Organization)
A. General background information and personal experience of Ondoy
Suggested questions
1. How long have you lived in (name of barangay)?
How did you come to live in this community?
Probing questions (additional information)
1. Where are you (parents/grand-parents) originally
from? What was it about this neighborhood that
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 72/76
64
2. Where were you when Ondoy hit? How did you
manage to keep safe during the typhoon?
3. How is your family? Where is everyone at the
moment?
made you decide to settle here (rather than
somewhere else?)
2. What kind of information did you receive on the
storm before it hit? (Who provided this
information? How much advance warning did you
get?)
3. How did you manage to keep everyone together?
How are you able to care for yourchildren/elderly relatives/disabled members
now?
4. Did you have to move temporarily? When did youreturn home? What made you decide to return?
Who in your family has now returned home? Are
there still members of your family in temporaryaccommodations? Do you expect them to return?
When? Under what circumstances?
B. Social relations and cohesion (looking at the participation of vulnerable groups in community activities)
Suggested questions
1. Could you give me an example of activities
people in this neighborhood have been doingtogether since Ondoy?
Or Could you tell me about the activities the
community associations have been doing in thelast two weeks. Identify the associations. Clarify
which organizations did what activities.
Or When was the last time the neighborhood did
something together as a group? Could you
describe it for me?
2. What is the security situation like since Ondoy?
Or How do you feel about the safety of your
family since Ondoy?
3. What are the causes of the disaster from the
point of view of the community and leaders?
What steps has the barangay taken to avertfuture disasters?
Probing questions (additional information)
1. What about before the floods? What kinds of
things did people used to do together?
What has changed/not changed in the way
neighbors behave towards one another since the
floods?
What are the groups that are more active inthese activities?
What are the groups that have not participated?
How do you explain these differences?
2. What do you think contributed to make the
neighborhood safer/less safe?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 73/76
65
C. Local Governance and Social Accountability
Suggested questions
1. How do you feel about the way in which support
was distributed after the floods? (by local
government/by civil society organizations)
Did you work closely with the barangay
captain/barangay councilor? Mayor’s office? The
governor’s office? National government offices
before Ondoy? Which ones and in what ways? If
not, why not?
2. What were the groups in the community that
participated in the distribution of support? What
was their role? Were there any differences
between men and women in distribution of support?
3. How do you feel about the collaboration/What is
your relationship with local government like?With other civil society organizations, local
associations, church groups, others?
Probing questions (additional information)
1. What kind of information did you provide about
the post-flood assistance? What kind of
information did you receive from localgovernment on the post-flood assistance?
What about early warning information? What
kind of information did you/communitiesreceive? From whom?
Before Ondoy, did you have any training in
disaster management or prevention? If yes, from
whom? Was it useful? If yes, in what ways? If not,
why not?
2. Did you receive support from groups outside the
community? Who were these groups? How did
they help?
Did some groups receive more/less support than
others? If yes – which ones? Why do you think
they received more/less help?
Did you have any specific complaints? How did
you handle that complaint (who did you complain
to? What happened as a result?)
3. What was your relationship with them like before
Ondoy? How about now? What do you feel haschanged (if anything?)
D. Concluding remarks and closing
1. How can the local government support be improved?2. What are the most pressing needs of the communities to get their lives back to normal? How can
government/NGOs help?
3. Are you aware of the government’s resettlement schemes? What information do you have about them
(from whom?)? What do you think about these schemes? Are you or your association participating in anyof the decision making on this? If not, would you like to? If yes, how are your views being treated by the
Government? By NGOs?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 74/76
66
KII Guide Tool for Barangay Captain
A. General background information and personal experience of Ondoy
Suggested questions
1. How long have you lived in this community?How did you come to live in this community?
2. Where were you when Ondoy hit? How did you
manage to keep safe during the typhoon?
3. How is your family? Where is everyone at the
moment?
Probing questions (additional information)
1. Where are you (parents/grand-parents) originallyfrom? What was it about this neighborhood that
made you decide to settle here (rather than
somewhere else?)
2. What kind of information did you receive on the
storm before it hit? (Who provided this
information? How much advance warning did you
get?)
3. How did you manage to keep everyone
together? How are you able to care for yourchildren/elderly relatives/disabled members
now?
4. Did you have to move temporarily? When didyou return home? What made you decide to
return? Who in your family has now returned
home? Are there still members of your family in
temporary accommodations? Do you expect
them to return? When? Under what
circumstances?
B. Social relations and cohesion (looking at the participation of vulnerable groups in community activities)
Suggested questions
1. Could you give me an example of activitiespeople in this neighborhood have been doing
together since Ondoy?
Or Could you tell me about the activities the
community associations have been doing in the
last two weeks. Identify the associations. Clarify
which organizations did what activities.
Or When was the last time the neighborhood didsomething together as a group? Could you
describe it for me?
2. What is the security situation like since Ondoy?
Or How do you feel about the safety of your
family since Ondoy?
Probing questions (additional information)
1. What about before the floods? What kinds of things did people used to do together?
What has changed/not changed in the way
neighbors behave towards one another since the
floods?
What are the groups that are more active in
these activities?
What are the groups that have not participated?How do you explain these differences?
2. What do you think contributed to make the
neighborhood safer/less safe?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 75/76
67
C. Local Governance and Social Accountability
Suggested questions
1. What structures in the barangay are in place torespond to disaster, maintain security, provide
health services, mediate conflicts – structures
needed after the floods. How did the barangayrespond?
2. What are the causes of the disaster from the
point of view of the community and leaders?What steps has the barangay taken to avert
future disasters?
3. How do you feel about the way in which support
was distributed after the floods? (by local
government/by civil society organizations)
Did you work closely with the Mayor’s office?
The governor’s office? National government
offices? Which ones? With adjacent barangay
captains? If yes, how? If not, why not?
4. What were the main challenges you faced in
providing assistance?
5. What were the groups in the community that
participated in the distribution of support?
What was their role? Were there any
differences between men and women in
distribution of support?
6. How do you feel about the collaboration with
civil society organizations, local associations,
church groups, others?
Probing questions (additional information)
1. What major activities were implemented by thebarangay to respond to the disaster?
2. Before Ondoy, did you have any training indisaster management or prevention? If yes, from
whom? Was it useful? If yes, in what ways? If no,
why not?
3. What kind of information did you provide about
the post-flood assistance? What means did you use?
To whom was this information targeted? How did
you reach the most vulnerable groups? What about
immediately before the floods? What kind of
information were you able to provide communities?
4. Did you receive support from groups outside the
community? Who were these groups? How did they
help?
5. Did some groups receive more/less support than
others? If yes – which ones? Why do you think they
received more/less help?
Did you receive any specific complaints? From
whom and how did you handle these complaints?
6. What was your relationship with them like before
Ondoy? How about now? What do you feel has
changed (if anything?)
D. Concluding remarks and closing
1. How can the local government support be improved?, 2. How can the support provided by NGOs be
improved?
3. Do you know what plans the government/local government unit has for this community? What are
they? What is your opinion of them? Are any leaders or members of the community participating in thedecision-making? How?
4. What are the most pressing needs of the barangay at this stage? How can government/other
stakeholders provide support?5. Are you providing communities in your area with any information about resettlement schemes? What
information are you providing? To whom and how is it being received?
7/29/2019 Rapid Assessment of the Social Impacts of of Tropical Storm Ondoy on Urban Poor Communities
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rapid-assessment-of-the-social-impacts-of-of-tropical-storm-ondoy-on-urban 76/76
Community Profiling Checklist
To understand community life before Ondoy.
Collect information through observation, secondary data (eg., barangay profile, healthor school records) and 1 or 2 key informant interview with barangay and communityleaders.
DATA SET PARTICULARS
Physical Map with boundaries; names and
number of residential clusters (sitios);
topography and natural resources
(rivers, springs, marshland, water
sources, mountains, etc)
Land area; land use
Road network
Type and number of community
infrastructure and facilities (basic
utilities, road, water system, health,
educational, recreational,communication, commercial facilities,
agricultural, etc.)
Usual mode of access; distance
to/from town center; types of
transport facilities; frequency of trips
Dry/wet season months
Existing housing arrangement
Types of housing materials used:
temporary, permanent, one floor, 2nd
floor, etc
Social
history History of the barangay: year founded
Religion, ethnicity, languages
spoken/written
educational level
means of livelihood: major source of income/occupation; other sources of
income/occupation percent of HHs in
what source of income
access to credit, microenterprise
development Sources of water; percent of HHs
obtaining (potable/domestic use)
water from what type of water source?
Means of waste disposal; number of HHs with sanitary latrines
means of disseminating informationamong the members of the community
access to electricity
Local
governance presence of community organizations;
active or inactive; HOAs, POs, NGOs,
youth
Barangay structures (Barangay council,
BDC, SK, Barangay Emergency
Response Team, etc)
Barangay plans, ordinances on solid
waste management, disaster response,
risk reduction
access to services (internal and
external): types of groups/agencies
providing what types of services
Population Total population, male/female, age groups, No. of households, average HH size
top related