Consolidated Report On The Audit of The Disaster Risk Reduction Management DRRM Fund For The Year Ended December 31 2014

Republic of the Philippines
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
Commonwealth Ave., Quezon City
CONSOLIDATED REPORT
on the Audit of the
DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

MANAGEMENT (DRRM) FUND
For the Year Ended December 31, 2014

NATIONAL GOVERNMENT SECTOR
Cluster 4–Defense and Security
Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City
February 1, 2016
Secretary Voltaire T. Gazmin

Chairman
National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council
Camp Aguinaldo, EDSA, Quezon City
Consolidated Report on the audit of the

Disaster Risk Reduction Management (DRRM) Fund
For the year ended December 31, 2014
1. Pursuant to Section VII, 9 of COA Memorandum 2014-009 dated August 28, 2014,
we have prepared this Report consolidating the issues and observations on the audit
of DRRM Funds of various government agencies (national and local) for the year
2014. This report is being made in the absence of a single/consolidated report on
financial data on disaster management, particularly on the receipt and utilization
thereof. This will serve as valuable reference in the programming of DRRM Funds
by the Council Members and various government agencies as this will enable them
to see the overall picture of the management of DRRM Funds.
2. This consolidated report highlights the financial and operational data on DRRM
which were included in the Annual Audit Reports on the following agencies:
a) Bureau of Fire Protection i) Department of Trade and

b) Department of Agriculture Industry
c) Department of Education j) Local Government Units
d) Department of Health k) Office of Civil Defense
e) Department of the Interior and l) Philippine Air Force
Local Government m) Philippine Army
f) Department of National Defense n) Philippine Institute of
g) Department of Public Works and Volcanology and Seismology
Highways o) Philippine Navy
h) Department of Social Welfare
and Development
1
3. The significant Audit observations and recommendations were likewise incorporated
in the Annual Audit Report (AAR) on the concerned government agencies for CY
2014.
4. For the Local Government Sector, the only data made available were the
observations and recommendations. The financial and operational data for the local
government units are not available.
Financial and Operational Highlights
5. Financial Highlights
Sources of Funds for the National Government Agencies (NGAs)
 General Appropriations Act
a. NDRRMF
The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (NDRRMF) is

appropriated under the annual General Appropriations Act (GAA) which shall
be used for disaster risk and reduction or mitigation, prevention and
preparedness activities such as but not limited to training of personnel,
procurement of equipment, and capital expenditures. It can also be utilized for
relief, recovery, reconstruction and other works or services in connection with
natural or human-induced calamities which may occur during the budget year
or those that occurred in the past two years from the budget year.
b. Quick Response Fund (QRF)
The QRF is the thirty percent of the NDRRMF allocated to the agencies
identified by the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
(NDRRMC) as stand-by-fund for relief and recovery programs in order that
situation and living conditions of people in communities or areas stricken by
disasters, calamities, epidemics, or complex emergencies, may be normalized
as quickly as possible for affected communities in the shortest possible time.
c. Allocation from agency regular budget
All departments, bureaus, offices and agencies of the government are

authorized to use a portion of their appropriations to implement projects
designed to address DRRM activities in accordance with the guidelines to be
issued by the NDRRMC in coordination with the Department of Budget and
Management (DBM) pursuant to Section 22.e of RA No. 10121.
2
 Cash Donations from Local and Foreign Sources
Cash donations are assistance or contribution from local or foreign donor

entity/individual to the National Government for DRRM projects/program
Sources of funds for the LGUs
 General Fund Current Year Appropriation
Not less than five percent of the estimated revenue from regular sources shall be
set aside to support disaster risk management activities such as, but not limited to,
pre-disaster preparedness programs, including training, purchasing life-saving
rescue equipment, supplies and medicines, for post-disaster activites, and for the
payment of premiums on calamity insurance.
Thirty percent of the amount appropriated shall be allocated to the QRF or stand-
by fund for relief and recovery projects and activities.
 Funds transferred from the NDRRM Fund
These are funds received from the National Government for DRRM activities
upon approval of the President.
 Funds received from other LGUs and other sources
These are cash donations received from other LGUs, local and foreign sources.
6. Operational Highlights
The total allotments/NCAs and donations received for CY 2014 by various NGAs for
DRRM including balances from PY are summarized below with details shown in
Annex A.
National Government Agency

Allotments Donations
Beginning Balance P 5,388,191,860.68 P 343,886,173.04
Received During the year 18,803,182,454.49 248,916,006.42
Total 24,191,374,315.17 592,802,179.46
Less: DRRM Funds utilized 12,699,026,626.42 92,387,018.00
Ending Balance P11,492,347,688.75 P 500,415,161.46
3
7. MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The major accomplishments of the various agencies for CY 2014 in connection with
DRRM are summarized below with details shown in Annex B:
IMPLEMENTING
ACCOMPLISHMENT
AGENCIES
GOAL: DRRM and CCA mainstreamed and integrated in national, sectoral and local
development policies, plans and budget.
Housing and Land Use  Included Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and Disaster
Regulatory Board Risk Assessment in Vol. 2 of the 2013-2014 CLUP Guidebook
(HLURB)  Produced the Supplemental Guidelines on Mainstreaming
Climate and Disaster Risks in the CLUP
 Included OCD, DOST, CCC, PAGASA, and PHIVOLCS as
suggested members of PLUC under Vol. 1 of the 2013-2014
CLUP Guidebooks
GOAL: DRRM and CCA sensitive environmental management
HLURB  Mainstreamed CCA-DRR and enhanced the CLUP process in
the 2013-2014 CLUP Guidebook
GOAL: Increased disaster resilience of Infrastructure Systems
Department of Education  Implemented disaster-resilient school building designs with
(DepEd) necessary budget adjustments
 Upgrade of the Building Code with the inclusion of Green
Building under process.
 Assessed damages for 61 State Colleges and Universities at the
end of 2013
Department of Public  Implemented Structural Resiliency Program in new construction
Works and Highways and in the reconstruction of calamity damaged.
(DPWH)  Recovered road right of way of critical national roads and bridges
and upgraded design to ensure flood-free at all times
 Identified public facilities as safe Shelter Centers in disaster
prone municipalities for resilient design and redundancy, also be
used as emergency command center and evacuation facility
 Completed design of one storey resilient school building as well
as two storey multi-purpose building
 Upgraded engineering design standards for flood control,
drainage and slope protection works
 Upgraded National Code to include DRRM and CCA
HLURB  Mainstreamed CCA-DRR in the new Integrated Model Zoning
Ordinance (MZO) for cities and municipalities
GOAL: Community based and scientific DRRM and CCA assessment, mapping, analysis
and monitoring
DEPED & DPWH  Approved DepEd order on the annual conduct of student-led risk
assessment in schools
 Conducted vulnerability assessment prior to construction of
infrastructures.
DPWH  Used Geo-hazard maps as one tool for planning for climate
resilient infrastructure
4
IMPLEMENTING
ACCOMPLISHMENT
AGENCIES
 Conducted training for all 16 Regional Offices for CCA and
DRRM at the end of 2014
Philippine Atmospheric  Provided the LGUs with the hazard/Risk Map and completed the
Geophysical conduct of IECs to 17 municipalities/cities.
Astronomical Services  Developed severe wind risk calculator which can be used by
Administration LGUs to estimate potential damage to buildings due to severe
(PAGASA) winds in GMMA
GOAL: End-to-end monitoring forecasting and early warning systems are established and/or
improved
PAGASA, DILG, LGUs,  Provided weather hazard monitoring and timely, accurate and
OCD reliable weather forecasts, advisories and warnings
 Conducted public education and awareness to enhance the
capability of various stakeholders to respond to hydro-
meteorological disasters
 Used a variety of available media (radio, tv, internet and social
media (SMS, facebook and twitter) in a variety of format (textual,
graphics, color-coded and audio) to disseminate information.
 Organized Training Workshop, IEC and Flood Drill and
conducted actual flood drills for stakeholders to appropriately
respond to disaster.
 PAGASA calibrated instruments for CBFEWS for compliance
with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) standards.
 PAGASA designed the network density of the monitoring
stations as prescribed by WMO when it comes to exposure of
instruments for weather observations
 Provided specifications for weather monitoring instruments for
EWS.
 PAGASA utilized the 8” standard rain gauge for the synoptic
stations all over the country as recommended by the World
Meteorological Organization (WMO).
 Used indigenous materials like batingaw and drum as a means of
communications.
 Established Community-based flood early warning system in
various areas of the country.
PAGASA, LGUs  PAGASA provided training on observation and data transmission
as well as on the protocols of data interpretation and issuance of
flood warnings and advisories and how it can be integrated in the
existing disaster mitigation program of the community
GOAL: Increased level of awareness and enhanced capacity of the community to the threats
and impacts of all hazards
Philippine Institute of  Included “Volcano, Earthquake, and Tsunami Disaster Risk
Volcanology and Reduction Program” in the PHIVOLCS Strategic Plan 2012-
Seismology (PHIVOLCS) 2016, as one of the strategic initiatives of the plan.
GOAL: Increased DRRM and CCA capacity of Local DRRM Councils and Offices at all
levels
DILG  Formulated Climate Change Action Plan (9 Provinces, 59 Cities,
and 238 Municipalities)
5
IMPLEMENTING
ACCOMPLISHMENT
AGENCIES
 Conducted Infrastructure Audit Workshops in 334 LGUs
DILG  Conducted Training on Geographic Information System (GIS) for
Climate and Disaster and Vulnerability Reduction to 52
Provinces, 43 Cities, 433 Municipalities and 376 Barangays
 Conducted Training on Understanding the Multi-Hazard Maps,
their Usage and Application in Local Development Planning for
LGUs
 Conducted Flood/Swift Water First Responder Training
 Formulated the National Disaster Preparedness Plan
 Formulated the Minimum Preparedness Standards
 Formulated the Early Preparedness Manuals for LCEs
 Formulated the Critical Preparedness for LCEs
 Formulated the Checklist of Minimum Actions for MLGOOs,
COPs, and FMs
 Created the DepEd DRRM Office through DepEd Order No 50 s
2011
 Prepared DRRM plans by field offices and schools
 Formed Regional, division, district and school DRRM
teams/committees
 Inventoried DRRM materials available in DepEd
GOAL: Developed and implemented comprehensive national and local preparedness and
response policies, plans, and systems
DepEd  Conducted simulation exercises in the nationwide DRRM
Orientation and Planning Workshop to check the immediate
responses of field officials before and during calamities
 Set up of coordination and information management protocols
 Provided disaster preparedness measures to schools through
DepEd Order No. 83, s. 2011
DA  Activated the DA – Disaster Quick Response Center
 Ensured communications and EWS are in place
 Conducted situation assessment
 Coordinated response operations and resources mobilization
DILG  Developed and implemented:
- JMC No. 2014-01
- JMC No 2013-0
- Dept. Memo No 2012-73
- Dept Memo re Directing every DILG City Director, City Local
Government Operations Officer and Municipal Local
Government Operations Officer to ensure functionality of
BDRRMC
- Dept Circular No 2012-08
- Dept Memo for the President re DILG issuances on Calamity
Response Protocols
- Dept Order No 2011-1564
6
IMPLEMENTING
ACCOMPLISHMENT
AGENCIES
- Dept Order No 2011-8
- Dept Memo Circular No 2011-35
- Dept Memo Circular No 2010-143
DILG  Formulated Compendium of Disaster Preparedness and Response
Protocols in 2012
 Mainstreamed DRRM and CCA in Comprehensive Development
Plan Guidelines in mainstreaming being finalized.
GOAL: Strengthened partnership and coordination among all key players and stakeholders
DepEd  Developed a directory of all regional and division DRRM focal
persons
DA with DOST-PAGASA  Coordinated with PAGASA, PHIVOLCS and other agencies
and PHIVOLCS, BSWM, regarding calamity advisory
Quad-media, and DA  Developed localized disaster EWS
attached agencies
DILG  CSO-Managed/Co-Managed trainings and projects
 CSO-prepared modules /guidebooks/ manuals
 BLGS engaged 5 CSOs with DRRM Projects
GOAL: Well-established disaster response operations
OCD  Issued NDRRMC Memo Cir. No. 04, s. 2012 dtd 28 March 2012
DPWH  Conducted ICS training for 9 DPWH Regional Offices and 90
District Offices in 2012 to 2014
 Provided 520 trucks and heavy equipment and 1220 personnel for
clearing operations and relief distribution after typhoon Yolanda
DepEd  Issued weather advisories to DepEd field offices through
Infoboard textblast, SMS, emails and facsimile
PCG  Monitored a total of 2,002 incidents and conducted a total of
2,000 SAR operations from January 2012 to November 2014
 Constructed SAR Base Roxas which enhanced the PCG's
presence in terms of capability development and sustainment of
needed support thru extension of its bases and facilities.
 Constructed a 2- storey building for the Coast Guard District
Bicol
 Participated in the procurement of Disaster Response Equipment
worth PhP521,664,500.00.
GOAL: Adequate and prompt assessment of needs and damages at all levels
OCD  Deployed inter-agency DANA Team
 Drafted NDRRMC Guidelines in the Conduct of Joint Rapid
Damage Assessment and Needs Analysis
DepEd  Submitted Rapid Disaster Assessment Reports( RaDAR) through
SMS, email or facsimile (school-level)
 Consolidated RaDARs from affected schools
 Mobilized volunteers in the consolidation of RaDARs
 Prepared situation reports for DepEd management and oversight
agencies for the appropriation of necessary intervention
7
IMPLEMENTING
ACCOMPLISHMENT
AGENCIES
DWPH  Deployed DRRM members as part of the inter-agency RDANA
Team
GOALS: Integrated and coordinated Search, Rescue and Retrieval (SRR) capacity
NBI  Formed 4 Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) Teams, each is
assigned for a particular quadrant of Metro Manila.
GOAL: Evacuated safely and on time affected communities
DepEd  Prepared schools for possible use as evacuation center
GOAL: Temporary shelter needs are adequately addressed
DPWH  Assisted DILG/LGU in the determination of the feasibility of
shelter sites
 Constructed 273 bunkhouses in Region VIII after the onslaught
of Typhoon Yolanda
 Set the Minimum Performance Standards and Specifications
(MPSS) for one storey school building and multipurpose building
DepEd  Identified and/or established TLS to disaster / emergency-
affected areas
GOAL: Basic health services provided to affected population whether inside or outside ECs
DSWD  Conducted NDRRMC Meeting re Enhancement of the Provision
of Health Services During Disaster
GOAL: Psychosocial well-being promoted and mental health problems and risks reduced
DepEd  Mobilized external partners for the provision of psychosocial
support
GOAL: Coordinated, Integrated System for Early Recovery implemented on the national
and local levels
OCD  Conducted:
- PDNA for TY Yolanda on 08 January-28 February 2014
- National Writeshop of PDNA on 5-7 March 2014
 Presented the 1st draft of PDNA to the C, NDRRMC -13 March
2014
 Presented PDNA Report to the President – 15 May 2014
DepEd  Conducted detailed damage assessment of schools by DepEd
engineers
 Endorsed consolidated RaDARs to concerned offices for
appropriate action
 Immediately resumed classes to track students
 Mobilized donations through social media (Twitter and facebook)
 Uploaded K-12 learning materials for easier access and
reproduction
 Pooled volunteers for the provision of PSS
DPWH  Deployed DRRM members as part of the inter-agency PDNA
Team for typhoons Sendong, Pablo and Yolanda
 Constructed five temporary bridges in Bohol damaged by the 7.2
earthquake in 2013. Construction on permanent bridges on-going
 Conducted clearing operations for all national roads immediately
after a disaster
8
IMPLEMENTING
ACCOMPLISHMENT
AGENCIES
GOAL: Damages, Losses and Needs Assessed
OCD, NEDA  Participated in the activities relative to the conduct of PDNA for
the following major disasters:
- TS Sendong (2011)
- TY Pablo (2012)
- Central Visayas Earthquake (Bohol 2013)
- Zamboanga Siege (2013)
- TY Yolanda (2013)
- TD Agaton (2014)
DepEd, DPWH  Deployed DepEd Engineers to schools with reported major and
totally damaged classrooms based on the Rapid Assessment of
Damages Report (RADaR) for detailed assessment.
 Enhanced the protocols and monitoring mechanisms for the
conduct of detailed assessment.
 Joined Representatives from the Department in the conduct of
PDNA for Typhoon Yolanda on January – March 2014.
GOAL: DRRM/CCA elements incorporated in human settlement
DPWH  Assisted the DILG in the determination of the feasibility and
suitability of relocation sites.
 Upgraded the structural design standards for disaster resiliency for
school buildings and other public infrastructures to withstand 250
kph wind velocity.
 Trained and engaged some of the male survivors of Typhoon
Yolanda to help in the construction of bunkhouses in Tacloban.
GOAL: Disaster and climate-change resilient infrastructure reconstructed
DPWH, DepEd  Repaired 88 damaged infrastructure as of 2014.
 Rehabilitated and repaired damaged school facilities.
 Strictly implemented the National Building Code of the
Philippines and awareness program on green technology
conducted
 Implemented disaster-resilient school design from 2014 onwards
 Prepared the Minimum Performance Standards and Specifications
(MPSS) for Public Buildings as guide in preparing design
requirements for rehabilitation and reconstruction of damaged
LGU infrastructures and facilities.
DPWH  Established the Project Monitoring System (PMS) for the
monitoring of all infrastructure projects including rehabilitation
projects for damaged infrastructure.
9
8. DRRM Equipments purchased and received from Donors
AGENCY ITEM QTY VALUE LOCATION

DA –
Floating Tillers 40 P 4,386,200.00 DA – RFO XI
RFO XI
Surface Pump w/
41 3,613,800.00 DA – RFO XI
accessories
4WD Farm Tractor 3 2,850,000.00 DA – RFO XI
Rehab, replacement and
6 4,200,000.00 DA – RFO XI
retrofitting of flatbed dryer
Warehouses 7 2,000,000.00 DA – RFO XI
DA owned and/or NFA
1 8,000,000.00 DA – RFO XI
drying & storage facility
Shallow Tube Wells 10 1,580,000.00 DA – RFO XI
Surface Pumps 78 7,250,000.00 DA – RFO XI
1 ea for DN,
COMVAL, DO;
3 units for DA
Laser Guided Leveler 6 4,500,000.00
Research
Center/Service
Provider)
2 units for DA
Research
4WD Tractors with Rotary Center/Service
4 10,000,000.00
Tiller & Leveler Provided; 1 ea for
COMVAL and
DO
1 unit for DN; 1
unit for DA
4WD Tractors 2 2,000,000.00 Research
Center/Service
Provider
PLGU-
Rice Processing Complex I 1 7,500,000.00
COMVAL
PLGU - Davao
Rice Processing Complex I 1 7,500,000.00
Oriental
Rehab of Sugod Diversion
Monkayo,
Dam and Extension of 1 3,500,000.00
COMVAL
Canal Lining
Rehab of Tubo-Tubo Monkayo,
1 2,500,000.00
Diversion Dam COMVAL
Rehab/Construction of Maragusan,
1 10,000,000.00
Tupas Diversion Dam COMVAL
Corn Mill 4 1,000,000.00 Davao Oriental
Corn Mill 1 250,000.00 Davao del Norte
COMVAL
Corn Mill 10 2,500,000.00
Province
Provinces
Harrow and Plow 189 6,250,000.00
affected by
10
Typhoon Pablo
Boston and
Construction of
2 3,100,000.00 Caraga, Davao
Slaughterhouse
Oriental
Construction of Kapalong, Davao
1 900,000.00
Slaughterhouse del Norte
Construction of New Corella,
1 1,600,000.00
Slaughterhouse Davao del Norte
Construction of
1 1,600,000.00 Baganga
Slaughterhouse
Montevista,
Construction of
1 1,600,000.00 COMVAL
Slaughterhouse
Province
Construction of Monkayo,
1 1,600,000.00
Slaughterhouse COMVAL
Nabunturan,
Construction of
1 1,500,000.00 COMVAL
Slaughterhouse
Province
Compostela,
Construction of Laak, New
3 4,600,000.00
Slaughterhouse Bataan,
COMVAL
Lamdag sa
Panginabuhi,
Brgy. Pasian,
Establishment of Municipal
2 2,000,000.00 Monkayo; Brgy.
Native Chicken Hatchery
Salingcamot,
Baganga, Davao
Oriental
Establishment of Artificial Monkayo; New
Insemination Centers for 4 4,000,000.00 Corella; Boston;
Native Pigs Manay
Shallow Tube Wells 15 1,277,025.00 Davao Oriental
Open Surface Pump 18 1,650,375.00 Davao Oriental
Compostela
Open Surface Pump 29 1,467,000.00
Valley
DA – Zampiarc - Roger
Payloader 1 3,555,000.00
RFO IX Bagaforo
Zampiarc - Roger
Grader 1 7,950,000.00
Bagaforo
PAF Ground Rescue Equipment 1 12,945,818.00 PAF
Collapsed Structure, Ground
Vehicle and Aircraft Rescue 1 15,616,000.00 PAF
Equipment
Underwater Rescue
1 2,155,269.00 PAF
Equipment
Water Rescue Equipment 1 14,891,000.00 PAF
Individual Rescue 1 14,080,000.00 PAF
11
Equipment
Disaster Response
Operation (DRO) 1 19,323,456.65 PAF
Machineries and Equipment
Technical and Scientific
1 20,464,309.74 PAF
Equipment
Communication Van 1 8,988,000.00 PAF
Communication Equipment 1 1,792,000.00 PAF
Warehouse #2,
LSG, ASCOM,
Flood Rescue Equipment 1 21,216,500.00
GHQ Camp
Aguinaldo, QC
Warehouse #2,
Earthquake Rescue LSG, ASCOM,
1 8,000,000.00
Equipment GHQ Camp
Aguinaldo, QC
3000 units at
RFO VIII
750 units at RFO
VII
5.5 HP Marine Gasoline
BFAR - CO 5491 21,305,080.00 750 units at RFO
Engine
VI
991 units at
BFAR MCS
Station
BFAR MCS
16 HP Marine Engine 450 5,265,000.00
Station
Ambulance with accessories
MMDA (2012 Nissan Urvan 2 4,830,000.00 MMDA
Escapade Brand New)
Mitsubishi Canter Wide

new model full size rescue 1 2,975,000.00 MMDA
ambulance (reconditioned)
Isuzu GIGA NPS 4WD new

model full size rescue 2 5,950,000.00 MMDA
ambulance (reconditioned)
Rescue Tender Van (with

equipment/accessories) 1 6,920,000.00 MMDA
reconditioned
Life Locator III 1 4,850,000.00 MMDA
Audio ResQ 2 3,960,000.00 MMDA
Life Detector Apparatus
2 2,990,000.00 MMDA
(WOHLER/KD-912)
Stretcher Basket 10 295,000.00 MMDA
Search and Rescue Camera 10 1,450,000.00 MMDA
12
Paratech Airgun Porta
10 3,950,000.00 MMDA
Hammer
Remote Area Lighting
10 440,000.00 MMDA
System
Heavy Duty Lift Bags 10 17,960,000.00 MMDA
Medium Cutter - LUKAS
10 4,380,000.00 MMDA
s330 cutter blade
Combi Tool - LUKAS
10 5,520,000.00 MMDA
sc357
RAM - LUKAS R410
10 2,690,000.00 MMDA
Rescur RAM
Lukas Extension 250mm for
10 260,000.00 MMDA
R410
Pump Motor - Lukas P650-
10 6,460,000.00 MMDA
SG motor pump
Hose; Lukas Coaxial Hose
20 4,360,000.00 MMDA
15
Lukas KSV 8/50 Chain Set 10 1,010,000.00 MMDA
Lukas Tool Station 10 270,000.00 MMDA
Achilles, Inflatable Rubber
2 995,000.00 MMDA
Boat
Thermal Dynamics Drag-
Gun Plus Plasma Cutting 10 1,000,000.00 MMDA
System
Various Scuba Diving
405,825.00 MMDA
Equipment
DOST Laptop 1 49,990.00 NCR
Laptop 1 50,900.00 IVB
Municipalities of
DTI – Boston, Cateel
Hot Chili Processing Project 3 1,243,000.00
Region XI and Bagangga,
Davao Oriental
DILG -
NAPOLCOM Generator, Diesel,10KVA 8 1,512,000.00 OCD, DND
Center
Big Generator Set 1 672,000.00 OCD, DND
Forklift, JAC (brand new) 1 1,749,000.00 OCD, DND
Portalets/Temp.
20 1,190,000.00 OCD, DND
Latrines/Chemical Toilets
Rescue Boat with outboard
2 1,505,200.00 OCD, DND
motors
Rescue Spine Board 15 378,000.00 OCD, DND
Demolition Jack Hammer 13 773,500.00 OCD, DND
Radio Portable VHF 20 316,000.00 OCD, DND
Ropes and Accessories 147 1,808,100.00 OCD, DND
13
Water Pump Set 25 449,250.00 OCD, DND
Waste Sludge Pumps 10 287,090.00 OCD, DND
Chainsaw 13 204,165.00 OCD, DND
Powder Coated Steel 40 543,800.00 OCD, DND
Powder Coated Steel Addon 40 342,400.00 OCD, DND
Water Bladder 5 597,500.00 OCD, DND
Community Tents 10 340,000.00 OCD, DND
Family Tents 50 925,000.00 OCD, DND
Water Treatment Plant 3 11,589,000.00 OCD, DND
3 sets at CO; 2
sets at ROIVA;
10 sets at ROV; 6
Generator Sets KENBO w/ sets at ROXII; 3
50 1,490,000.00
extension cords sets at ROXIII;
15 sets at PPSC;
6 sets at ROVI; 5
sets at ROI
TOTAL 7,081 ₱407,758,553.39
14
Significant Audit Observations and Recommendations
National Government Sector
Delayed completion of projects and unutilized funds
9. Five infrastructure projects totalling P6,368,782,496.00implemented by the

Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), Department of the
Interior and Local Government (DILG) and Philippine Institute of Volcanology
and Seismology (Phivolcs) were not completed nor started within the specific
contract timedue to delayed release of funds, non-coordination and monitoring;
thus, deprived the public of the immediate and maximum use of the said
projects.
9.1 DILG, DSWD and Phivolcs implemented various infrastructure projects totalling
P6,368,782,496.00 out of their DRRM funds.
9.2 The result of the evaluation of the projects disclosed that these were not finished
within the specific contract time or target completion dates for various causes as
indicated in the table below;thus, the objective of the projects was not timely and
fully attained.
Contract Amount/
Implementing
Project Balance as of Cause/s of delay
Agency
December 31, 2014
a) DILG Shortage of construction materials and
RAY 1 P1,791,450,000.00
workers.
RAY 2 2,000,000,000.00 Delay in the release of funds
BEA 2,486,000,000.00 Lack of technical personnel and incomplete
documentary requirements
Sub-total 6,277,450,000.00
Delay in the release of funds and non-
b) DSWD Pilot Evacuation compliance with the terms and conditions
10,000,000.00
Center by the concerned LGUs.
Non-systematic and no standardized
c) Phivolcs DYNASLOPE identification of deployment sites, and
81,332,496.00
Project delays in the manufacture and delivery of
sensors/data loggers.
TOTAL P6,368,782,496.00
a) RAY 1 –Massive and overwhelming repair, rehabilitation and reconstruction

works resulted in acute shortage of construction materials and construction
workers in almost all Yolanda-affected areas, thus slowing down the progress
of the implementation.
RAY 2 – The P2 billion fund was released in November 2014, reverted in

December 2014 and subsequently released only in June 2015. This delay was
due to local government units (LGUs) difficulty in accomplishing the DPWH
certificate of capability.
15
BEA –Slow projectimplementation by the Administration was due to lack of
technical personnel (one engineer and one support staff only), despite the
numerous projects to be implemented while the Provincial Project
Management Team (PPMT) has its own checklist of required documents prior
to the release of funds to the LGUs. Funds will not be released unless the
deficiences noted are corrected/completed by the concerned LGUs regardless
of whether the deficiences were major or minor which causes the slow
utilization of funds and implementation of projects.
b) There was no indication that the DSWD Field Office (FO) VI regularly
coordinated regarding the construction of the pilot evacuation cum multi-
purpose center; no report on the monitoring and inspection of the status of the
project implementation as well as the verification of the utilization of funds;
and have not required the LGU the submission of monthly reports on the
progress of project implementation.
c) Deployment of sensors was delayed and limited by the number of

recommended sites. The sensors were delivered by manufacturers only in
November 2014. Technology transfer requires fully-installed landslide sensors
in the site; thus, the activities under this objective cannot be implemented
unless the deployments are 100 percent completed
9.3 The following courses of actions were recommended:
 DILG to closely monitor the project implementation and require the

concerned LGUs to hasten the completion of subprojects in order to
facilitate the rehabilitation and returning to normalcy of government
services and economic activities in their respective areas;
 DSWD to require and demand the monthly report on fund utilization of

the partner LGU on the status of the implementation of the Pilot
Evacuation Center cum Multi-Purpose Center and require the FO point
person to submit a monitoring and inspection report regularly on the
project implementation for the NPMO management decision making;
and
 Phivolcs to prepare a written criteria for the selection of new sites for
deployment of new landslide sensor system to serve as basis for
scoring/evaluation of all surveys made with the end-view to hasten and
facilitate the indentification of possible sites andcoordinate/collaborate
effectively with University of the Philippines (UP) to fast-track the
manufacture and delivery of needed sensors and data loggers to ensure
that the newly-deployed and installed sensors will be able to communicate
with the PhiVolcs data computers and evaluate results.
16
10. The lack of appropriate work program of DILG that is responsive to disaster
risk reduction management and climate change adaptation (DRRM/CCA) and
the lack of related coordinative activities among the implementing offices
resulted in the underutilization of Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Funds (DRRMF) with 18.82 per cent utilization rate and 9.03 per cent
absorptive capacity because the road map for Disaster Preparedness has not
been presented/ developed by the DILG as vice chairperson of the National
Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council (NDRRMC).
10.1 The guidelines for the proper accounting of DRRM fund shows the importance of
maintaining DRRM in the development process to better prepare for and lessen
the impact of costly disasters with the goal of promoting sustainable socio-
economic growth. Compliance with accounting procedures and guidelines were
specifically instructed.
10.2 Part IV.A.2 and Part V.A.1 of COA Circular 2014-002 state that:
“The agencies (a) that received Special Allotment Release Orders (SAROs) from
NDRRMF; (b) with QRF; and (c) those with DRRMF allocation included in their
respective budgets shall maintain a separate Registry of Allotments and Obligations
(RAOs) to be labeled as RAO-DRRM for Maintenance and Other Operating
Expenses (MOOE) and Capital Outlay (CO) using the formats prescribed in
Appendices 15 and 16, Volume II, MNGAS”; and “The national and local
government agencies with DRRMF allocation from the GAA and/or cash donations
received from local and/or foreign sources shall prepare and submit to NDRRMC
through the Office of the Civil Defense (OCD), on the 5th day following the end of
each month, the Report on the Receipt and Utilization of the DRRMF sourced from
GAA and Report on the Receipt and Utilization of Cash Donations. The reports shall
be furnished the respective COA Auditor” respectively.
10.3 The Accounting Unit did not maintain a separate Registry of Allotments and
Obligations labeled as RAO-DRRM for the receipt of SARO for DRRM fund and
no report of DRRM allocation from the GAA was prepared and submitted to the
National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council (NDRRMC) through the
Office of Civil Defense (OCD) and copy furnished the COA Auditor as required
under COA Circular 2014-002.
10.4 The 2014 General Appropriations Act provided P76 million for “Enhancing LGU
Capacity on Disaster Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation” among the
DILG’s locally funded projects in its capacity as Vice Chairman for disaster
preparedness of the NDRRMC.
10.5 As in the past years, project had three components with corresponding fund
allocation:
Project Components Amount (Php)
1. Assessment – deployment of technical expertise for conduct of audit on P22,429,000.00

hazard/vulnerability, environmental compliance, infrastructure, community
17
Project Components Amount (Php)
preparedness and post disaster
2. Capacity Enhancement – provision of capacity development interventions and 52,971,000.00

advocacy
3. Access to financing – to finance LGU access to People’s Survival Fund and 600,000.00
generate revenues for Capital Outlay for DRR-CCA initiatives (e.g. loans, grants
and subsidies)
Total P76,000,000.00
10.6 The funds were approved and available for release to the implementing offices for
the activities stated in the Operations Plan and Budget (OPB) as allocated based
on the three components, as follows:
Implementing Offices Activities Per OPB Allocation %

Formulation of LCCAP and training
Local Government Academy (LGA) P25,826,400.00 33.98
on roll-out
National Barangay Operations Trainers’ Training on Response and
18,325,000.00 24.11
Office (NBOO) Rescue Operations
Bureau of Local Government Mainstreaming of DRR/CCA in
10,043,800.00 13.22
Development (BLGD) Comprehensive Development Plan
Public Affairs and Communications
Advocacy 5,887,548.00 7.74
Service (PACS)
Office of the Project Development
Infrastructure Audit 6,237,400.00 8.21
Services (OPDS)
Bureau of Local Government
Preparedness Assessment 980,000.00 1.29
Supervision (BLGS)
Office of the Undersecretary for
Administrative Support 8,699,852.00 11.45
Local Government (OUSLG)
Total P76,000,000.00 100
10.7 Review of the fund allocation showed that the linkage between the activities in
the OPB and the project components were not clearly identified. The roles of the
implementing offices in connection with the three components had not been
established and how the funds were released and spent in the regions. As a result,
the fund allocations presented were not appropriately aligned with the project
strategies and objectives.
10.8 The transferred funds to the regions were from two sources: 2013 continuing
appropriations (CA) and 2014 appropriations.
10.9 No specific report of accomplishments was submitted for the 2013 utilization,
while for 2014, the reported accomplishments for the implementing offices with
the amount spent were as follows:
2014
Activities per OPB Physical Accomplishments
Disbursements
LGA
Formulation of Local Climate Report submitted did not reflect the performance
Change Action Plan (LCCAP) indicator presented in the 2014 OPB with reference none
to the utilization of P114,410,030 available in 2014
for DRRM Fund.
18
2014
Activities per OPB Physical Accomplishments
Disbursements
The DILG OPBs did not reflect the Disaster
Preparedness Framework pursuant to R.A. 10121
which is being reported by LGA.
NBOO
 Conduct of Community-Based Request for the transfer of funds to the NBOO was
Disaster Risk Reduction and disapproved by FMS due to the absence of the
Management approved OPB for CY 2014. The project was not none
 Training on Response and implemented in 2014 due to time constraint.
Rescue
BLGD
 Consultation Workshop on  Draft MC on Mainstreaming CCA-DRR in Local
Mainstreaming CCA-DRR in Development Planning was finalized.
Local Development Planning  Memo Circular on Mainstreaming CCA-DRR in 14,000
 National Orientation on Local Development Planning is not yet signed by
Mainstreaming CCA-DRR in Sec. Mar Roxas.
LDP  The National Orientation needs to be conducted 253,000
 Regional Roll-out on prior to the roll-out.
Mainstreaming CCA-DRR in none
LDP
PACS
 Interfacing with LCEs  Activity has not taken off pending the approval
of the concept note; re-enrolled in the 2015
 2 Day Disaster Lecture and DRR-CCA AOPB (new budget).
 First draft has been submitted to none
Simulation Exercises
LGA/incorporated in the Disaster checklist.
 Disaster Playbook
OPDS
Infrastructure Audit Workshop Seminar-workshop on the “Conduct of Infrastructure
Audit” in five (5) out of seven (7) regions
programmed for 2014. 226,157
BLGS
 Counterpart Funds for  Consultation-workshops were conducted to
Protocol Simplification and formulate the study design on the Disaster Risk
Improvement of Standards and Management and Institutional Strengthening.
Disaster Preparedness Audit  Hired consultants 150,000
Tool 280,000
 Consultancy Services
Regional Offices No report 5,945,300
TOTAL P6,868,457
10.10 Per 2014 Registry of Allotment and Obligation – Maintenance and Other
Operating expenses (RAOMO), the object of expenditures for the released funds
of P52,592,965.33 were the following:
Authorized Allotments/ Allotment

Particulars Appropriations Obligations Disbursements Balance
(a) (b) (a-b)
Traveling P13,505,000.00 P677,497.56 P1,050,948.41 P12,827,502.44
Training 21,175,000.00 34,746,578.75 5,006,346.67 (13,571,578.75)
Supplies and Materials 6,800,000.00 14,550,029.38 277,831.41 (7,750,029.38)
Communication 700,000.00 - - 700,000.00
Awards/Rewards and
Prizes - 2,000,000.00 - (2,000,000.00)
Professional Services 8,670,000.00 573,859.64 515,830.13 8,096,140.36
Financial Assistance/
Subsidy 23,000,000.00 - - 23,000,000.00
Other MOOE 2,150,000.00 - - 2,150,000.00
19
Authorized Allotments/ Allotment
Particulars Appropriations Obligations Disbursements Balance
(a) (b) (a-b)
Rent/Lease - 45,000.00 17,500.00 (45,000.00)
Total MOOE P76,000,000.00 P52,592,965.33 P6,868,456.62 P23,407,034.67
10.11 As shown, the fund allocations were inappropriately obligated for trainings,
supplies and materials, awards and prizes, and rent/lease that weremade in excess
of the appropriated funds. While the amount spent was only P6,868,457 out of
P76,000,000 appropriated for the year or 9.03 percent absorptive capacity or
disbursements over total appropriations.
10.12 As shown in Annex C of the herein report, expenses of P14,669,104 in 2014 were
from the 2013 continuing appropriations with no accomplishment report. With the
funds totaling P114,410,030 for disaster preparedness with only P21,537,561
disbursed or 18.82 percent utilization rate, shows that there is the lack of direction
in the disaster preparedness initiatives of the DILG as Vice-Chair of the
NDRRMC pursuant to Section 5 paragraph 2, RA 10121 which provides that:
“The National Council shall be headed by the Secretary of the Department of

National Defense (DND) as Chairperson with the Secretary of the Department of the
Interior and Local Government (DILG) as Vice Chairperson for Disaster
Preparedness, the Secretary of the Department of Social Welfare (DSWD) as Vice
Chairperson for Disaster Response, the Secretary of the Department of Science and
Technology (DOST) as Vice Chairperson for Disaster Prevention and Mitigation,
and the Director-General of the National Economic and Development Authority
(NEDA) as Vice Chairperson for Disaster Rehabilitation and Recovery.”
10.13 The Local Government Academy (LGA), as outcome manager, have not
consolidated/ submitted its report on the results of DRRM/CCA preparedness.As
shown, due to lack of monitoring activities based on the accomplishment reports
and liquidation/report of disbursements, the agency performance on disaster
preparedness DRRM fund cannot be measured with 9.03 percent absorptive
capacity of the project implemented.
Regional Implementation
10.14 The failure to evaluate properly the project design on debris management
under Task Force Pablo of the Proponent LGU in Region XI resulted in
funded projectswith unattainable implementation scheme.
10.14.1 In 2013, the Project Design on Debris Management under Task Force Pablo
of Davao Oriental includes: a) Social Preparation; b) Inventory of Usable
Timber Debris, Retrieval and Clearing; c) Monitoring and Evaluation; d)
Provision for Salaries and Wages of the Debris Provincial Team Field
Workers; and e) Contingency Allowance.
20
10.14.2 The audit disclosed that the Debris Management Work Plan and Project
Design was not followed in the implementation stages.
10.14.3 Only the households-waste assessment characterization study was

conducted for Social Preparation. The Actual Inventory of usable timber
debris and its retrieval/collection and consolidation in four identified
municipalities of Caraga, Cateel, Baganga and Boston in Davao Oriental
was also not conducted due to unanticipated constraints in the field.
10.14.4 Other significant observations were: a) that 19 out of 23 project locations

inspected in the Province of Davao Oriental do not have
notifications/signboards installed as required under COA Circular No. 2013-
004; b) that significant amount of mixed debris was still noted in three
project locations; and c) that an unlikely dumpsite was noted around two
hectares located beside Caraga River and near the Caraga Bridge.
10.14.5 The DILG Focal Person explained that the inventory taking of usable timber
debris did not push through because of the problems encountered in the field
such as: a) Disagreement with the residents about the removal of usable
timbers; b) Lack of coordination between the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources (DENR) XI and other stakeholders; c) inaccessible
terrain of timberlands; d) lack of heavy equipment and trucks; and e) peace
and order condition in the identified areas.
10.14.6 Management provided the Audit Team with the following

actions/comments: a) signboards were already installed in most project
locations; b) the LGU is still retrieving usable timber debris; c) the mixed
debris noted were already cleared; and d) some residents do not like the
timber debris near them removed.
10.14.7 The Task Force Monitoring Report disclosed that the unused fund for Social
Preparationis proposed for reprogramming, for updating of the 10-year
Ecological Waste Management Program of the Proponent LGU, while the
unused fund for Inventory of usable timber debris is proposed for
realignment, the purpose of which was not indicated thereof. The remaining
budget for Timber Debris Retrieval may no longer be necessary since the
Inventory of usable timber debris is proposed for reprogramming for
Ecological Waste Management Program.
10.14.8 The remaining budget for Monitoring and Evaluation, may no longer be
necessary as well since mixed debris clearing/retrieval is 100 percent
accomplished already, and that usable timber debris inventory/geo-tagging,
retrieval, collection and consolidation are unattainable project schemes.
21
10.15 We recommended that Management present a) Disaster Preparedness
framework envisioned in the NDRRMC Plan as the road map for
“Enhancing LGU Capacity on DRRM-CCA” and require the PMO to
develop a work plan responsive to DRRM-CCA (preparedness) with
coordinated activities of the implementing offices and the regions.
10.16 Further, we recommended that managementdesignate a team within Project

Management Office (PMO), that will coordinate with LGA and other DILG
Bureaus and which shall be responsible for facilitation, assessment,
consolidation and monitoring of all matters relating to the DRRM-CCA
Plan.
Utilization of Quick Response Fund (QRF)
11. Only P 4,620,654,581.86 or 62 percent of the P7,453,732,576.08 QRF transferred

to various implementing agencies was utilized due to inadequate planning,
delayed release of SARO and downloading to field offices, incompatibility with
the mandate of the agency and delay in procurement process resulting in
wastage of government resources, delay in the implementation of projects
depriving the communities with the much needed rehabilitation.
11.1 The table below shows the details of the QRF transferred to six implementing
agencies and its utilization.
Year
Source Implemen Amount
Project Trans Utilized Balance
Agency ting Agency Transferred
ferred
1. DA DA RFU VI RAY 2014 P256,309,851.00 P225,035,778.00 P31,274,073.00
Purchase of
RFU CAR 2012 41,268,120.00 32,268,120.00 9,000,000.00
Corn seeds
2. DND Various
Various 2012-
agencies 1,020,736,208.56 268,623,572.28 752,112,636.28
Projects 2014
under DND
3. OCD OCD
Stand-by
Regional 2012 989,244,460.05 66,090,738.21 923,153,721.84
Fund
Offices
4. DILG
DSWD MMRB 2014 350,000,000.00 - 350,000,000.00
5. DSWD DSWD FO
ESA 2014 3,063,902,643.23 3,036,000,000.00 27,902,643.23
IV
FO III, 2008-
CSAP 909,271,293.24 403,636,373.37 505,634,919.87
VI,VIII,X 2014
6. DEPED Regional School
2014 823,000,000.00 589,000,000.00 234,000,000.00
Offices Buildings
Total P7,453,732,576.08 P4,620,654,581.86 P2,833,077,994.22
11.2 As can be gleaned from the afore-cited table, only 62 percent of the total amount
transferred(P4,620,654,581.86/P7,453,732,576.08) was utilized by the
implementing agencies for a period ranging from one year to six years.
22
11.3 The slow utilization was caused by the following:
Implementing
Source Agencies Projects Reasons for slow utilization
Agencies
DA RAY RFU VI Delay in the procurement process and in the
distribution of reconstruction materials
Purchase of RFU CAR CAR did not experience much calamity during
Corn seeds Typhoons Quiel and Pedring; thus, the amount
downloaded by DA OSEC was not fully utilized.
The unused fund was withdrawn by DA OSEC and
transferred the same to RFU XI to augment the QRF
for the Typhoon Pablo victims.
DND Various projects Various agencies Multiple fund transfers made by DND rendered
under DND improbable for these IAs to fully implement the
projects
OCD Stand-by Fund OCD Regional The main purpose of QRF is inconsistent with the
Offices mandate of OCD, thus no planned action of
activities for the released funds
DILG MMRB DSWD Unavailability of land and the procurement of land
are not included in the fund releases
DSWD ESA FO IV Most masterlist and other necessary documents
from LGUs were only submitted on the 2nd week of
January 2015
CSAP FO III Inadequate water and power supply; land ownership
disputes; lack of monitoring and supervision of the
implementation by the LGU; and aggravating road
condition due to weather condition, among others
FO VIII Land site is still owned by the Gawad Kalinga and
the needed Deed of Donation will no longer be
given by the said owner; and required Certificates
from concerned government agencies were not
obtained because the said land site is not safe for
human occupancy
FO X Unavailability of land as relocation site for the
construction of shelter units
DepEd School Regional Offices Late issuance of Sub-AROs from DepEd Central
Buildings Office
 The officials of the concerned source agencies closely monitor the

utilization of fund transfers so that the purpose for which the transfers
are made are immediately carried out and fully implemented;
 The concerned officials of DA ensure that funds released are fully utilized
to benefit the typhoon affected farmers to assist them in rehabilitating
their farms and recover their losses;
 The concerned officials of OCD make representation with the DBM,

through the DND, for the reassessment of the allocation of the QRF
taking into account the functions of each of the implementing agencies of
the NDRRM, as defined under RA No. 10121, with the view of providing
only what is necessary in the performance of their functions, the OCD in
23
particular to ensure that the government resources are utilized to the
optimum level to the advantage of those victimized by calamities;
 The concerned officials of DSWD to return the unutilized fund for

MRRB to DILG; and henceforth refrain from receiving fund transfers
until the conditions of such fund transfers have been complied with;
 The concerned officials of DSWD institute procedures to expedite the

release/distribution of ESA to the prioritized recipients and to coordinate
with the OSEC for the immediate release of the additional ESA to pay the
remaining qualified beneficiaries of the financial assistance due them;
 The concerned officials of DSWDimpose strictly the stipulations in the

MOA regarding committed responsibilities of all the parties involved in
the implementation of the CSAP to achieve fully the benefits and
operating objectives of the program; and
 The concerned officials of DepEd ensure the optimum utilization of funds

received through timely releases of SARO to operating units and consider
releasing sub-allotment order on the basis of cost allocation per damaged
school to the recipient operating units as their authority to implement the
repairs, rehabilitation, or replacement of damaged school buildings and
facilities affected by calamities for the efficient utilization and completion
of projects to normalize as quickly as possible the situation of
communities needing much of the availability of learning facilities.
12. The utilization of funds transferred to various implementing agencies

amounting to P128,091,450.00 was not consistent with QRF as stand-by fund.
12.1 As defined under the GAA, QRF are stand-by fund for relief and recovery
programs in order that situation and living conditions of people in communities or
areas stricken by disasters, calamities, epidemics, or complex emergencies, may
be normalized as quickly as possible.
12.2 QRF are built-in in the budgetary allocations of various agencies to enable them
to immediately assist areas/victims sticken by catastrophies and crises and ensure
immediate action during calamities and does not require the approval of the
Office of the President (OP) to trigger the use and release of funds.
12.3 For CY 2014, the Department of National Defense was provided with an
appropriation of P352,500,000.00 and continuing allotment of P95,350,307.82 for
QRF.
12.4 During the year, DND transferred the aggregate amount of P129,327,257.00for
capital outlay of three implementing agencies as shown below.
24
Agency Purpose of Fund Transfer Capital Outlay (CO)
Repair of concrete pier in
Philippine Navy P39,426,450.00
Caballo Island
Construction of various
Office of Civil Defense 88,665,000.00
RDRRMCs
Sub-total P128,091,450.00
Acquisition of Collapsed
Philippine Military
Structure Search and rescue 1,235,807.00
Academy
Equipment
Total P129,327,257.00
12.5 It was observed that fund transfers to the Philippine Navy (PN) and the Office of
Civil Defense (OCD) for construction, repairs, renovation amounting to
P128,091,450.00do not fall under the intended purpose of the QRF.
12.6 We recommended that the concerned officials of DND strictly implement the
provisions of the GAA on the utilization of the QRF.
Utilization of Donations
13. Donations in the aggregate amount of P850,228,982.41, which were received by

OCD and DSWD from foreign and local donors were not utilized in full,
depriving the calamity victims of the much needed assistance to alleviate their
difficulties.
13.1 Tabulated below are the donations received and utilized by OCD and DSWD.
Total donations Utilization Unutilized Balance

AGENCY
(received from 2008 to 2013) (from 2008 to 2014) as of 12/31/14
OCD P466,018,732.14 P81,068,471.49 P384,950,260.65
DSWD 1,151,238,883.76 769,160,510.92 382,078,372.84
Total P1,617,257,616.00 P850,228,982.41 P767,028,633.49
13.2 The donated funds received by the Office of Civil Defense were used for payment
of financial assistance to calamity victims as authorized under DND
Memorandum Order No. 1 and NDCC Memorandum Order No. 13. The balance
of P384,950,260.65 which is 82.60 percent of the total donations were not utilized
for the period ranging from one to six years. While for DSWD, the unutilized
balance ofP382,078,372.84 constituted 33 percent of the total donations for
Yolanda victims of P1,151,238,883.76.
13.3 There was no information or proof that the purposes for said donations were
already served or completed by OCD and DSWD. However, considering the
lapse of time since the donations were received indicates that the purposes may
have already been served in which case the unutilized balances should have been
remitted to the BTr pursuant to COA Circular 2014-002 dated April 15,
2014which require that all unutilized cash donations after the purpose had been
served shall either be:
25
a. remitted to the Bureau of the Treasury (BTr), if no condition to return any
unused amount to the donor, or
b. returned to the donor, if specified in the agreement.
13.4 The management of OCD stated that the unutilized balance was due to low
utilization in view of the absence of the rulings and guidelines on its usage and
the delay in the submission of requirements by the victims.
13.5 On the other hand, the Managementof DSWD commented that the utilization of
the balances is still being considered in the Work and Financial Plan prepared.
They further commented that as of June 15, 2015, the unutilized amount has been
reduced to P338,857,856.10 (P150,831,930.86 for the CO and P188,025,925.24
for the FOs). The remaining unutilized funds in the amount of P150,831,930.86
were included in the Work and Financial Plan for typhoon Yolanda.
a) The concerned officials of OCD to:
 ensure that donations are utilized for the intended purpose in a

timely manner and facilitate the early determination of the actual
number of affected victims and their immediate needs for the purpose
of ensuring the improvement of their living conditions;
 revisit DND Memorandum Order No. 1 and NDCC Memorandum

Order No. 13 with the end view of aligning them with the provisions
of RA 10121 for an effective administration of cash donations, with
focus on the concerns of the calamity victims;
 formulate a comprehensive plan, to be recommended to NDRRMC,

which contains the specific rulings and procedures on how to utilize
the donations in accordance with the functions of each member of the
council, i.e. DSWD for distribution of relief good, DPWH for repair
and rehabilitation of infrastructure; and
b) The concerned officials of OCD and DSWD remit to the Bureau of

Treasury the unutilized balance after the purpose has been served.
Storage/Warehousing and distribution of relief goods
14. The procurement and acceptance by DSWD of relief goods was made without
considering the absorptive capacity and condition of the warehousing facilities
and personnel, available stocks, shelf life or expiry dates and the actual needs of
Field Offices (FOs) resulting in undistributed and expired or about to expire
relief goods amounting to P5,115,200.00.
26
14.1 As of December 31, 2014, DSWD has about P141.084 million expired or near
expiry relief goods which have not been distributed which are stored in storage
facilities in the Central Office and in various Field Offices.
14.2 This was brought about by some lapses in the procurement, acceptance of the
relief goods, as well as, in the storage and distribution procedures, details of
which are tabulated below.
Undistributed, Expired or Soon to Expire as of

Office/FO 12/31/14 Remarks
Items Qty Amount
Sardines 900,180 tins 10,577,115.00 The relief goods were procured on Oct. 20,
OSEC Corned beef 949,031 tins 14,045,658.80 2014 to be delivered to FO V for repacking and
Noodles 814,916 pcs. 4,816,153.56 distribution. The targeted 500,118 family Food
Packs were not repacked for distribution to FO
V due to insufficient warehouse facility.
Of the 1,269,108 pcs of noodles at CO, 451,992
pcs were transferred on Dec. 8-31 2014 to FOs
IVA, IVB and VII and the balance of 814,896 to
FOs I, II, III, IVA, CAR, and NCR less than
two months prior to its expiry date of May
2015.
FOs III, IVA and IVB did not request for the
transferred noodles.
OSEC Sardines 9,704 tins 107,714.40 The available stocks of sardines, corned beef
Corned beef 307,992 tins 4,558,261.60 and noodles were not considered prior to
Noodles 599,040 pcs 3,672,115.20 procurement of additional relief goods for
Cereal drink 81,408 pcs 354,124.80 Typhoon Ruby. As reported there were excess
1,269,108 pcs noodles intended for Mayon
Volcano victims which could have been used
first.
As of March 17, 2015, the 599,040 pcs of
noodles with expiry date of June 15, 2015
remained undistributed.
NCR Noodles 96 sacks NA Part of the noodles were donated by Thailand in
Imported biscuits 37 boxes NA June 2014 and part from DSWD with expiry
Canned goods 33 boxes NA date of March 2014
The imported biscuits expired in March 2014,
while the canned goods were likewise expired,
mislabeled and/or with rusty/dented tin cans.
The relief goods are temporarily entrusted to
DSWD-NCR warehouse. These are subject for
disposal and are no longer fit for human
consumption
IVA Family Food 427 NA Should have been delivered to the Provincial
Packs (FFPs) Social Welfare and Development Office in
Lucena City but remained undelivered as of
2014.
The agency’s warehouse is not organized and
without adequate space.
The pile of sacks of FFPs has no labels or marks
to determine the quantity stacked.
IVB Various goods NA 4,570,000.00 The goods are not properly stockpiled for easy
counting, release and expiry dates can’t be seen.
FFPs, sacks of NFA rice and boxes of canned

goods are laid on the floor with cardboard as
matting, thus, not protected from damp and
pests.
The temperature of the warehouse is hot without

air ventilation and direct sunlight passes through
the room which moistens the canned goods and
sacks of rice.
27
Undistributed, Expired or Soon to Expire as of
Office/FO 12/31/14 Remarks
Items Qty Amount
The warehouse can be easily accessed by
unauthorized person/thieves because its padlock
can be unlocked easily by using any card.
VI Rice 3,197 sacks 5,115,200.00
14.3 It was recommended and the Secretary agreed to direct the concerned
DSWD officials to:
 prioritize and fast track the distribution of the remaining relief goods
especially those food items soon to expire, otherwise, these will be
damaged/spoiled that would result to wastage of government funds;
 transfer immediately the relief food items to any other storage area
suitable for storing perishable goods in order to avoid early deterioration
and spoilage of the food items that may likewise result in wastage of
government funds;
 consider, among others, the following factors in its future procurement

and acceptance of relief goods to meet the objective of the procurement
and prevent overstocking and/or expiration: (i) absorptive capacity and
condition of the warehousing facility and personnel to accommodate
procured items; (ii) availability of goods prior to the procurement of
additional relief items based on the needs of the disaster affected FOs or
let the DSWD FOs do their own procurement and make them responsible
and accountable for the same; and (iii) shelf-life or expiry date of goods to
be procured and distributed to recipient beneficiaries;
 observe proper procurement planning and monitoring of relief goods for

the procurement and distribution to the intended beneficiaries that would
aid in making decision as to the necessity of procuring additional relief
goods during disaster relief operations so that huge balances of stocks
after each relief operation could be avoided and to ensure efficient and
effective delivery of the relief goods;
 consider reducing the inventory level of relief goods commensurate with

the actual requirements of the FOs and avoid placing POs after the
critical period of relief operation to avoid huge balances of inventories;
and
 assign additional personnel during relief operations to properly and

collectively store/pile the goods received from various sources to prevent
its immediate spoilage/deterioration and to facilitate efficient monitoring
and reporting of the status of relief operation.
28
15. There was uncertainty as to actual receipt of Family Food Pack (FFPs) by
victims of Typhoon Ruby/Hagupit in FOs IV-A, IV-B, VI and XI because the
distribution made by DSWD of the 144,444 FFPs was not supported with the
Relief Distribution Sheets (RDS).
15.1 The distribution of 144,444 FFPs to various LGUs in FOs IV-A, IV-B, VI and
XIas of December 31, 2014 provide no proofs if the relief goods were actually
received by typhoon victims, as follows:
SOURCE/PACKING NO. OF RIS NO. OF FFPs NO. OF
CENTER RELEASED RECIPIENT LGUs
FO IVB:
Regional Office 2 1,500 2
SWAD Office-Marinduque 7 3,036 7
SWAD Office-Occ. Mindoro 5 1,000 5
SWAD Office-Or. Mindoro 16 3,100 16
SWAD Office-Palawan 10 2,300 10
SWAD Office-Romblon 15 5,364 15
Sub-Total FO IV-B 55 16,300 55
FO VI:
Juantong Warehouse 24 24,967 21
Barotac Viejo, Iloilo 3 3,787 3
SWAD Office-Antique 10 1,666 8
SWAD Office-Aklan 10 2,470 10
SWAD Office-Capiz 7 1,850 7
SWAD Office-Negros Occ. 4 3,609 3
Sub-total FO VI 58 38,349 52
FO IV-A 23,880
FO XI 65,915
Total 113 144,444 107
15.2 It is required in the absence of RD, the Agency’s Disaster Relief Operation Matrix
and the Flow of Relief Goods Distribution that LGUs are to use and accomplish
the RDS showing, in particular, the names and signatures of the Typhoon Ruby
victims who received FFPs. To date, no LGU accomplished RDS was submitted;
hence, it cannot be ascertained if the FFPs actually reached the typhoon
victims/affected families. Management commented that letters have been sent to
concern LGUs requesting submission of the RDS.
15.3 It further showed that the following documentary requirements prescribed under
COA Circular No. 2014-002 dated April 15, 2014 were not complied with by the
Warehouse Management and Donation Facilitation Division (WMDFD), Disaster
Risk Reduction and Response Operations Office (DRRROO):
 Issuance Form For In-Kind Donations – DRRM

 Invoice Receipt
 Registry of Donated Relief Goods for DRRM
 Report on the Receipt and Distribution/Issuance of Donated Relief Goods
 Report on the Receipt and Utilization/Issuance of Donated PPE
 Inventory List Items for DRRM
29
 Inventory List of Procured Items for DRRM
 Inventory List of Donated Items for DRRM
 Property/Stock Cards
15.4 Instead of the above required documents, the WMDFD, DRRROO presented the
following report/records: (a) Status of Family Foods Packs; (b) Status of Relief
Augmentation or Summary of Releases; (c) Status of Delivery; (d)
Acknowledgment Receipt for In-Kind Donations for DRRM; (e) Volunteer
Mobilization Report; and (f) Tally Out Sheet (TOS), which caused the difficulty
in tracking the goods purchased until it reaches the beneficiaries.
15.5 We recommended and the DSWD Secretary agreed to direct the FOs IVB,
VI and XI Management to require the immediate submission of the RDS
from the concerned LGUs as proof of actual receipt of FFPs by Typhoon
Ruby/Hagupit affected families.
30
Local Government Sector
16. The importance of the local government units (LGUs) during disasters cannot be
overlooked. They play a vital role by taking the lead in preparing for, responding to
and recovering from the effects of any disaster. The LGUs are in the frontline being
the agency primarily responsible in responding to disasters. RA 10121 sets the
following coordination mechanisms during emergencies:
 The Barangay Development Council takes the lead if a barangay is affected;

 The City/Municipal DRRMCs, if two or more barangays are affected;
 The Provincial DRRMCs, if two or more cities/municipalities are affected;
 The Regional DRRMCs, if two or more provinces are affected; and
 The NDRRMC, if two or more regions are affected.
17. Thus, it is important that the officials have sufficient capability to act and respond in
time of emergencies and to have sufficient funds for this purpose.
18. RA 10121 strengthens the capacity of the National Government and LGUs for
disaster risk reduction and management through decentralized powers,
responsibilities and resources. More particularly, the following sources of funds are
available for the LGUs:
 Not less than 5% of the estimated revenue from the regular sources are set
aside as the LDRRMF;
 The balance of the current year LDRRMF are recognized as Special trust
Fund to be spent by LGUs in the succeeding five years;
 LGUs can also receive funds from the NDRRMF upon approval of the
President, from other LGUs and other sources.
19. The failure of LGUs to make available the above resources for its disaster risk
reduction and management activities and to utilize DRRM funds in accordance with
existing rules and regulations on its utilization, accounting and reporting, will prevent
it from performing properly its mandated responsibilities under RA 10121.
20. The audit conducted on the LDRRM funds disclosed various observations as
consolidated by the Local Government Sector, and summarized below:
21. Several inconsistencies were noted in the implementation of RA 10121:
21.1 Twelve (12) LGUs did not appropriate funds for DRRM contrary to Section
21 of Republic Act (RA) No. 10121.
21.1.1 Section 21 of Republic Act (RA) No. 10121 provides:
“The present Local Calamity Fund shall henceforth be known as the Local Disaster
Risk Reduction and Management Fund (LDRRMF). Not less than five percent (5%)
31
of the estimated revenue from regular sources shall be set aside as the LDRRMF to
support disaster risk management activities such as, but not limited to, pre-disaster
preparedness programs including training, purchasing life-saving rescue equipment,
supplies and medicines, for post-disaster activities, and for the payment of premiums
on calamity insurance. The LDRRMC shall monitor and evaluate the use and
disbursement of the LDRRMF based on the. LDRRMP as incorporated in the local
development plans and annual work and financial plan.Upon the recommendation of
the LDRRMO and approval of the sanggunian concerned, the LDRRMC may
transfer the said fund to support disaster risk reduction work of other LDRRMCs
which are declared under state of calamity.
xxx.
Unexpended LDRRMF shall accrue to a special trust fund solely for the purpose of
supporting disaster risk reduction and management activities of the LDRRMCs within
the next five (5) years. x x x .”
21.1.2 Tabulated below are the LGUs which failed to appropriate LDRRM funds.
Region LGU
1. Cavinti
IV-A
2. Santa Cruz
ARMM 3. Buldon
4. Buluan
5. DatuPaglas
6. H. PanglimaTahil
7. Maguing
ARMM 8. Omar
9. P Estino
10. Parang
11. South Upi
12. Tapul
21.2 Eighty-seven LGUs in various regions (details in Annex D) did not transfer
to Special Trust Funds (STF) unexpended/unutilized/unobligated LDRRMF
balances in the total amount of P1,327,797,094.05 contrary to the above-
quoted regulation, tabulated below.
Region Amount
IV A P391,554,756.31
IV B 198,983,410.27
V 30,851,540.61
VI 21,398,644.08
VII 5,668,726.52
VIII 3,802,756.12
XII 25,694,665.78
32
Region Amount
XIII 38,924,029.46
NCR 579,232,000.00
ARMM 31,686,564.90
TOTAL P1,327,797,094.05
21.3 Twenty-nine LGUs failed to maximize the utilization of their LDRRMF,

defeating the objectives of RA No. 10121, tabulated below.
Region Number of LGUs*

IV-A 9
IV-B 8
V 8
VIII 1
XIII 3
Total 29
*See Annex E for the list of LGUs
21.3.1 In view of the failure by the above LGUs to appropriate funds for LDRRMF, to
transfer their unobligated/unexpended LDRRMF balances to STF, and to fully
maximize utilization of the fund, there was noassurance that the disaster risk
management activities for their respective communities were carried out and the
objectives of RA 10121 were attained.
21.4 Fifteen LGUs have no approved LDRRM Plan and the corresponding Work
and Financial Plan in accordance with Rule 5, Section 4 (1) and Rule 6,
Section 4 (7) of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 10121; thus,
timeframes, sources of funding, and expected output was not explicitly
defined.
21.4.1 Section 4, Rule 5 of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 10121

provides for the functions of LDRRMCs, as follows:
a. Approve, monitor and evaluate the implementation of the LDRRMPs and

annually review, test and develop the plan consistent with other national and
local planning programs;
b. Ensure the integration of disaster risk reduction and climate change

adaptation into local development plans, programs and budgets as a strategy
in sustainable development and poverty reduction;
c. Recommend the implementation of forced or preemptive evacuation of local

residents, if necessary; and
d. Convene the local council as provided by the Act.
33
21.4.2 In addition, Section 4(7), Rule 6 of the IRR of RA 10121 also provides for the
functions of the provincial, city and municipal DRRMOs or BDRRMCs, in
coordination with concerned national agencies and instrumentalities, one of
which is to formulate and implement a comprehensive and integrated
LDRRMP in accordance with the national, regional and provincial framework
and policies on disaster risk reduction in close coordination with the local
development councils.
21.4.3 Tabulated below are the LGUs per region which do not have approved
LDRRM Plan and the corresponding Work and Financial Plan:
Region LGU
NCR 1. Caloocan
IV-A 2. BAY
3. Calauan
IV-B 4. Linapacan
V 5. Calabanga
6. Irosin
7. Gubat
VI 8. San Miguel
9. Cabatuan
10. Calatrava
XIII 11. Buenavista
12. Nasipit
13. Carmen
14. Remedios T. Romauldez
ARMM 15. City of Isabela
21.4.4 The formulation of individual LDRRM Plan and the Work and Financial Plan
are crucial in the management by LGUs of the risks during disasters.
22. Seven LGUs failed to organize a Local Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Council as required under Section 11 of RA No. 10121.
22.1 Section 11 of RA 10121 provides:
“Organization at the Local Government Level. - The existing Provincial, City, and
Municipal Disaster Coordinating Councils shall henceforth be known as the
Provincial, City, and Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Councils.
The Barangay Disaster Coordinating Councils shall cease to exist and its powers
and functions shall henceforth be assumed by the existing Barangay Development
Councils (BDCs) which shall serve as the LDRRMCs in every barangay. x x x”
34
22.2 The following LGUs did not organize their respective Local Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Councils which will be responsible for ensuring the
protection and welfare of the communities during disasters and emergencies:
Region LGU
1. Cavinti, Laguna
2. Lumban, Laguna
IV-A 3. Sampaloc, Quezon
4. Santa Cruz, Laguna
5. Siniloan, Laguna
6. Romblon Province
IV-B
7. Taytay, Palawan
23. Expenses not related to disaster risk management and charges out of QRF not
supported with SB Resolution
23.1 DILG Memorandum Circular No. 2012-73 dated April 17, 2012 provides that the
LDRRMF shall be used for disaster risk management activities, support to other
affected LGUs and quick response fund or stand-by fund for relief recovery.
23.2 Ten LGUs, tabulated below, spent their LDRRMF for activities which are not
disaster risk management related, in the total amount of P8,425,679.87, instead of
charging the same against their regular appropriation, inconsistent with the
provisions of the DILG Memorandum Circular.
Region LGU Amount

1. City Government of Antipolo P19,208.44
2. Kalayaan 115,521.63
IV-A
3. Pakil, Laguna 139,867.62
Total 274,597.69
IV-B 4. Paluan 2,347,888.00
V 5. Malinao 780,000.00
VI 6. San Miguel 1,026,151.50
VIII 7. San Jorge, Samar 2,808,894.99
8. Maasim 835,699.69
9. Maitum 336,448.00
XII
10. Malungon 16,000.00
Total 1,188,147.69
Grand Total P 8,425,679.87
23.3 On the other hand, 21 LGUsutilized their Quick Response Fund despite the
absence of a Resolution of the Sangguniang Bayan (SB) or Presidential
declaration of state of calamity which is not consistent with Section 5.1.3 of COA
35
Circular 2012-002, which provides that the release and use of the LDRRMF shall
be supported by Local Sanggunian resolution and the declaration of state of
calamity for the QRF. They are as follows:

IV-B 2
V 10
VI 2
XII 3
XIII 4
TOTAL 21
See Annex F for the list of LGUs
23.4 The above expenses/transactions are considered irregular.
24. Non-adherence to COA Circular No. 2012-002 on the accounting and reporting of
LDRRM funds
24.1 Section 5.1.1 of COA Circular No. 2012-002 provides that the appropriation for
the LDRRMF shall be included in the General Fund Budget. The existing
program category “Budgetary Reserve” (9998) and “Outlays for Disaster and
other Calamities” (9991) shall be changed to “Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management” (DRRM)” (9940). The QRF which is a lump sum appropriation
shall be under the functional classification “Other Purposes”. The preparedness
and mitigation projects as identified in the LDRRMFFIP shall be classified under
the program for DRRM and under the functional classification of the
implementing office.
24.2 Accounting and reporting of the LDDRMF were not properly adhered to by 47
LGUs, tabulated below, violating Section 5.1.1 of COA Circular No. 2012-002.

IV-B 2
V 9
VI 1
XIII 4
ARMM 31
TOTAL 47
*See Annex G for the list of LGUs
24.3 Failure of the above LGUs to strictly adhere to the above regulation resulted in
the difficulty in determining the accurate unexpended/unobligated yearly balances
of the fund while clouding pertinent transactions with questions of their validity
and legality.
36
24.4 On the other hand, 155 LGUs, tabulated below, were not able to prepare the
required fund utilization reports with the supporting documents and submit the
same to the Audit Team contrary to Section 5.1.5 of COA Circular Nos. 2012-002
dated September 12, 2012.

NCR 3
IV-A 15
IV-B 14
V 17
VI 35
VII 3
VIII 27
XII 5
XIII 17
ARMM 19
TOTAL 155
*See Annex H for the list of LGUs
24.5 Section 5.1.5 of COA Circular No. 2012-002, dated September 12, 2012 provides
that a Report on Sources and Utilization of DRRMF shall be prepared and
certified correct by the Local Accountant. The Local Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Officer (LDRRMO) shall submit the report on or before the 15th day
after the end of each month through the LDRRMC and Local Development
Council (LDC) to the COA auditor of the LGU.
24.6 The failure of the LGUs to submit the required fund utilization reports is not
consistent with the principle on transparency and accountability and rendered
doubtful the reliability of the financial data on disaster funds.
25. Inaccurate recording of the purchased relief goods
25.1 Relief goods purchased by 16 LGUs,tabulated below, out of the LDRRMFwere

taken up in the books as direct expense, instead of the appropriate inventory
accounts, thus resulting in the overstatement of expense and understatement of
inventory accounts. Moreover, donated relief goods of five LGUs were not
recorded in the book of accounts contrary to COA Circular 2014-002 dated April
15, 2014 hence there was no check and balance in the receipt and issuance of the
said goods.
Region LGU
IV-A 1. Cavite City
2. Ajuy
3. Balasan
VI
4. Banate
5. Barotac Nuevo
37
Region LGU
6. Barotac Viejo
7. Carles
8. Concepcion
9. Dionisio
10. Dumangas
VI 11. Estancia
12. Hamtic
13. Lemery
14. San Rafael
15. Sara
16. Tobias Fornier
25.2 COA Circular 2014-002 dated April 15, 2014 provides for the following
guidelines on the procurement of relief goods out of DRRM funds:
a. Supplies, materials, equipment and relief goods procured out of the fund shall
be taken up in the books under the appropriate Inventory and/or Property,
Plant and Equipment (PPE) account. Except for PPE, issuances for
distribution to end-users/beneficiaries shall be supported with Requisition
Issue Slip (RIS) and taken up under the appropriate expense account.
b. The Accounting Unit shall prepare and maintain PPE Ledger Cards and
Supplies Ledger Cards for all PPE and relief goods, respectively, procured out
of appropriations. For check and balance, the Property and Supply Unit shall
maintain Property Cards and Stock Cards. The formats prescribed in
Appendices 8, 9, 38 and 39, Volume II, MNGAS shall be used.
26. Incomplete documentation
26.1 The granting and liquidation of cash advances amounting to P102,608,322.70

to23 LGUs charged to LDRRMF were not supported with complete and proper
documentation, contrary to Section 4 [6] of PD 1445.
26.2 Section 4 (6) of PD 1445 states that “Claims against government funds shall be
supported with complete documentation.”
26.3 The table below shows the amount of cash advances granted to 23 LGUs in
various regions which are not supported with complete documentation.
Region Number of LGUs Amount

IV-A 5 P11,456,375.09
IV-B 3 3,374,342.52
V 7 69,675,428.54
VI 3 1,807,058.86
VIII 1 2,000,000.00
XII 1 3,559,883.79
38
Region Number of LGUs Amount
XIII 3 10,735,233.90
TOTAL 23 P102,608,322.70
*See Annex I for the list of LGUs
26.4 On the other hand, the municipalities of Bato-Region V and Jamindan and
Mambusao of Region VI distributed relief goods for the victims of typhoon using
the CY 2014 LDRRMF but were not supported with the list of
beneficiaries/recipients, contrary to Section C. 2 of COA Circular no. 2014-002
dated April 15, 2014, which provides that: “Issuances of donated relief goods for
distribution to intended beneficiaries/end-users shall be supported with Issuance Form
for In-kind Donations DRRM.”
26.5 Due to lack of sufficient documentation, the regularity and propriety of the
expenditures could not be determined.
26.6 The Local Chief Executives of the concerned LGUs are recommended to
undertake the following activities:
 comply with the statutory appropriation of 5% of estimated revenue from

regular sources to obtain sufficient funds to carry out the disaster risk
management activities and attain the objective of RA 10121;
 require their Chief Accountant to transfer the unexpended/unobligated

balance to STF in compliance with Section 6.4 of the National Disaster
Risk Reduction Management Council (NDRRMC) DBM DILG
Memorandum Circular No. 2013-02 dated March 25, 2013;
 ensure that the LDRRMF are utilized strictly for calamity-related

activities to accomplish properly all the programs, projects and activities
embodied in the LDRRMF Plan as required under DILG Memorandum
Circular 2012-73;
 strictly abide with the provisions of DILG Memorandum Circular No.

2012-73 and refrain from incurring and charging expenses not related to
disaster risk management activities to DRRM Fund;
 refrain from charging expenses against QRF without resolution and

declaration of state of calamity as required under Section 5.1.3.1 of COA
Circular 2012-002 dated September 12, 2012;
 instruct the LDRRMC to prepare the LDRRM Plan and the

corresponding Work and Financial Plan in accordance with Rule 5,
Section 4 (1) and Rule 6, Section 4 (7) of the Implementing Rules and
Regulations of RA 10121;
39
 organize a LDRRMC as required under Section 11 of RA No. 10121;
 require their concerned officials to prepare and submit a duly certified

Report on Sources and Utilization of LDRRMF within the period
prescribed, which is on or before the 15th day after the end of each
month, in compliance with Section 5.1.5 of COA Circular No. 2012-002
dated September 12, 2012;
 instruct the concerned officers to adhere on the Accounting and

Reporting Guidelines under Section 5.1.1 of COA Circular 2012-002
dated September 12, 2012;
 instruct the Chief Accountants to adhere strictly to Section IV.9 and

IV.10 of COA Circular 2014-002 in the recording of purchased and
donated relief goods;
 ensure complete documentation before processing disbursement and

liquidation of cash advance in compliance with Section 4 [6] of PD 1445;
and
 follow the procedures in handling donated relief goods prescribed in

COA Circular 2014-002 dated April 15, 2014 to present a reliable
financial reports and availability of accurate information on the receipt
and utilization of disaster relief aid/donations in-kind.
40
Status of Implementation of Prior Years’ Audit Recommendations
Since this is the initial Consolidated Report prepared for the audit of DRRM
funds, the status of prior years’ audit recommendations was not presented. However, the
status of PY audit recommendations on DRRM are contained and can be verified from
the individual Annual Audit Reports of various agencies receiving and utilizing DRRM
Funds.
Acknowledgement
We wish to express our appreciation to the Auditors of various national and local
government agencies that provided the financial data and observations on DRRM
management in their respective audited agencies and to the management and staff of the
Office of Civil Defense for their cooperation and assistance.
We request that appropriate actions be taken on the various audit

recommendations consolidated in this Report.
Very truly yours,
CYNTHIA B. FERRER
Audit Team Leader
LUCENA D. GANA
Supervising Auditor
41
ANNEX A
NDRRMF UTILIZED AND UNUTILIZED BALANCES

As of December 31, 2014
RECEIPT UTILIZATION TOTAL
IMPLEMENTING Beg. Balance, UNUTILIZED
TOTAL
AGENCIES Dec 31, 2013 Donated BALANCES,
Allotments Donated Funds TOTAL Allotments TOTAL DEC 31, 2014
Funds
1. DA 2,889,675.91 1,657,813,285.00 - 1,657,813,285.00 1,660,702,960.91 1,432,536,661.66 1,432,536,661.66 228,166,299.25
2. DepEd - 3,720,008,759.62 - 3,720,008,759.62 3,720,008,759.62 362,569,985.96 362,569,985.96 3,357,438,773.66
3. DOH 500,538,733.09 - - - 500,538,733.09 121,125,021.21 121,125,021.21 379,413,711.88
4. DILG 1,844,836,728.62 4,562,045,518.00 3,133,991.35 4,565,179,509.35 6,410,016,237.97 4,335,531,567.68 12,814,600.00 4,348,346,167.68 2,061,670,070.29
5. BFP - 189,092,900.00 - 189,092,900.00 189,092,900.00 43,161,513.00 43,161,513.00 145,931,387.00
6. DND 95,350,307.82 352,500,000.00 - 352,500,000.00 447,850,307.82 170,154,189.72 170,154,189.72 277,696,118.10
7. DPWH 744,859,816.67 3,818,829,700.52 - 3,818,829,700.52 4,563,689,517.19 2,650,518,250.84 2,650,518,250.84 1,913,171,266.35
8. DSWD 1,403,192,037.26 3,765,755,856.00 149,799,882.00 3,915,555,738.00 5,318,747,775.26 3,149,484,107.66 65,430,129.00 3,214,914,236.66 2,103,833,538.60
9. DTI - 10,800,000.00 - 10,800,000.00 10,800,000.00 8,494,000.00 8,494,000.00 2,306,000.00
10. GHQ 17,631,231.69 118,645,912.00 - 118,645,912.00 136,277,143.69 68,645,912.00 68,645,912.00 67,631,231.69
11. OCD 791,869,153.50 530,000,000.00 95,549,453.85 625,549,453.85 1,417,418,607.35 66,090,738.21 13,709,609.78 79,800,347.99 1,337,618,259.36
12. PAF 201,202,497.66 - - - 201,202,497.66 147,333,818.10 147,333,818.10 53,868,679.56
13. PA 83,307,355.50 42,758,523.35 - 42,758,523.35 126,065,878.85 98,659,270.17 98,659,270.17 27,406,608.68
14. PHILVOCS 46,400,496.00 34,932,000.00 - 34,932,000.00 81,332,496.00 44,721,590.21 44,721,590.21 36,610,905.79
15. COMELEC - - 432,679.22 432,679.22 432,679.22 - 432,679.22 432,679.22 -

TOTAL P5,732,078,033.72 P18,803,182,454.49 P248,916,006.42 P19,052,098,460.91 P24,784,176,494.63 P12,699,026,626.42 P92,387,018.00 P12,791,413,644.42 P11,992,762,850.21
ANNEX B
MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS
IMPLEMENTING
PLANS ACTIVITIES ACCOMPLISHMENT
AGENCY
GOAL: DRRM and CCA mainstreamed and integrated in National, Sectoral and local development policies,
plans and budget.
1. Decisions supported by tools  Develop science-based  Included Climate

and technologies that facilitate mainstreaming tools Housing and Land Change Vulnerability
the financial and economically for DRRM and CCA Use Regulatory Assessment and
sound mainstreaming of DRRM Board (HLURB) Disaster Risk
and CCA  Build capacities to Assessment in Vol. 2
effectively of the 2013-2014
mainstreaming DRRM CLUP Guidebook
and CCA in
 Produced the
development planning, Supplemental
investment Guidelines on
programming, project Mainstreaming
development and Climate and Disaster
evaluation Risks in the CLUP
2. Measures to reduce  Review and amend HLURB  Included OCD, DOST,

vulnerability and increase EO72 Sec. 2 to include CCC, PAGASA, and
capacity to cope with disasters OCD, DOST and CCC PHIVOLCS as
are integrated in plans, as members of the suggested members of
programs and projects Provincial Land Use PLUC under Vol. 1 of
Committee (PLUC) the 2013-2014 CLUP
and the Board of Guidebooks
Commissioners
GOAL: DRRM and CCA sensitive environmental management
3. Environmental policies with  Review and integrate HLURB  Mainstreamed CCA-

DRRM and CCA lens and DRRM and CCA into DRR and enhanced the
component various environmental CLUP process using
policies, plans, the Ridge-to-
programs and projects Reef/Integrated
(i.e EO 26 or National Watershed Ecosystems
Greening Program) Management
framework in the
2013-2014 CLUP
Guidebook
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
GOAL: Increased disaster resilience of Infrastructure Systems
4. Enhanced disaster mitigation  Advocacy for the Department of  Implemented disaster-
and preparedness strategies for implementation of the Education (DepEd) resilient school
Infrastructure systems building code and us building designs with
of green technology necessary budget
adjustments
 Conduct inventory,
vulnerability and risk  Upgrade of the
assessment for critical Building Code under
infrastructure process. Green
building is likewise to
be included in the
building code
 Assessed damages for

61 State Colleges and
Universities at the end
of 2013
 Develop guidelines on Department of  Implemented

the redesign, retro- Public Works and Structural Resiliency
fitting or operational Highways Program in new
modification of (DPWH) construction and in the
infrastructure reconstruction of
calamity damaged
infrastructures –
upgraded roads and
bridges, school
buildings, hospital,
public housing, and
other infrastructure
facilities
 Recovered road right

of way of critical
national roads and
bridges and upgraded
design to ensure flood-
free at all times
 Identified public
facilities as safe
Shelter Centers in
disaster prone
municipalities for
resilient design and
redundancy to also be
used as emergency
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
command center and
evacuation facility
 Completed design of
one storey resilient
school building as well
as two storey multi-
purpose building
 Upgraded engineering
design standards for
flood control, drainage
and slope protection
works
 Upgraded National
code to include DRRM
and CCA
 Integrate DRRM and HLURB  Mainstreamed CCA-

CCA in the building DRR in the new
code and local Integrated Model
ordinances Zoning Ordinance
(MZO) for cities and
municipalities
GOAL: Community based and scientific DRRM and CCA assessment, mapping, analysis and monitoring
5. DRRM and CCA assessment  Conduct vulnerability DEPED, DPWH  Approved DepEd
and mapping tools assessment on a order on the annual
regular basis (every 1st conduct of student-led
quarter on election risk assessment in
year – per existing schools
DILG policy) as the
need arises a) National  Conducted
Level; b) Local Level vulnerability
assessment prior to
construction of
infrastructures. If
existing infrastructures
are found vulnerable,
interventions such as
retro fitting measures
are done
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
6. Readily usable and accessible  Conduct hazards DPWH  Used Geo-hazard
knowledge product as DRRM mapping and maps as one tool for
and CCA planning tools assessment at planning for climate
town/city to barangay resilient infrastructure
levels (a. National
Level; b. Local Level)
7. Collection of various DRRM  Establishment of a DPWH  Conducted training for
and CCA products for sharing knowledge all 16 Regional offices
management center for CCA and DRRM
within the OCD at the end of 2014
 Information
dissemination through
partnership with
various media partners
8. Enhanced use of vulnerability  Conduct of capacity Philippine  Provided the LGUs

and assessment tools by LGUs building research Atmospheric with the hazard/Risk
and communities activities Geophysical Map and completed
Astronomical the conduct of IECs to
Services 17
Administration municipalities/cities.
(PAGASA)
 Developed severe
wind risk calculator
which can be used by
LGUs to estimate
potential damage to
buildings due to severe
winds in GMMA
GOAL: End-to-end monitoring forecasting and early warning systems are established and/or improved
9. Enhanced monitoring  Develop and PAGASA, DILG,  Provided weather
forecasting and hazard warning institutionalize EWS LGUs, OCD hazard monitoring and
information sharing timely, accurate and
and communication reliable weather
systems between forecasts, advisories
LGUs communities and warnings.
and national PAGASA provided a
government wide range forecasts
and warnings as
distinguished by the
 Standard for CBEWS type of end-user (ie
aviation, shipping and
public
forecasts/warnings,
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
gale, special weather
forecasts for Mayon
and Bulusan
Volcanoes). Provided
Flood
Advisory/Bulletin,
Establishment and
replication of
Thunderstorm and
color-coded Heavy
Rainfall Warning
System in other
PAGASA regional
offices (PRSD) and
provided storm surge
forecast and warning.
 Conducted public
education and
awareness to enhance
the capability of
various stakeholders to
respond to hydro-
meteorological
disasters
 Used a variety of
available media (radio,
tv, internet and social
media (SMS, facebook
and twitter) in a
variety of format
(textual, graphics,
color-coded and audio)
to disseminate
information.
 Organized Training
Workshop, IEC and
Flood Drill to orient
Volunteers Observers,
Disaster Managers,
other LGU authorities
and the general public
on the established
system, trained on
basic rainfall and
water level
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
monitoring, analysis
and communication
protocols. Conducted
actual flood drills for
stakeholders to
appropriately respond
to disaster.
 Criteria development PAGASA, DILG,  PAGASA calibrated

and/or accreditation LGUs, OCD instruments for
CBFEWS for
compliance with the
World Meteorological
Organization (WMO)
standards.
 PAGASA designed the

network density of the
monitoring stations as
prescribed by WMO
when it comes to
exposure of
instruments for
weather observations
 Procedure equipment DILG, LGUs,  Provided

and establish facilities PAGASA, OCD specifications for
for EWS weather monitoring
instruments for EWS.
 Develop localized  PAGASA utilized the

disaster EWS 8” standard rain gauge
for the synoptic
stations all over the
country as
recommended by the
World Meteorological
Organization (WMO).
These are locally
fabricated which is
composed of a
collector tube and a
collector funnel made
of Gauge #26 G.I., a
measuring tube made
of brass or PVC pipe
and a measuring stick
made of wood or
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
metal. A water level
gauge is a simple staff
stage usually painted
on a semi-permanent
structure such as the
pier of concrete
bridges and bank
protection.
 Used indigenous
materials like
batingaw and drum as
a means of comms.
 Establish community- DILG, LGUs,  Established
based EWS for various PAGASA, OCD Community-based
hazards flood early warning
system in various areas
of the country. The
CBFEWS for flood
were completed in the
following provinces:
a. Surigao del Sur

b. Surigao del Norte
c. Leyte
d. Southern Leyte
e. Laguna
f. Cavite
g. Ilocos Sur
h. Northern Samar
i. Eastern Samar
j. Other LGU
initiated
CBFEWSs
k. GMMA (On-
going)
 Train and tap LGUs PAGASA, LGUs  PAGASA provided

for hazard monitoring training on observation
and data transmission
as well as on the
protocols of data
interpretation and
issuance of flood
warnings and
advisories and how it
can be integrated in
the existing disaster
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
mitigation program of
the community
GOAL: Increased level of awareness and enhanced capacity of the community to the threats and impacts of all
hazards
10. A comprehensive national and  Developed DRRM and Philippine Institute  Included “Volcano,
local DRRMIEC program CCAIEC and of Volcanology and Earthquake, and
developed and implemented advocacy plan and Seismology Tsunami Disaster
program (PHIVOLCS) Risk Reduction
a. National Level Program” in the
b. Local level PHIVOLCS Strategic
Plan 2012-2016, as
one of the strategic
initiatives of the plan.
Under this program are
various projects and
activities being
planned and
implemented from
year to year, among
which are seminars,
workshops, trainings,
lectures and drills for
various stakeholders.
One of the two Major
Final Outputs of
PHIVOLCS approved
by DBM in 2013 (as
per DBM NBC 532
dated 28 November
2011) is Disaster
Preparedness and
Risk Reduction
Services. The
Performance
Indicators of this MFO
are the number of
DRR activities
conducted, timeliness
of implementation,
average participants,
and client satisfaction
ratings.
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
GOAL: Increased DRRM and CCA capacity of Local DRRM Councils and Offices at all levels
11. Fully-functioning adequately  Develop the local DILG  Formulated Climate
staffed and financially capable DRRM plan Change Action Plan (9
local DRRM Offices Provinces, 59 Cities,
 Conduct risk and 238
assessments, Municipalities)
contingency planning,
knowledge  Conducted
management and Infrastructure Audit
training activities Workshops in 334
LGUs
 Inventory of resources
 Conducted Training on
 Stockpiling and Geographic
prepositioning of Information System
resources (GIS) for Climate and
Disaster and
 Establish the DRRM Vulnerability
Operations Center Reduction to 52
Provinces, 43 Cities,
433 Municipalities and
376 Barangays
 Conducted Training on
Understanding the
Multi-Hazard Maps,
their Usage and
Application in Local
Development Planning
for LGUs
 Conducted
Flood/Swift Water
First Responder
Training
 Formulated the
National Disaster
Preparedness Plan
 Formulated the
Minimum
Preparedness
Standards
 Formulated the Early

Preparedness Manuals
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
for LCEs
 Formulated the
Critical Preparedness
for LCEs
 Formulated the
Checklist of Minimum
Actions for MLGOOs,
COPs, and FMs
 Created the DepEd

DepEd
DRRM Office through
DepEd Order No 50 s
2011 to initiate and
spearhead the
establishment of
mechanisms which
prepare, guarantee
protection and increase
resiliency of DepEd
constituents in the face
of disasters, to
institutionalize the
culture of safety at all
levels, to systematize
protection of education
investments and to
ensure continued
delivery of quality
education services
 Prepared DRRM plans

by field offices and
schools
 Formed Regional,
division, district and
school DRRM
teams/committees
 Inventoried DRRM
materials available in
DepEd
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
GOAL: Developed and implemented comprehensive national and local preparedness and response policies,
plans, and systems
12. Enhanced preparedness and  Develop and/or DepEd  Conducted simulation
response strategies, including enhance and simulate exercises in the
coordination mechanisms and scenario-based nationwide DRRM
infrastructure. preparedness and Orientation and
response plans Planning Workshop to
a) National Level check the immediate
b) Local Level responses of field
officials before and
during calamities
 Set up of coordination
and information
management protocols
 Provided disaster
preparedness measures
to schools through
DepEd Order No. 83,
s. 2011
DA  Activated the DA –
Disaster Quick
Response Center
 Ensured
communications and
EWS are in place
 Conducted situation
assessment
 Coordinated response
operations and
resources mobilization
DILG  Developed and

implemented of:
- JMC No. 2014-01:
Implementing
Guidelines for the
Establishment of
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
Local DRRM
Offices or Barangay
DRRM Committees
in LGUs
- JMC No 2013-0:
Allocation and
Utilization of the
Local Disaster Risk
Reduction
Management Fund
- Dept. Memo No
2012-73 Utilization
of LDRRMF
- Dept Memo re
Directing every
DILG City Director,
City Local
Government
Operations Officer
and Municipal Local
Government
Operations officer to
ensure functionality
of BDRRMC
- Dept Circular No
2012-08:
Community
Preparedness on, and
Response to, a
Calamity in Every
Flood-Prone and
Landslide-Prone
Barangays
- Dept Memo for the
President re DILG
issuances on
Calamity Response
Protocols
- Dept Order No
2011-1564 re
Official Designation
of Regional Focal
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
Persons on Disaster
Risk Reduction and
Management
- 2011-8 re Active
Faults, Liquefaction
Susceptibility Maps
and Earthquake-
triggered landslide
Susceptibility Maps
Available in
PhilVolcs website
- Dept Memo Circular
No 2011-35 re
Tsunami Alert in
Coastal Areas
Fronting the Pacific
Ocean
- 2010-143 re Local
Disaster Risk
Reduction and
Management
Councils
 Formulated
Compendium of
Disaster Preparedness
and Response
Protocols in 2012
 Mainstreamed DRRM
and CCA in
Comprehensive
Development Plan
Guidelines in
mainstreaming being
finalized. National
Orientation on 11
December 2014
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
GOAL: Strengthened partnership and coordination among all key players and stakeholders
13. Partnership arrangements  Creation, maintenance DepEd  Developed a directory
among stakeholders established and update of a of all regional and
directory or database of division DRRM focal
key players and
persons
stakeholders
 Formulate coordination DA with DOST-

mechanisms and PAGASA and  Coordinated with
guidelines for PHIVOLCS, PAGASA,
partnership BSWM, Quad- PHIVOLCS and other
arrangements in the media, and DA agencies regarding
contingency plan attached agencies calamity advisory
a. National level
b. Local level  Developed localized
disaster EWS
DILG  CSO-Managed/Co-
Managed trainings
And projects:
- CBDRRM with
CDP
- DRRM Volunteer
Management
Seminar with VSO
Bahaginan
Foundation
- Flood/swift Water
First Responder
Training with
Disaster Emergency
Search and Rescue
- Project Encore with
Save the Children
 CSO-prepared
modules /guidebooks/
manuals
- Guidebook for
LGUs on how to
prepare LCCAP –
Local Climate
Change Adaptation
Development
(LCCAD)
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
- Modules for
Training on
Formulation of
LCCAP – Up Los
Baños
- CBDRRM Manual
(Kontra Disaster)
and Handbook on
Documenting Good
Practices on DRRM
– CDP
 BLGS engaged 5
CSOs with DRRM
Projects:
- Alter Plan and

Cope Foundation:
Shelter Program
Formulation to
address DRR in
Barangas Rawis
and neighboring
Barangays along
Yawa River in
Legazpi City
- Samahang
Mamamayan –
Zone One Tondo
Organization –
Capacity
Enhancement and
Partnership
Building between
Urban Poor
Community
member in
Dagatdagatan and
Navotas City on
DRRM
- Simon of Cyrene –
Children’s
Rehabilitation and
Development –
Capacity Building
of the Stakeholders
in Daraga in
mainstreaming
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
persons with
disabilities in
DRRM – Daraga,
Albay
- La Liga Policy
Institute – Making
the LDRRMF work
through the alliance
of sevel LGUs
- South Pacific
Integrated Area
Development, Inc.
- Building resilient
communities to
disaster – Southern
Leyte
GOAL: Well-established disaster response operations

14. Activated functional ICS on site  Activation of the ICS OCD  Issued NDRRMC
and C3 at the national Memo Cir. No. 04, s.
and local levels 2012 dtd 28 March
2012 re Implementing
Guidelines on the use
of Incident Command
System (ICS) as an on-
scene Disaster
Response and
Management
Mechanism under the
PDRRMS
DPWH  Conducted ICS

training for 9 DPWH
Regional Offices and
90 District Offices in
2012 to 2014
15. Well-established system of  Issue public advisories DepEd  Issued weather

information gathering, reporting in accordance with the advisories to DepEd
and dissemination protocols developed field offices through
Infoboard textblast,
SMS, emails and
facsimile
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
 Gathered essential PCG  Monitored a total of
information on 2,002 incidents and
maritime-related conducted a total of
incidents
2,000 SAR operations
from January 2012 to
November 2014
16. Established functioning system  Logistical support DPWH  Provided 520 trucks
for coordinated and efficient  Immediate deployment and heavy equipment
relief operations of SAR and 1220 personnel for
clearing operations
and relief distribution
after typhoon Yolanda.
 Construction of SAR PCG  Constructed SAR Base

Base / District Roxas which enhanced
 Well-equipped the PCG's presence in
personnel terms of capability
development and
sustainment of needed
support thru extension
of its bases and
facilities. The
geographical location
of the said SAR Base
enhanced the PCG
presence in the region
having a forward
platform, which can
also host several
vessels needed for
rapid deployment
which will result to
increase response time
during maritime
emergencies.
 Constructed a 2- storey
building for the Coast
Guard District Bicol
from the portion of the
Regional Government
Site at Rawis, Legaspi
City that was offered
by National Economic
Development
Authority.
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
 Participated in the
procurement of
Disaster Response
Equipment worth
PhP521,664,500.00.
The equipment are as
follows:
 50 units Combat
Rubber Boats
with OBM
 81 units RHIB
 300 units
Aluminium V-
Shape Bow
 862 units VHF
Handheld Marine
Type Radio
 862 units Life
Vest
 2,598 units
common Life
vest
 431 units
Megaphone
 1,905 units Flare
 6 units Jet Ski
GOAL: Adequate and prompt assessment of needs and damages at all levels
17. Timely and appropriate and  Activation of OCD  Deployed inter-agency
consolidated needs assessment assessment teams at all DANA Team
reports levels, as needed
DepEd  Submitted RADAR
through SMS, email or
facsimile (school-
level)
DWPH  Deployed DRRM

members as part of the
inter-agency RDANA
Team
 Using the latest OCD  Drafted NDRRMC

DANA assessment Guidelines in the
tool, consolidate, Conduct of Joint Rapid
analyze and Damage Assessment
disseminate data by and Needs Analysis
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
the local and national
DRRM Councils
DepEd  Consolidated Rapid

Disaster Assessment
Reports from affected
schools
 Mobilized volunteers
in the consolidation of
RaDARs
 Prepared situation
reports for DepEd
management and
oversight agencies for
the appropriation of
necessary intervention
GOALS: Integrated and coordinated Search, Rescue and Retrieval (SRR) capacity
18. Communities found, retrieved  Develop and NBI  Formed 4 Disaster
and reconnected with their implement a system Victim Identification
families for SRR and proper (DVI) Teams, each are
disposal with assigned for a
concerned agencies particular quadrant of
Metro Manila. Each
team is composed of
two team leaders; both
are doctors who are
tasked to respond
depending on the
quadrant involved. The
DVI team concerned
shall be the one
joining the RDANA
team to be initially
deployed in the
disaster area for pre-
operational phase as
suggested in the
previous meetings.
There will be an extra
team on standby in the
main office. The
operation will be
supervised by the
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
Chief of MLD and the
Executive Officer,
with the Chief as the
overall operation
leader. The
development of these
teams enabled a quick
response for the
disaster and carry out
immediately the DVI
process. This also
hastened coordination
between other
agencies since there
will only be a point
team leaders to be
contacted depending
on the quadrant
involved. The
operational budget
allotted for the MLD
varies depending on
the need of the
division.
GOAL: Evacuated safely and on time affected communities

19. Safe and timely evacuation of  Coordination with DepEd  Prepared schools for
affected communities appropriate agencies possible use as
evacuation center
 Activate an evacuation
system and/or set of
procedures
GOAL: Temporary shelter needs are adequately addressed

20. All evacuees are sheltered in  Identification of DPWH  Assisted DILG/LGU
adequately equipped facilities standard-based relief in the determination of
for all (including areas for shelters and sites the feasibility of
lactating mother) shelter sites
 Provision of tents and
other temporary  Constructed 273
shelter facilities bunkhouses in Region
VIII after the
 Implement a set of onslaught of Typhoon
minimum standard for Yolanda
temporary shelters
 Set the Minimum
Performance Standards
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
and Specifications
(MPSS) for one storey
school building and
multipurpose building
21. Child-friendly spaces or  Establishment of DepEd  Identified and / or
temporary learning area in the child-friendly established TLS to
evacuation center for continuity spaces/temporary disaster / emergency-
of education learning area in the affected areas
evacuation center for
continuity of education
GOAL: Basic health services provided to affected population whether inside or outside ECs
22. Database of hospitals and other  Determination if there DSWD  Conducted NDRRMC
health care providers is enough clinics and Meeting re
hospitals to address the Enhancement of the
casualties Provision of Health
Services During
Disaster
GOAL: Psychosocial well-being promoted and mental health problems and risks reduced
23. Disaster-affected population are  Conduct of traumatic DepEd  Mobilized external
in good mental and and/or psychological partners for the
psychological state stress debriefings provision of
psychosocial support
GOAL: Coordinated, Integrated System for Early Recovery implemented on the national and local levels
24. Mechanisms for coordinated  Conduct of post- OCD  Conducted:
and integrated early recovery DANA - PDNA for TY
established and essential Yolanda on 08
services restored January-28
February 2014
- National Writeshop
of PDNA on 5-7
March 2014
 Presented the 1st draft

of PDNA to the C,
NDRRMC -13 March
2014
 Presented PDNA
Report to the President
– 15 May 2014
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
DepEd  Conducted detailed
damage assessment of
schools by DepEd
engineers
DPWH  Deployed DRRM

members as part of the
inter-agency PDNA
Team for typhoons
Sendong, Pablo and
Yolanda
 Develop and DepEd  Endorsed consolidated

implement a system RADARs to concerned
for early recovery, to offices for appropriate
include specific action
activities addressing
the needs identified  Immediately resumed
classes to track
students
 Mobilized donations
through social media
(Twitter and facebook)
 Uploaded K-12
learning materials for
easier access and
reproduction of such
DPWH  Constructed five

temporary bridges in
Bohol damaged by the
7.2 earthquake in
2013. Construction on
permanent bridges on-
going
 Develop partnership DepEd  Pooled of volunteers

mechanisms with for the provision of
utility providers and PSS
key stakeholders
 Design and implement DPWH  Conducted clearing

temporary livelihood operations for all
and/or income national roads
generating activities immediately after a
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
(i.e. case for food or disaster
work; micro and small
enterprise recovery)
GOAL: Damages, Losses and Needs Assessed

25. Post Disaster Needs Assessment  Conduct Post-Disaster OCD, NEDA  Participated in the
Needs Assessment activities relative to the
(PDNA) conduct of PDNA for
the following major
disasters:
TS Sendong (2011):
NROs VII and X
assisted OCD in field
assessment and data
analysis, particularly in
macro/governance
sectors, on
damages/loss and
needs.
TY Pablo (2012):
NROs XI and XIII
participated in the
preparation of Work
and Financial Plan for
the conduct of the
PDNA, field
assessment and
validation of
damages/loss and
needs, and the drafting
of the final PDNA
document. The final
PDNA report of Davao
Oriental and
Compostela Valley was
released in June 2013
and served as reference
in the preparation of the
Pablo Rehabilitation
Plan.
Central Visayas
Earthquake (Bohol
2013): NRO VII
organized a technical
working group
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
composed of 13
Regional Line Agencies
to assess damages and
validate preliminary
data gathered.
Zamboanga Siege
(2013): NRO IX
participated in the
crafting of the Post
Conflict Needs
Assessment (PCNA)
particularly in the
macroeconomic impact
assessment,
consolidation and field
validation of data on
damages and loss.
TY Yolanda (2013):
NEDA-CO and NROs
IV-B, VI, VII and VIII
participated in the
macroeconomic impact
assessment, field
validations, writeshops
and drafting of final
document.
TD Agaton (2014):
NRO XIII conducted
Damage and Needs
Assessment (DANA)
in all provinces of
CARAGA region.
DepEd, DPWH  Deployed DepEd

Engineers to schools
with reported major and
totally damaged
classrooms based on the
Rapid Assessment of
Damages Report
(RADaR) for detailed
assessment.
 Enhanced the protocols

IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
and monitoring
mechanisms for the
conduct of detailed
assessment.
 Joined Representatives
from the Department in
the conduct of PDNA
for Typhoon Yolanda
on January – March
2014.
GOAL: DRRM/CCA elements incorporated in human settlement
26. Safe relocation sites  Identify and provide DPWH  Assisted the DILG in
suitable relocation the determination of
sites for the affected the feasibility and
population suitability of
relocation sites.
27. Disaster-resilient housing  Design/construction of DPWH  Upgraded the

designed and reconstructed disaster resilient structural design
housing standards for disaster
resiliency for school
buildings and other
public infrastructures
to withstand 250 kph
wind velocity.
28. Empowered informal  Organize DPWH  Trained and engaged

settlers/affected families NASA/construct core some of the male
shelters/engage in cash survivors of Typhoon
for work/Food for Yolanda to help in the
Work/organize SEA-K construction of
groups bunkhouses in
Tacloban.
GOAL: Disaster and climate-change resilient infrastructure reconstructed

29. Infrastructure facilities  Undertake the necessary DPWH, DepEd  Repaired 88 of
restored/rehabiliated according rehabilitation or repair of damaged infrastructure
to safety and resiliency damaged infrastructure as of 2014.
standards
 Implement the Building  Rehabilitated and
Code and promotion of repaired damaged
green technology school facilities.
 Implement design  Strictly implemented

guidelines for climate the National Building
change resilient Code of the
IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
infrastructure Philippines and
awareness program on
green technology
conducted.
 Implemented disaster-
resilient school design
from 2014 onwards
 Prepared the Minimum

Performance Standards
and Specifications
(MPSS) for Public
Buildings as guide in
preparing design
requirements for
rehabilitation and
reconstruction of
damaged LGU
infrastructures and
facilities.
30. Development permits approved  Close monitoring DPWH  Established the Project
within prescribed timeline and/or tracking of Monitoring System
approval of (PMS) for the
infrastructure projects monitoring of all
and permit infrastructure projects
including
rehabilitation projects
for damaged
infrastructure.
ANNEX C
Underutilization of DRRM Fund due to lack of appropriate work program by DILG
Sources of Funds Available:

2013 Continuing Appropriations P 38,410,030.00
2014 Current Appropriations 76,000,000.00 114,410,030.00
Less 2014 Utilization from:
2013 Fund P 14,669,104.00
2014 Fund 6,868,457.00 21,537,561.00
Ending Balance P 92,872,469.00
ANNEX D
List of LGUs that failed to transfer their unexpended/unutilized/unobligated

LDRRMF balances to the STF
REGION LGU AMOUNT

NCR 1. Malabon P 579,232,000.00
1. Alabat, Quezon 50,138.05
2. Alaminos 2,039,392.46
3. Balayan, Calaca 19,058,857.02
4. Baras 1,548,971.62
5. Buenavista, Quezon 2,458,075.75
6. Cainta 300,000.00
7. Cavinti 2,005,746.33
8. City Government of Antipolo 1,242,531.84
9. Dolores 5,040,333.62
10. Famy P2,468,264.86
11. Imus 22,683,559.57
12. Kalayaan 4,088,642.80
13. Liliw 2,040,384.07
14. Luisiana 2,012,059.73
15. Lumban 1,873,328.37
IV-A
16. Magdalena 5,034,754.15
17. Noveleta 554,836.65
18. Pangil 2,666,425.68
19. Patnanungan, Quezon 5,657,125.02
20. Pililla 4,035,988.12
21. Province of Cavite 110,905,807.00
22. San Narciso, Quezon 520,378.08
23. San Pablo City 101,875,367.85
24. Santa Cruz 3,935,335.44
25. Santa Rosa City 49,733,722.98
26. Tagaytay City 13,692,462.21
27. Tanza 4,750,672.20
28. Ternate 1,678,821.09
29. Trece Martires City 17,602,773.75
TOTAL P391,554,756.31
1. Brooke's Point 9,238,281.47
2. Busuanga 2,744,382.69
IV-B
3. Cagayancillo 1,255,412.70
4. Calintaan 2,874,064.08
REGION LGU AMOUNT
5. Coron 4,367,984.03
6. Culion 4,344,196.98
7. Jose P. Rizal 6,886,460.10
8. Kalayaan 4,951,061.70
IV-B 9. Magsaysay 581,319.93
10. Mun of Quezon 8,056,178.36
11. Province of Romblon 1,495,261.30
12. Puerto Princesa City P152,188,806.93
TOTAL P198,983,410.27
1. Balud 943,518.27
2. Calabanga 1,258,845.15
3. Caramoran 2,079,077.47
4. Cawayan 5,911,404.55
5. Claveria 3,063,234.49
6. Esperanza 1,227,610.87
V
7. Magallanes 1,540,000.00
8. Panganiban 2,312,804.74
9. Pio Corpuz 2,447,180.04
10. San Pascual 2,661,237.93
11. Sta. Elena P7,406,627.10
TOTAL P30,851,540.61
1. Barbaza 1,883,030.40
2. Belison 1,793,506.51
3. Bugasong P1,164,970.21
4. Calinog 1,665,269.40
5. Dao 2,296,312.19
VI 6. Maasin 1,651,972.00
7. Maayon 4,001,176.67
8. Mambusao 2,591,013.21
9. San Miguel 3,552,235.81
10. Sapian 799,157.68
TOTAL P21,398,644.08
1. Enrique Villanueva P2,799,928.02
VII 2. San Juan 2,868,798.50
TOTAL P5,668,726.52
1. La Paz, Leyte 594,539.57
VIII 2. Paranas, Samar P3,208,216.55
TOTAL P3,802,756.12
1. Arakan 1,178,762.80
XII 2. Carmen 1,034,453.56
3. Isulan 5,799,344.25
REGION LGU AMOUNT
4. Kabacan 812,526.87
5. Magpet 169,355.47
6. Pres. Quirino 2,714,647.00
XII 7. Tacurong City P8,079,057.90
8. Tantangan 3,156,923.77
9. Tulunan 2,749,594.16
TOTAL P25,694,665.78
1. Bunawan 4,027,091.81
2. Burgos P265,135.77
3. Del Carmen 404,153.90
4. Esperanza 4,301,277.64
5. Province of Agusan del Norte 27,624,825.01
XIII 6. San Benito 31,189.97
7. San Isidro 99,827.93
8. Sta. Josefa 1,186,429.16
9. Sta. Monica 200,495.53
10. Veruela 783,602.74
TOTAL P38,924,029.46
ARMM 1. City of Isabela P31,686,564.90
GRAND TOTAL P1,327,797,094.05
ANNEX E
List of LGUs that failed to maximize the utilization of LDRRMF
REGION LGU
1. Cavinti
2. Luisiana
3. Lumban
4. Mabitac
IV-A 5. Pagbilao, Quezon
6. Sampaloc, Quezon
7. Santa Cruz
8. Santa Rosa City
9. Siniloan
1. Abra de Ilog: Looc
2. Bongabong
3. Bulalacao
4. Jose P. Rizal
IV-B
5. Kalayaan
6. Roxas
7. San Teodoro
8. Sta Cruz; Paluan
1. Bato
2. City of Sorsogon
3. Gubat
4. Guinobatan
V
5. Irosin
6. Palanas
7. Panganiban
8. Rapu-Rapu
VIII 1. La Paz, Leyte
1. Pilar
XIII 2. Sibagat
3. Surigao City
ANNEX F
List of LGUs that have expenditures under the LDRRMF which were improperly charged
to QRF
Region LGU
1. Kalayaan
IV-B
2. Puerto Princesa
1. Bacacay
2. Baleno
3. Bombon
4. City of Iriga
V 5. Dimasalang
6. Esperanza
7. Mandaon
8. Pio V. Corpuz
9. Placer
10. Sto. Domingo
1. Antique Province
VI
2. Passi City
1. Pres. Quirino
XII 2. South Cotabato
3. Surallah
1. Claver
2. Dapa
XIII
3. General Luna
4. Socorro
ANNEX G
List of LGUs that were not able to adhere properly to the accounting and reporting of the
LDDRMF
Region LGU
1. Rizal
IV-B
2. Santa Cruz, Laguna
1. Gainza
2. Goa
3. Jose Panganiban
4. Lagonoy
V 5. Pili
6. Prieto Diaz
7. Province of Albay
8. Siruma
9. Talisay
VI 1. Anilao
1. Buenavista
2. Butuan City
XIII
3. Province of Agusan del Norte
4. Surigao City
1. Bacolod Kalawi
2. Balabagan
3. Balindong
4. Bayang
5. Binidayan
6. Buadipuso Buntong
7. Butig
8. Calanogas
9. Ditsaan Ramain
10. Ganassi
11. Kapai
12. Kapatagan
13. Lumba Bayabao
14. Lumbaca Unayan
ARMM
15. Lumbanaque
16. Lumbatan
17. Madalum
18. Madamba
19. Malabang
20. Marawi
21. Marogong
22. Pagayawan
23. Piagapo
24. Picong
25. Poona Bayabao
26. Pualas
27. Sultan Domalundong
28. Tamparan
29. Taraka
ARMM 30. Tuburan
31. Tugaya
ANNEX H
List of LGUs that were not able to prepare the required fund utilization reports of
LDRRMF
Region LGU
1. Caloocan
NCR 2. Pateros
3. San Juan
1. Angono
2. Binangonan
3. Cardona
4. Carmona
5. Los Banos
6. Luisiana
7. Mabitac
IV-A 8. Magallanes
9. Maragondon
10. Morong
11. Paete
12. Province of Rizal
13. Santa Rosa City
14. Siniloan
15. Taytay
1. Agutaya
2. Araceli
3. Busuanga
4. Cagayancillo
5. Coron
6. Dumaran
7. El Nido
IV-B
8. Jose P. Rizal
9. Kalayaan
10. Linapacan
11. Magsaysay
12. Palawan
13. Romblon Province
14. Taytay
1. Barcelona
2. Batuan
3. Bombon
4. Buhi
5. Gainza
V
6. Guinobatan
7. Magallanes
8. Mandaon
9. Matnog
10. Monreal
11. Pili
12. Province of Sorsogon
V 13. Rapu-Rapu
14. San Fernando
15. San Jacinto
Region LGU
16. Sta. Elena
17. Sta. Magdalena
1. Ajuy
2. Anilao
3. Balasan/
4. Banate
5. Barotac Nuevo
6. Barotac Viejo
7. Bugasong
8. Calinog
9. Carles
10. City of Roxas
11. Concepcion
12. Dingle
13. Dionisio
14. Dueñas
15. Dumalag
16. Dumangas
17. E.B. Magalona
VI 18. Estancia
19. Lemery
20. Maayon
21. Mambusao
22. Mina
23. Murcia
24. Passi City
25. Pavia
26. Pilar
27. Pototan
28. Pres Roxas
29. San Enrique
30. San Miguel
31. San Rafael
32. Sapian
33. Sara
34. Tapaz
35. Victorias City
1. Larena
VII 2. Lazi
3. Siquijor
22 Municipalities of Eastern Samar
23 Borongan City
VIII 24 La Paz, Leyte
25 Matuguinao, Samar
26 Province of Eastern Samar
Region LGU
27 Province of Leyte
1. Banga
2. Esperanza
XII 3. Sarangani
4. Surallah
5. Tantangan
1. Bacuag
2. Buenavista
3. Bunawan
4. Carmen
5. Dapa
6. Del Carmen
7. Esperanza
8. Jabonga
XIII 9. Las Nieves
10. Nasipit
11. Remedios T. Romauldez
12. Rosario
13. San Luis
14. Santiago
15. Sta. Josefa
16. Surigao City
17. Tubay
1. Ampatuan
2. Buluan
3. Datu Abdullah Sangki
4. Datu Paglas
5. Datu Unsay
ARMM
6. Indanan
7. Jolo
8. Kabuntalan
9. Luuk
10. Marantao
11. Matanog
12. Pagalungan
13. Pandami
14. Pangutaran
ARMM 15. Parang
16. Patikul
17. Shariff Aguak
18. South Upi
19. Sultan Mastura
ANNEX I
List of LGUs that processes the granting and liquidation of Cash Advances with incomplete
documentations
Region LGU Amount

1. Bay 4,573,363.81
2. Famy P250,000.00
3. Kawit 2,401,049.30
IV-A
4. Taytay 2,367,812.29
5. Tiaong 1,864,149.69
TOTAL P11,456,375.09
1. Agutaya 875,290.00
2. Linapacan 1,400,743.00
IV-B
3. Quezon P1,098,309.52
TOTAL P3,374,342.52
1. Buhi 5,113,203.83
2. Calabanga 4,380,772.00
3. City of Iriga P17,964,631.21
4. City of Sorsogon 5,256,000.00
V
5. Legazpi City 14,656,791.50
6. Mobo 914,030.00
7. Sorsogon 21,390,000.00
TOTAL P69,675,428.54
1. Calatrava 145,546.36
2. Passi City P1,411,512.00
VI
3. San Enrique 250,000.50
TOTAL P1,807,058.86
VIII 1. Province of Leyte P2,000,000.00
XII 1. Tacurong City P3,559,883.79
1. Buenavista P2,261,378.38
2. Sibagat 700,000.00
XIII
3. Veruela 7,773,855.52
TOTAL P10,735,233.90
GRAND TOTAL P102,608,322.70

Consolidated Report On The Audit of The Disaster Risk Reduction Management DRRM Fund For The Year Ended December 31 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Consolidated Report On The Audit of The Disaster Risk Reduction Management DRRM Fund For The Year Ended December 31 2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Consolidated Report On The Audit of The Disaster Risk Reduction Management DRRM Fund For The Year Ended December 31 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

on the Audit of the

DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

For the Year Ended December 31, 2014

Secretary Voltaire T. Gazmin

Consolidated Report on the audit of the

a) Bureau of Fire Protection i) Department of Trade and

Financial and Operational Highlights

Sources of Funds for the National Government Agencies (NGAs)

 General Appropriations Act

The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (NDRRMF) is

b. Quick Response Fund (QRF)

c. Allocation from agency regular budget

All departments, bureaus, offices and agencies of the government are

Cash donations are assistance or contribution from local or foreign donor

Sources of funds for the LGUs

 General Fund Current Year Appropriation

 Funds transferred from the NDRRM Fund

 Funds received from other LGUs and other sources

National Government Agency

AGENCY ITEM QTY VALUE LOCATION

Mitsubishi Canter Wide

Isuzu GIGA NPS 4WD new

Rescue Tender Van (with

National Government Sector

Delayed completion of projects and unutilized funds

9. Five infrastructure projects totalling P6,368,782,496.00implemented by the

a) RAY 1 –Massive and overwhelming repair, rehabilitation and reconstruction

RAY 2 – The P2 billion fund was released in November 2014, reverted in

c) Deployment of sensors was delayed and limited by the number of

9.3 The following courses of actions were recommended:

 DILG to closely monitor the project implementation and require the

 DSWD to require and demand the monthly report on fund utilization of

Project Components Amount (Php)

1. Assessment – deployment of technical expertise for conduct of audit on P22,429,000.00

2. Capacity Enhancement – provision of capacity development interventions and 52,971,000.00

Implementing Offices Activities Per OPB Allocation %

Authorized Allotments/ Allotment

“The National Council shall be headed by the Secretary of the Department of

10.14.3 Only the households-waste assessment characterization study was

10.14.4 Other significant observations were: a) that 19 out of 23 project locations

10.14.6 Management provided the Audit Team with the following

10.16 Further, we recommended that managementdesignate a team within Project

Utilization of Quick Response Fund (QRF)

11. Only P 4,620,654,581.86 or 62 percent of the P7,453,732,576.08 QRF transferred

11.4 The following courses of actions were recommended:

 The officials of the concerned source agencies closely monitor the

 The concerned officials of OCD make representation with the DBM,

 The concerned officials of DSWD to return the unutilized fund for

 The concerned officials of DSWD institute procedures to expedite the

 The concerned officials of DSWDimpose strictly the stipulations in the

 The concerned officials of DepEd ensure the optimum utilization of funds

12. The utilization of funds transferred to various implementing agencies

13. Donations in the aggregate amount of P850,228,982.41, which were received by

Total donations Utilization Unutilized Balance

b. returned to the donor, if specified in the agreement.

13.6 The following courses of actions were recommended: