PANTAWID PAMILYANG PILIPINO PROGRAM (4PS): A COMPARISON OF THE

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF THE BENEFICIARIES IN BGRY. PILAR,

OQUENDO DISTRICT, CALBAYOG CITY BEFORE AND AFTER IMPLEMENTATION

A Thesis Presented to
THE FACULTY OF THE COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES
Christ the King College
Calbayog City

In Partial Fulfilment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Science in Social Work

By

________________

SEPTEMBER 2016
 CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

Rationale

Poverty is an economic issue that has long been a persistent

problem in differentnations, especially among developing

countries. The issue of poverty alleviation became the focus of

many political and socioeconomic reforms that have been

undertaken in the quest to mitigate poverty. However, many of

these reforms did not yield sustainable results.This is mainly

because poverty is a complex phenomenon where the linking of

economic,social, political and demographic factors is crucial

(Annan, 2013).

In the circumstance of the Philippines, poverty remains

rampant. Although the country attained economic growth, poverty

was not reduced and income inequalityremains high (Asian

Development Bank, 2009). According to the National Statistical

Coordination Board (2013), poverty statistics reported a poverty

incidence of 27.9% duringthe first semester of 2012. This is

comparatively similar to the poverty incidence during thefirst

semester of 2006 and 2009 at 28.8% and 28.6%, respectively. On

the other hand, thereis a very small change of the income gap

during the first semester of 2006 and 2012 at30.1% and 29.3%,

correspondingly.
 National Statistical Coordination Board (2013) also reported

that the families inextreme poverty persisted at 10% from the

first half of 2006 until 2012.

According to the Asian Development Bank (2013), poverty in

the Philippinesis mainlycaused by low employment opportunities,

substandard to moderate economic growth forseveral decades,

income inequality, and external shocks such as natural

calamities,economic crises, and political issues. The report also

found that poverty is attributed to thelack of human capital

development. As educational attainment has long been linked

to poverty in the Philippines, the government has

implemented several anti-poverty programsfocusing on the

improvement of human capital to alleviate poverty.

Anti-poverty programs in the Philippines began after the

enactment of Republic Act8425 or the Social Reform and Poverty

Alleviation Act, where the Social Reform Agenda(SRA) and National

Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) were established during the

1990s.The SRA aims to create a representation and participation

of marginalized sectors in theanti-poverty programs of the

government, while the NAPC wants to uphold this partnershipin the

long run between the poor and the government by implementing

social reforms whileworking towards a common goal, which is

poverty alleviation (Bennagen, 2000).

 
 Among the numerous anti-poverty programs, the Conditional

Cash Transfer (CCT)Program sustained global attention because it

addresses the issue of inter-generational poverty cycle in

developed and developing countries throughout the world where

poverty remains prevalent (Shahani, 2013). CCT programs have been

distinguished as one of the most effective wayto alleviate

poverty because of its targeting methods and conditionality of

monetarytransfer. Reliant upon meeting the conditions imposed by

the government, cash grants aregiven to extremely poor families

to finance their children’s education and health needs.This

positively impacts education and health of the children of

poorest families (Son,2008). Furthermore, the scope of CCTs is

not limited to giving financial aid to theextremely poor, but

also in empowering poor households through social activities

thatwould help them mitigate poverty in the future.

In 2007, the Philippines implemented the PantawidPamilyang

Pilipino Program which was patterned after the CCT programs in

Latin American countries such as Brazil’s BolsaFamilia and

Mexico’s Oportunidades. The Philippine government believes that

good governance and social services are key mechanisms in poverty

alleviation. (Reyes, et.al., 2012)

The cash transfer that the beneficiaries receive is subject

to several requirementsimposed by authorities. Based on DSWD

(2009), the requirements of 4Ps include schoolattendance and

health center visits for children, and parents’ participation in

FamilyDevelopment Sessions (FDS). These FDS allow the

beneficiaries to interact with other beneficiaries that could

strengthen the social and community engagement of

4Ps recipients.Thus, 4Ps could have an indirect social impact on

its beneficiaries.

Given the possibility of the impact of 4Ps on socio-economic

status of the community, the researcher aims to analyse and

compare the socio-economic status of the beneficiaries in

Barangay Pilar, Oquendo District, Calbayog City, before and after

the implementation of the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program

(4Ps).

Knowing the economic condition of the beneficiaries’ before

the program could determine how much improvements were achieved

by the respondents as the 4Ps come into their lives. Thru looking

in the comparison of the economic status of the beneficiaries in

two separate times, progress therefore could be specified and

directly measured in terms of the changes the beneficiaries have

achieved after the effect of the program.

To determine how far and how much good wave the program had

brought to the intended beneficiaries, there must be a review on

the previous condition of the members to connect with the current

condition they have with the effect of the 4Ps. Despite of the

controversies the program is facing nowadays, having clear

insight on the previous economic conditions of the beneficiaries

is a need to justify the effectiveness of the program in battling

poverty in the country.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This study was based on the Human Capital Theory, Social

Capital Theory, and Spillover Effects. Human Capital Theory

indicates the importance of investments human capital of a

country, while the Social Capital Theory explains social network

where individuals work together to improve well-being. Spillover

effects refer to the externality that is sourced from the CCT.

According to Kwon (2009), human capital can make an impact

on an individual(employment opportunities), organizational (core

competencies and competitiveness) andsocietal (socio-political

development) level. Furthermore, Kwon (2009) cites that

humancapital can be measured using an output-based approach

(through measuring schoolenrolment rates, literacy and other

educational variables), a cost-based approach (throughmeasuring

the costs of education) and an income-based approach (through

measuring the benefits incurred through education and

training).Putting all the aforementioned insights

into perspective, it is intuitive that returns onhuman capital

stem from the education and health invested on children. For a

givenhousehold, investments on children depend on the household

income and number ofchildren in the household. For a given level

of income, more investment is distributed oneach child with fewer

children in the household. With this, countries with little

humancapital are usually characterized by large family size and

invest little on each child. On thecontrary, those with abundant

capital invest more on fewer kids. Thus, a country would bewell

off if there are more investments in children, and long-term

physical capitalaccumulation (Tamura et al., 1990).

On the other hand, according to Garson (2006), social

capital can be defined as the resources that areintegral in

social relations, which help facilitate cooperative and

collaborative action within a society. These resources may

include, but are not limited to, socio-cultural norms such

astrust, friendship and goodwill, as well as networks of

association that work towards acommon goal. Although the

social capital theory has not yet been fully established due

tothe complexity of social capital and its components, it can be

loosely theorized to describethat productivity can be derived

from the social bonds, bridges and linkages that peopleshare and

utilize. Given that a conditional cash transfer program is a part

of asocial network where individuals develop social relationships

in order to strengthen their well-being, social capital is

imperative with regard to the program’s success, especiallysince

the social network in this study is composed of the government,

the community, andthe household members. Using the social capital

theory as a basis, the cash transfer program can be seen as a

form of social protection method in order to alleviate poverty

andvulnerability through giving cash transfers. Hence, there is a

need to develop

relationship between the government and community for a proper im

plementation of the program(Ressler, 2008).

Spillover effect is defined as the unintended impact of a

certain program onindividuals that are not targeted by the

program (Jaffe, 1996). Spillovers can also beviewed as

externalities, which could be positive or negative depending on

the private andsocial gains and costs incurred (Helbling, 2010).

According to Jaffe (1996), spillovers can be categorized

into market spillovers (tangible benefits received by society),

knowledge spillovers (use of knowledge without compensation) and

network spillovers(program benefits become highly valued as more

people become beneficiaries). As such, spillover effects may also

be present in CCT programs. This is because the resources that

the beneficiaries use are the same resources used by non-

beneficiaries (Angelucci et al., 2010).In addition, the social

interactions between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries could

havean influencing factor on the non-beneficiaries. For instance,

children from non-beneficiaryhouseholds may share the academic

materials that are given to children from beneficiaryhouseholds

(Angelucci et al., 2010).

Overall, externalities can be attributed to CCT programs,

especially with regard to schooling (positive effects on school

enrolment), economic (positive effects on inequality and food

consumption), social (positive effects onhuman and physical

capital prospects) and health (positive effects on nutrition and

healthconsciousness) indicators (Lehmann, 2010).

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

This study is grounded on concepts from behavioral studies

which aresupplemented with economic theories: Selective Material

Gratification which implies that beneficiaries would be

inclined to reciprocate the gratitude that they obtain from casht

ransfers received; Social Engagement which denotes civic

solidarity as the preconditionfor civic activities; and Political

Budget Cycle Model, in which political budget cycles areused to

determine the impact of government intervention on government

support.

Selective material gratification refers to beneficiaries

feeling gratified by receiving cash transfers (Perova, 2010). In

this case, the selectivity refers to the feeling ofgratification

as expressed by the beneficiary group only, while materialism

refers to thecash received by the beneficiaries. Since

beneficiaries receive additional cash, their povertystatus is

improved. The additional cash would aid them in their additional

expenses pertaining to health and education. Hence, beneficiaries

will feel more gratified towards thegovernment. This will serve

as an incentive to reciprocate the benefits that they receive

by participating in civic activities (Verba et al., 1995).

Conditional cash transfers require beneficiaries to meet

certain requirements inorder to continue receiving cash

transfers. This includes attendances in health

clinics,educational activities and other orientations. This would

allow them to interact more withcommunity members and hence form

a social network with them. Putnam (2000) said thiswould create

some level of trust and reciprocity between them. This is termed

as “civilsolidarity”, and aside from the role of this concept on

socioeconomic modernization, this isalso considered as a

precondition for voter’s turnout and membership in organizations.

Thisis because when civil solidarity is developed, influences on

the collective action of thenetworks in the community would be

developed. Hence, there is an impact on civicengagement.

THE PROBLEM

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

 This study will be conducted to compare the socio-economic

status of the beneficiaries in Barangay Pilar, Oquendo District,

Calbayog City before and after the implementation of the Pantawid

Pamilyang Pilipino Program.

Specifically, this study aims to provide answers to the

following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in

terms of:

a. Age;

b. Sex; and

c. Number of years as 4Ps beneficiary?

2. What are the effects of 4Ps implementation to the

selected beneficiaries of Barangay Pilar, Oquendo

District, Calbayog City?

3. Is there any improvement on their economic status after

the implementation?

4. Does the 4Ps program eradicate the poverty experienced by

the respondents?

Significance of the Study

This study of the comparison of the economic status of the

selected respondents before and after the implementation of 4Ps

is important in the following ways:

 1. Determine the economic condition of the respondents

before and after the implementation of 4P¶s.

2. Present the contribution of 4P¶s as an act of eradicating

extreme poverty in the country.

Hypothesis

Research Hypothesis

1. The beneficiaries improve their way of living.

2. They can purchase immediately their basic needs.

3. Vices are eliminated.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

For better understanding of the study, some terms are

defined:

4Ps.It is the acronym for the program, PANTAWID PAMILYANG

PILIPINO PROGRAM. A program of DSWD, is a poverty reduction

strategy

CT.Conditional Cash Transfer. A program which aim to reduce

poverty by making welfare programs conditional upon the

receivers' actions.

Beneficiaries. As used in the study, recipients of funds or

other benefits. Citizens who receive government assistance.

 Eradicate. To get rid of as if by tearing up by the roots.

Syn. (abolish, eliminate)

DSWD.It is the acronym for the agency, Department of Social

Welfare and Development.

Social Assistance:Benefits paid to bring incomes up to

minimum levels established by law.

FIES.It is the acronym for Family Income and Expenditures

Survey. It is a nationwide survey of households undertaken every

three years by the National Statistics Office (NSO); It is

conducted simultaneously with the quarterly Labor Force Survey

(LFS). The FIES gathers data on family income and family living

expenditures and related information affecting income and

expenditure levels and patterns in the Philippines.