Documentation of the Study Tour Visit by maclaren1


									   Documentation of the Study Tour Visit to the Philippines from Lao PDR and Nepal

         “Poverty Monitoring Systems and Measurement: Sharing of Experiences”
                                31 January to 4 February 2005


The activity was designed to be a sharing of experiences and lessons among the three
participating countries, namely Laos, PDR; Nepal and the Philippines on poverty monitoring
and measurement systems. The Philippines, being the host, took the lead in the discussions,
and the two other countries likewise shared their experiences on the topics discussed.

List of Participants:

LAO PDR Delegation

   1. Mr. Onida Souksavath, Head of Department of Planning and Cooperation at the
       Ministry for Communicatuion, Transport, Post and Construction
   2. Mr. Bounkhong Thoummavong, Deputy Head of Non-formal Education, Department
       of Ministry of Eduction
   3. Ms. Phonesay Souksavath, Deputy Director General of National Statistics Centre at
       the Committee for Panning and Investment
   4. Ms. Pehetsamone Sone, NHDR Project Manager, National Statistics Centre at the
       Committee for Planning and Investment
   5. Ms. Pnonevanh Outhavong, Head of Poverty Eradication Division. Planning
       Department at the Commiittee for Planning and Investment
   6. Mr. Cheme Sithimarongsy, Head of Administration and
   7. Personnel Division, Planning Department at the Ministry ofg Agriculture and Forestry
   8. Mr. Somphet Vanikhachone, Acting Head of Planning Dision at the Ministry of
   9. Ms. Ana Gaby Guerero, Programme officer at UNDP Vientriane
   10. Mr, Khamhoung Keovilay, Monitoring and Evaluation Associate at UNICEF,
   11. 10. Mr. Dirk-Uwe Hahn, NHDR Data Managemenet Specialist at National Statistics

NEPAL Delegation

   1. Mr. Lava Kumar Devacota, Secretary, National Planning Commission Sectetariate,
      Kathmandu, Nepal
   2. Mr. Balananda Paudel, Jopint Secretary, National Planning Commission Secretariate,
      Kathmandu, Nepal
   3. Mr. Teertha Raj Dhakal, Under Secretary, National Planning Commission
      Secretariate, Katmandu, Nepal

   4. Mr. Tunga S. Bastola, Director General, central Bureau of Statistics, Kathmandu,
   5. Mr. Nebin Lal Shrestrha, Deuty Director, Central Bureau of Statistics, Kathmandu,
   6. Mr. Suresh Basnyat, Statistical Officer, Central Bureau of Statistics, Kathmandu,

Day 1: The first day was devoted to opening activities, introduction and overview of the
events and exposure in the various agencies responsible for poverty monitoring and
measurement activities in the country.

Day 1 was hosted by the NAPC at the Premier Guest House/New Executive Bldg.
Malacanang, Manila. The event was formally opened with the welcome remarks by Secretary
Imelda M. Nicolas, Lead Convenor/Secretary General of the National Anti-Poverty
Commission(NAPC), followed by Mr. Lava Kumar Devacota, Head of the Nepal Delegation
and Ms. Phonesaly Souksavath, who represented the Head of Delegation of Lao PDR.

Shortly after, there was the introduction of the participants and the leveling of expectations.
The facilitator for the day, Ms. Aurma M. Manlangit, led the group to express their
expectations of the 5 day study tour and exposure to the Philippines experience in poverty
monitoring and measurement.

Expectations expressed by the participants

A. Knowledge and experience of the different countries in terms of the following:
          Poverty Monitoring Data and Indicators
               – Use of process indicators in monitoring
               – Development of indicators
               – Use of information in policy-making
               – Development of sex-disaggregated data
          Organization for Monitoring
               – Integration of national and local poverty monitoring system
               – Integration of poverty reduction and national plan
               – Roles and responsibilities of various agencies, stakeholders in poverty
          Information system
               – System/strategies for generating, reporting, and dissemination data
               – Use of DEVInfo
          Implementation of poverty reduction strategy (PRS)
          Added tools and experience on poverty

The comparison of the presentation of the countries are summarized in EVENT 1: DAY 1:
Poverty Monitoring:

Comparative Study of the Participating Countries
Event 1: Day 1
           Event                        Philippines                            Laos                                Nepal

Day1: Lead Agency: National Anti-Poverty Commission
Poverty Measurement and       National Anti-Poverty
Monitoring in the Philippines Monitoring in the Philippines

                               Philippine Poverty Situation       LAO PDR Situation                    Nepal Poverty Situation

                                  Poverty situation has            The primary determinant of           Adult literacy rate 48
                                   gradually been decreasing         poverty is the degree of rice         percent: High infant
                                   since 1985 but increased for      self-sufficiency. The                 mortality rate (64 per
                                   first time in 2000                primary indicator of wealth           thousand): High Maternal
                                  Large regional differences        is livestock.                         mortality rate (415 per
                                   in poverty situation exists      The secondary conditions              100,000): HDI value for
                                  Poverty is measured in            of poverty include lack of            2003 is 0.504
                                   terms of : asset reform,          arable land, livestock               About 30% of the
                                   human development                 diseases, poor health, hiring         population is poor (2003)
                                   services, livelihood and          out of labour lack of                Poverty severe in rural
                                   employment, social                technical knowledge and               areas (1996) [with 44%rural
                                   protection and participation.     skills, lack of access roads,         poverty: 44 Percent and
                                  Progress on the MDGs              insufficient clothing and             23% urban poverty]
                                   showed that the Phil. has a       poor housing.                        Poverty–Highest in remote,
                                   low probability of               The most commonly cited               backward mountain
                                   achieving: MDG goal 1 in          causes of poverty include             districts and western
                                   terms of halving the              (in order of priority): i) land       regions
                                   proportion of the population      problems, ii) no cash                Varying across ethnic
                                   below the minimum level           investment for rice, iii)             groups – severe with
                                   of dietary energy                 livestock disease, iv)                indigenous people
                                   consumption and halving           natural disasters and pests,         Poverty – More prevalent
                                   the proportion of                 v) environmental                      with women

   underweight children under           degradation and vi) lack of
   five years old; MDG5                 water for potential              Land-locked and rugged
   medium in its commitment             agricultural production.          terrain-Inaccessibility and
   to reduce maternal                  Other causes include: lack        relative isolation -Weak
   mortality rate by three-             of village leadership,            infrastructure base
   quarter by 2015. The rest of         relocation, insufficient         Limited resource
   the poverty situation shown          health services, too many         endowments
   in the presentation found in         children, lack of                Low growth rate and low
   Annex 1: Day 1.                      commercial skills, lack of        agri. growth rate - non-agri.
                                        government assistance, low        sector growth with limited
                                        prices for agricultural           spill-over effects,
                                        products, opium addiction,       Poor re-distributive
                                        UXO contamination.                capacity,
                                                                         Targeted programmes: low
Poverty Reduction Efforts           Poverty Reduction Efforts             coverage, duplication and
Philippines has a centerpiece       NGPES objectives:                     co-ordination issues
poverty reduction strategy           Better LIVING Standard             High population growth
through its KALAHI –project          Poverty eradication 2010            rate,
through its redistributive social    Out from LDC 2020                  ·Governance issues and
reform in (a) asset reform-                                               political instability
including agrarian reform,*         strengthen the overall
aquatic resources reform, urban     environment for sustainable       Poverty Reduction Efforts
land reform and recognition of      Growth and Development            Has the PRSP with the goal to
ancestral domain claims; (b)        based on 4 main necessary         reduce poverty level to 30% in
full provision of the               factors                           normal and 33% in low case
requirements of human               • Macroeconomic stability         scenario. It has four pronged
development services,               • Enhancing the business          strategies:
especially basic education,             environment for enhancing
health, shelter, water and              growth and poverty               High, sustainable and
electricity; (c) increased              reduction                         broad-based growth
livelihood and employment           • Consolidating public sector        Social sector and rural
opportunities and strengthening         governance                        infrastructure development

the capacities of the             •   Sustainable Revenue            Targeted programmes
marginalized groups to engage         Development                    Good governance
in productive enterprises; (d)
providing basic sectors social    Overall efforts undertaken to   Features of the PRSP
protection and security from      foster NGPES                     Participatory
violence through social welfare   Implementation                   Result-oriented, realistic
and assistance, safety nets,                                         (Two case scenario)
social insurance and legal      Among the initiatives and          Prioritized and reform-
reforms; (e) participation in   measures taken by the                oriented
governance and institution-     Government are:                    Presented in the logframe
building, including              the restructuring of               and policy matrix
appointment in key national        institution to increase         Backed by Medium Term
and local economic, political      efficiency and one stop           Expenditure
and sectoral bodies                services;                         Framework(MTEF),
                                 Establishment in each              Immediate Action
NAPC as an overall policy-         province and district of          Plan(IAP)
making body to coordinate with     NGPES supervision and           Defined role of state, the
national and local government      steering committees;              private sector, local bodies,
agencies and private sector for  enhance the capacity               NGOs and civil societies
full implementation of social      building at provinces,          Poverty monitoring,
reform and poverty alleviation     districts and villages.           performance-based budget
programs; serves as an           Daily radio programmes on          release system
advocate for the mobilization      poverty issues.                 Contribute to realize MDGs
of funds to finance social       The organisation of an anti
reform and poverty alleviation     poverty week which take        Poverty measurement and
programs as well as capability     placed on third week of        monitoring system
building program of peoples        October very year was
organization.                      stipulated in the              Poverty Monitoring and
                                   Resolutions adopted by the     Analysis System (PMAS)
NAPC chaired by the president      1st National Conference on     which aims to support the
and an alternate chair by the      Poverty Eradication( as part   implementation of the PRSP
vice-president of the country,     of NGPES preparation).          to act as a coordinated

participated by members from              NGPES will be                    system for monitoring
23 national government                     implemented through              poverty efforts and
agencies and presidents of the             annual economic-socio plan       progress in achieving the
leagues                                    2004/2005, 2005/2006.            MDGs
                                          Preparation of next five        communicate results as
                                           year Plan the CPI is             feedback into policy
Poverty measurement and                    devising approach leading        making process
monitoring system considers                the Five Year Development
the following factors:                     Plan 2006-2010, based on     PMAS has the following levels
                                           the NGPES. Operational       of monitoring poverty
Poverty profile by identifying             priorities and investment     Implementation monitoring
who the poor are; how many                 allocation will respond to    Outcome monitoring
they are; what are their current           the priorities that the       Impact analysis
levels of poverty and where                Government outlined in
they are located                           NGPES.
Selection of instruments to               Province and district
measure and address their                  involvement (several
situation in terms of what they            workshops, seminars and
need, and what will address                meeting at the provincial
their situation                            and districts level being
Organization to identify which             prepared to be held before
agencies are responsible for               end of 2004 at the grass
delivering their services, and             root level
what quantity/quality of                  Revenue base, Regional
goods/services shall be given              Integration and Growth
and to whom.                               Initiative Operational
Identification of Beneficiaries            preparation.
Delivery of interventions                  A capacity enhancement
Utilization of services by the             workshop regarding
beneficiaries in terms of                  operationalization and
whether the poor utilized the              costing NGPES priorities
services and in terms of                   was held on 20-22/10/2004

determining whether the                 and the exercise will be
intervention have leakages              done for 4 sectors priorities
                                        which is expected to be
                                        completed by end of Q1,
                                       Roundtable meeting was
                                        held on 4/11/2004. A note
                                        regarding to specific areas
                                        of NGPES implementation
                                        and outlook to ward
                                        poverty monitoring were

                                    Poverty analysis and
                                    • Poverty analysis: CPI, NSC
                                    • NGPES progress
                                       monitoring (NGPES and
                                       economic socio
                                       development integration
                                       would provide the base for
                                       a consistent NGPES
                                    • MDG & NGPES
                                       Monitoring will be

Issues                              Issues                              Issues
gaps in profiling the poor in       • Appropriate Selective              Institutionalization of the
terms of the following:                 Indicators ( MDG/Local              national and local level
• sex and sector-                       MDG, NGPES ) toward                 poverty monitoring system

    disaggregated poverty data              poverty monitoring               Incorporation of
•   vulnerability indicators are            program.                          participatory aspects of
    still in the process of being       •   Mechanism and                     monitoring at the national
    developed                               institutional arrangement         level
•   need for internationally            •   Specific Tools ( National /      Finalizing the sources of
    comparable poverty data                 Regional/ provincial/             information and aligning
    (i.e purchasing power                   community…) including             them in household surveys
    parity, etc)                            the use of software “ DEV
•   frequency of poverty                    INFO”
    measurement and                     •   Data sources/Data Gap
    monitoring                              Filling ( Frequency of
•   rationalizing the                       monitoring in each steps of
    information                             monitoring)
    systems/sources                     •   Support channels
•   regular and sufficient
    budget support

gaps in terms of selection of
• consolidated database on
    poverty-related policies
• consolidated database on
    best practices model
    programs, effective
• database/inventory of civil
    society initiatives
gaps in identification of
• standard/prescribed
    targeting methodology and
    prioritization criteria

•   standard method for
    ranking priorities based on
    integrated income and non-
    income indicators
• data sources to generate
    poverty data for special
• linkage of national, local
    and administrative data
• integrated
• significant
    institutionalization of local
    monitoring systems
• small area estimation
gaps in terms of interventions
 linkage of agency
    monitoring system
 comprehensive
    assessment/study of
    implementation schemes
gaps in terms of utilization of
poverty monitoring services by
the beneficiaries
 methodology for measuring
    the extent of leakages
 standard and regular
    qualitative feedback

                            gaps in the change and outcome
                            of services provided to the poor
                             no standard
                             official methodology to
                                measure impacts of policy
                                intervention including
                                macroeconomic policies are
                             panel/longitudinal data for
                                tracking quality of life
                                changes within sub-groups
                                not in place

Commonalities/Differences   There is a similarity in terms of issues commonly faced by the countries in terms of institutional
                            arrangement and mechanisms for generating the necessary data to measure poverty incidences;
                            appropriate indicators to be used in measuring poverty; and the appropriate funding support to
                            measure incidence of poverty.

                            Indicators of poverty to indicate poverty are common to the 3 countries, particularly in the area of
                            each of the countries’ commitment to measure millennium development goals- and its indicators.

                            Philippines has a an overall body in tracking or coordinating all efforts in monitoring the
                            implementation of poverty projects and programs and similar efforts to reduce poverty. Both Lao
                            and Nepal are still in its initial stages of establishing an overall institutional body for monitoring all
                            its poverty reduction programs and strategies.

                            The poverty scenario in the 3 countries are very similar, the alarming incidence of poverty is still a
                            common problem to be addressed. However, all the three countries are very aggressive in pursuing
                            national development efforts in substantially reducing poverty by carefully putting systems in place
                            to measure and monitor its incidences.

February 1, 2005
Second Day

            Event                           Philippines                            Laos                 Nepal

Day 2: The Role of National Statistical Agencies in Relation to Poverty Monitoring
Visit to the National Statistical Coordination Board
Mandate                            NSCB provides overall policy
                                   making and coordination           The objective of National
                                   among NSO, SRTC, BAS and          Statistical Center (NSC) is
                                   BLES) on statistical matters in poverty eradication in order to
                                   the country.                      achieve its goals of overcoming
                                                                     the status of Least Developed
                                   Its Philippine Statistical System Country by the year 2020, and
                                   is a government wide system of reduced by half of poverty in
                                   providing statistical             2005
                                   information annually

                                  NSCB’s coordination
                                  mechanisms include                  Recently Lao PDR has
                                  formulation of the PSDP,            finalized a draft of Poverty
                                  system of designated statistics,    Eradication Strategy Programs
                                  budget review and                   (NGPES)
                                  prioritization, survey review
                                  and clearance system and            Similar to the Philippines, the
                                  standards and classification        NSC also provided the official
                                  system.                             national statistics: sectoral

                                    statistics, annual statistical year
The Official Poverty statistics     book including poverty
of the Philippines are part of      analysis, GDP, MDG
the System of Designated
Statistics and is conducted by      Poverty Statistics (WB, SIDA)
the Technical Committee on          Primarily at the national to
Poverty Statistics composed of      provincial level
the academe, NGA, experts on
poverty monitoring

The TC formulates
recommendations of issues on
poverty measurement for
NSCB’s approval

Poverty Measurement Tools   Official poverty statistics are      Poverty Monitoring Tools:
                            done at the national, regional       • Village Statistics Book
                            and provincial levels with
                            urban and rural disaggregation.      • Quantitative Poverty
                                                                    Monitoring Using the
                            Sources of data are menu, price         LECS
                            data, consumption pattern,           • Qualitative Poverty
                            actual income and expenditure        Monitoring Using Participatory
                            data                                 Methods

                            Food basket items recently           The Lao Expenditure and
                            changed, criticized as               Consumption Survey (LECS)
                            accounting to better state of        as tool every 5 years
                            poverty in the country
                                                                 The Objectives are:
                            Data generated are food
                            threshold, poverty threshold,        •macro estimates for the
                            subsistence incidence, poverty       National Accounts, both
                            incidence, income gap, poverty       private consumption and
                            gap, severity of poverty             household investments and
                                                                 income from agriculture and
                            Features of the Philippine           businesses
                            Web Pages                            •the consumption structure
                                                                 (weighing system) for the
                            Data per province, poverty           Consumer Price Index (CPI)
                            mapping                              •estimates of labor force
                                                                 •statistics on access to services
                            The Website was rewarded for
                            two years re: service quality
                                                                 •statistics on nutrition
                                                                 •statistics on poverty and
                            NSCB as the repository of            income distribution
                            MDG Indicators
                                                                 Data sources are from village

                                        level, household information,
Adoption of MDG Indicators              prices, menu (food basket)
through the MDG Data System
and Network. This was                   Data generated is the poverty
institutionalized nationwide            line, poverty incidence, poverty
through a policy resolution.            gap

The MDG convergence system              Food basket is determined by
aimed to consolidate all the            people’s choice; items not
efforts of various national and         changed over time to have a
local agencies in poverty               comparison
                                        Also used poverty mapping.
Ongoing NSCB Development

Poverty mapping based on                There are 4 main
available administrative                measurements that have been
resources                               used in poverty measurement
                                        •   Head count ratio ( poverty
Poverty mapping based on WB                 incidence)
Methodology- improving
provincial data by combining            • Poverty gap,
household survey and census to          • Severity of poverty and
estimate income-based welfare           • Inequality
                                        • Other related socio
                                        indicators: health, education
Project on the improvement of
Provincial Poverty Estimation

Development of Poverty
Statistics for the Basic Sectors


Assessment of Vulnerability to
Poverty (UNDP)

Community Based Monitoring
System (CBMS)


The NSCB impresses upon
LGUs the importance of
gathering data themselves but it
also stressed that the standard
concepts in data gathering will
be from NSCB.

Issues                           There is a clamor for local level Some Critical Issues on
                                 poverty statistics to determine   Poverty Measurement
                                 where the poor are and what       • Prices, spatial price index
                                 are their conditions                 for regional adjustment
                                 Data is only up to provincial     • How to update Poverty
                                 level gathered through regional      Line
                                 level units (as domain)           • Consumption pattern
                                 2003 figures at the national      • Rural – urban poverty
                                 level was not yet available due • Comparison between
                                 to questions in reliability of       Region, country level
                                 sampling design; estimates
                                 were only at the regional level   • Calories intake

                                 Adoption of a new food basket
                                 as basis for CPI was questioned
                                 by the public, the move to have
                                 a food items that are currently
                                 consumed as a result of
                                 changing lifestyle pattern was
                                 seen as attempt by government
                                 to reflect better conditions

                                 Some LGUs came up with their
                                 own surveys but there is a
                                 question of institutionalizing
                                 and systematizing these efforts
                                 especially when funds ran out

Visit National Statistics Office
Mandate                          The National Statistics Office                                    Nepal also conducted similar

(NSO) is the major statistical      surveys and censuses like the
agency responsible in               Philippines
collecting, compiling,
classifying, producing,
publishing and disseminating
general purpose statistics as
provided for in the
Commonwealth Act (CA) No.
591. NSO has also the
responsibility of carrying out
and administering the
provisions of the Civil Registry
Law as provided for in Act No.
3753 of Feb 1931.

NSO is tasked to conduct:

Censuses –population and
housing, agriculture and
fisheries, business and industry

Household survey- includes:

-   Annual Poverty Indicators-
    nationwide survey (APIS)-
    gathers data on indicators
    related to poverty
-   Family Income and
    Expenditure Survey (FIES)
    - conducted every three
    years, gathers data on
    family income, expenditure,

   factors affecting income
   and expenditure

FIES covers 79 provinces
including all cities and
municipalities in Metro Manila
and is conducted through
personal interviews.

Other NSO surveys:

Establishment Survey- price
reviews, etc.

Administrative-based Statistics-
trade statistics

Civil Registration Services

NSO disseminates information
through the web and other
publication releases

Tools in Poverty Monitoring   The Family Income and
                              Expenditures Survey (FIES) is
                              a nationwide survey of
                              households undertaken every
                              three years as a module of the
                              Integrated Survey of
                              Households (ISH) Conducted
                              simultaneously with the Labor
                              Force Survey (LFS), it gathers
                              data on family income and
                              family expenditures and related
                              information affecting income
                              and expenditure levels and
                              patterns in the Philippines

                              The FIES is conducted through
                              personal interviews using a
                              family schedule of
                              questionnaire called FIES Form
                              1. The respondent is any
                              knowledgeable and responsible
                              member of the sample family.

                              The FIES covers all 79
                              provinces including all cities
                              and municipalities in Metro
                              Manila. The sample includes
                              3,416 enumeration areas or
                              barangays with approximately
                              41,000 sample households.

                              Data obtained include sources

of family income, level of
family consumption by
expenditure item, number of
family members employed,
housing characteristics of
families, their facilities, utilities
and others.

Information obtained are
needed to assess the living
conditions of the population
and the changes occurring over
time. These served as bases in
formulating policies and
designing programs to improve
the quality of life of the
Filipinos and used by the
private sector for planning..

Survey rounds:

First Phase- Jan-June
Second Phase- July-December

Manual Processing is done at
the provincial office
Machine Processing is done at
the regional office

Ave Family Income 148,757
(2003) 145, 121 (2000 figure)
Annual Poverty Indicator

Survey (APIS) is conducted for
four years already. The APIS
aims to provide inputs to the
indicators under the Integrated
Poverty Monitoring System.;
provide socio-economic data on
the living conditions of Filipino
people; determine the number
of poor families. It uses
multiple stage sampling
designs- 41,000 households.
Data gathered- demographics,
economic- family expenditures.
and income, social-housing
It uses the MBN approach.- the
survival needs of the families.

2004 APIS is being processed.
2003 APIS Results: 38,000 out
of 41,000 interviewed. With
water supply-80%; With
sanitary toilets-86%; With
electricity-79%; With strong
housing materials- 70%;
Availed of government housing
program-5%; Family head
employed-51%; CARP
Beneficiaries-11%; Education-
high participation rate in
elementary (99%), high school
(77%); Membership in POs and
NGOs- 27%.

                             Data Dissemination:

                             Press releases, primers, fact
                             sheet, flyers, bookmark,
                             conventions, bulletin boards
                             and display windows,
                             publications, website, library
                             (96 nationwide), radio
                             programs, fora, internal
                             dissemination, trade fairs

February 2, 2005
Third Day of Study Tour

           Event                       Philippines                  Laos   Nepal

Day3 AM Session: Visit to National Economic Development Authority
National Economic
Development Authority          The mandate of NEDA has
                               been shared including some of
                               its functions as it relate to
                               monitoring socio-economic
                               policies, plans and programs
                               and project and its coordinating
                               function in the formulation of
                               socio-economic development
                               plans, policies, and programs.

                             NEDA’s involvement in

poverty reduction are in terms
of the following;
1. Development planning . It
    is responsible in the
    formulation of development
    plans, among which include
    the Medium-Term
    Philippine Development
    Plan(MTPDP)-which has a
    chapter on responding to
    the basic needs of the poor;
    Long Term-Philippine
    Development Plan(LTPDP)
    or Plan 21 for 1999-2025);
    regional development plans,
    sectoral development plans,
    National development
    agenda and Enhanced
    National Anti-Poverty
2. Investment programming-
    focused on evaluation and
    endorsement of anti-
    poverty projects currently
    being undertaken by the
    government, foremost of
    which is the center piece
    anti-poverty program by the
3. Program coordination and
    monitoring of anti-poverty

NEDA is also very much
monitoring performance of
anti-poverty program through
its /Regional Project
Monitoring and Evaluation
System(RPMES). This system
provides a scheme for
monitoring and evaluating
projects at the national,
regional, provincial, city and
municipal levels with
participating agencies, LGUs,
NGOs on pro-poor and other
similar projects under the
direction and special programs
of the president.

NEDA is also monitoring the
country’s commitments in
major international human and
social development
conferences’ targets, e.g. World
Summit for Social
International Conference on
Population and
Development(ICPD) and
Millennium Summit, on its
anti-poverty targets.

Sharing on the Use of DevInfo   DevInfo as a monitoring tool        There is a demand for a          To monitor the progress
                                   I.   DevInfo for MDG             common data base system for      towards social development
                                        monitoring                  monitoring and tracking social   indicators on children &
                                  II.   DevInfo for monitoring      development information and      women, the then Steering
                                        of International            the use of DevInfo as user       Committee of MICS 2000 in
                                        Commitments                 friendly software was the best   Nepal decided to implement
                                A database has been created         option made for the following    ChildInfo database in Nepal.
                                using the DevInfo with the          reasons:
                                following for the Phil. case:        All data compiled into one     ChildInfo was introduced in
                                a. national indicators (More            system                       CBS in the year 2000 with the
                                than a hundred indicators            Easy to query                  support from UNICEF/Nepal.
                                used): Classified into nine          Easy to produce tables,        There are two versions of
                                sectoral disaggregation                 graphs and maps              ChildInfo which has been
                                                                     Maps show all                  released.
                                b.Regional indicators                   administrative levels
                                (Disaggregated into regional         Easy to translate to Lao       The government has decided to
                                and provincial indicators)              language                     use NepalInfo as a monitoring
                                                                                                     tool for PMIS indicators.

                                                                                                     DevInfo in Nepal was
                                                                                                     established with the aim of
                                                                                                     building social development
                                                                                                     database on women and
                                                                                                     children. A decision was made
                                                                                                     to add to the indicators to
                                                                                                     monitor MDG and PRSP
                                                                                                     indicators as well.

Issues on the use of DevInfo      DevInfo not yet fully            Technical difficulty on DevInfo More training activities to
                                   institutionalized                because of the language         enable its users and make it
                                                                    limitation, Lao language not    more adaptable to the needs of

 DevInfo database not          available for DevInfo.              the NepalInfo data system for
  accessible through the                                            monitoring social development.
  Internet which limits those   As Lao has a highly
  that can access information   decentralized statistical system,
  stored in the database.       the agreed institutional
                                framework is crucial for NSC
                                to coordinate successfully; and
                                to disseminate official data on
                                common indicators using

Day 3 PM Session
Poverty Monitoring in a Decentralized Context: Linking Local and National Monitoring Systems
Visit to Angelo King International Center
DILG Presentation: Core Local Poverty Indicator Monitoring System Status and Future Direction
                                Philippines                    Laos                         Nepal
Mandate                         The DILG assists the President                              Nepal started from delegation
                                in the general supervision of                               deconcentration then
                                LGUs and advise formulation                                 devolution. This process started
                                of laws and policies over LGUs                              in 1990 and enactment of Local
                                for community empowerment,                                  Self-Governance Act of 1999.
                                public order and safety. It
                                strengthens administrative and                              75 districts, 58 municipalities,
                                technical capabilities of LGUs                              3913 municipal development
                                and establishes system of                                   committees, 9 wards per
                                coordination among                                          municipality. Each level has
                                communities, local chief                                    executive and legislative bodies
                                executives for efficient and                                and committees.
                                effective services.
                                                                                            The existing local poverty
                                The DILG in coordination with                               monitoring at the district level
                                the Leagues and other agencies                              focused on implementation
                                installed Poverty Monitoring                                monitoring. It is very difficult
                                Systems such as the Minimum                                 for local level units to monitor
                                Basic Needs (MBN)-                                          outcome and impact. Data
                                Community based (CB)                                        segregation is from the regional
                                Information System, MBN-CB                                  to central levels. Data
                                Poverty Indicator and                                       segregation cannot be done at
                                Monitoring System, MIMAPs                                   the district level. Participatory
                                CBMS, Integrated Rural                                      monitoring system is rarely
                                Accessibility Planning (IRAP)                               used. CBMS is being
                                Core Local Poverty Indicators                               implemented in some pilot
                                Monitoring System                                           areas but are not being used yet

                                                       at the community level. There
                   Issues that the DILG wanted to      are too many data from
Monitoring Tools   address: difficulty in              different sources at the district
                   identifying the specific needs      level. There are 4 sources and
                   of the community and                mostly input-output indicators
                   monitoring local impact of          used for monitoring. Overall,
                   government interventions on         the country lacks integrated
                   poverty alleviation; some MBN       poverty monitoring system at
                   indicators not correlated to        the district level.
                   poverty; need for lesser number
                   of indicators

                   The CLPIMS is a core set of
                   indicators used to provide a
                   picture of poverty at the
                   community/local level

                   CLPIMS was based on MBN
                   indicators (From the 37+ MBN
                   indicators, 13+1 indicators
                   were used in the CLPIMS) used
                   for poverty diagnosis and
                   planning, monitoring MDG-
                   responsive PPAs

                   The DILG seeks to address the
                   need for municipal based
                   planning, the need for
                   community mobilization and
                   people’s participation in
                   governance, the need to
                   strengthen collaboration and

                             coordination among focal
                             agencies and the need to
                             institutionalize integration of
                             poverty plans in the local
                             development plans of LGUs.

                             Toward this end, the DILG
                             conducts capacity building of
                             LGUs; policy development
                             guidelines for the adoption and
                             institutionalization of CLPIMS,
                             also making CLPIMS as the
                             MDG Monitoring Tool of
                             LGUs; integration of CBMS as
                             CLPIMS instrument for data
                             collection and processing;
                             establishment of reports i.e.
                             DevInfo at the national and
                             regional level and CBMS at the
                             local level.

                             DILG’s future directions:

                             Nationwide implementation
                             and institutionalization of
                             DevInfo and CBMS, enhance
                             capacities of trainors on
                             poverty diagnosis and planning
                             at all levels.
Bohol Experience on CLPIMS

Bohol’s development challenge
is to eradicate insurgency by
alleviating abject poverty. To
do this sound poverty
alleviation programs require
information on poverty
conditions at the community

Bohol’s experience in

-   Poverty mapping and
    targeting were achieved at
    the barangay and even
    households levels through
    the use of CLPIMS/CBMS
-   Enabled the city to address
    the needs of the community
    and improve their living
    conditions due to a more
    focused targeting of
-   Detailed information up to
    the household level enabled
    the LGU to determine
    specific needs that it needs
    to address at various levels
-   CBMS promoted
    participation, transparency
    and accountability of
    government officials

                                  especially with the website
                                  and other monitoring
                                  system in place.
CBMS as data Collection and Monitoring Tool on Poverty
Mandate                       The International Development        LECS was not designed for         In 2004, Nepal started separate
                              Research Centre (IDRC)-              lower level analysis and thus     district poverty monitoring
                              Canada through the Micro             there was a need to develop the   system. One at the central the
                              Impacts of Macroeconomic             a CBMS called the Village         other at the district level.
                              Adjustment Policies (MIMAP)          Book (VB)
                              has supported the design and                                           Poverty Monitoring Indicators:
                              piloting of CBMS in Asia. The        The main objectives of VB and     Identified two layers of
                              objective is poverty reduction,      CBMS are the same. The VB         indicators-the intermediate and
                              local government building,           determines standards of living    final indicators. The
                              increase gender equality and         at the village level for better   intermediate indicators intend
                              early warning of crisis impact.      planning. It was started in       to monitor inputs and outputs
                                                                   2000 in 1,000 villages.           of programs; the final
CBMS Tool                      The CBMS is a mechanism in                                            indicators monitor district 5-
                               which communities monitor      Requires the strengthening of          7year plans. Nepal is trying to
                                                              partnership between the NSC
                               their situation through carefully                                     have a system of determining
                               designed but relatively simple and LGUs. NSC advises the              sources of information. It also
                               sets of indicators. These      LGUs the importance of having          crafted a standard format.
                               information are used in local  local level data. It trains the        There will be a separate unit at
                                                              provincial, district staff and
                               decisions fed to the district and                                     the DCCs to monitor the
                                                              village chiefs to conduct the
                               provincial levels for budget and                                      indicators.
                               decision making purposes.      VB –from data gathering to
                                                              even using computer software.          MIMAP-Nepal initiated the
                               The CBMS stems from the        After implementing the VB, the         Poverty and Development
                               growing demand for a regular   LGUs have to prepare a report          Monitoring System (PDMS) in
                               up-to-date information that is and submit to the NSC. The             1997 in pilot areas.
                               disaggregated at the community data are analyzed by the NSC
                               level. The system is intended  and then presented to the LGUs         It aims to measure social and
                               to address data requirements   through workshops.                     economic changes at the

for development planning and                                               community (ward) level
monitoring at all geographical       In 2002, the VB adopted the
levels, which is specially           CBMS. Indicators include              Around 62 indicators were used
important in a decentralized         village profile, population           and collection is done through
set-up. CBMS is also important       statistics, economic sectoral         focused group discussion
in local level poverty               statistics, educational statistics,
monitoring and complements           household poverty profile.
the national level monitoring        There are around 70 indicators
system.                              used in the VB.

The CBMS Philippines is under
the MIMAP Philippines
initiated to monitor the impact
of macroeconomic policies and
shocks on population. There
are statistical gaps that FIES
cannot provide at the local

The CBMS features are: LGU
based; taps existing LGU
personnel; has core sets of
indicators. These features
facilitates community
mobilization for data
generation and dissemination.
The key players are PPDO,
MPDO, BDC, community
leaders, health workers,
academe and students.

CBMS experience in the

         Philippines is very positive as it
         provide the needed information
         to policymakers and program
         implementers at the national
         and local levels for tracking
         impacts of macro and micro
         economic reforms at the
         national level as well as support
         planning, resource allocation
         and project implementation at
         the local level.

         Facilitated target poverty
         reduction programs with
         household and individual level
         data and monitoring and
         evaluation of these programs

         CBMS is done in partnership
         with the DILG, and the LGUs
Issues   Funding support is essential to      Funding is a problem, as LGUs    The major issue is how to
         establish the CLPIMS, CBMS           could not shoulder the costs     integrate the various sources
         at the local level.                  and thus cannot sustain the      district level data and form a
                                              effort.                          national level picture.
         Capacity building of LGUs is         There is also difficulty in
         essential in implementing and        getting the support of LGUs to   There is data at the urban but
         sustaining the CBMS.                 conduct the VB.                  not in the rural areas.
                                              Capacity of LGUs to conduct
         There is a need to get the           the VB. Many are not even        Another issue is how to involve
         support of LGUs to implement         computer literate.               the other stakeholders to be
         CLPIMS and LGUs.                     Compared to the Philippines,     involved in this monitoring
         Integration of CBMS, CLPIMS          Laos still need to develop a     system so that there is an

                               is being done by the NAPC-          much better list VB indicators   integrated monitoring system
                               DILG-NEDA-LGUs                      and decrease the number of       for all government and non-
                                                                   indicators.                      government sectors.
                               There is a need to decrease the
                               13+1 indicators.                                                     Linkages between from central
                                                                                                    and district level are needed.
                               There is no concrete step in
                               giving priority assistance to                                        Statistical disaggregation is
                               poorer LGUs monitored by the                                         needed at the district level i.e.
                               systems.                                                             National Living Standard
                                                                                                    Survey at the district level.
                               Policies are needed to secure
                               access to crucial or confidential
                               information. Confidential
                               information are currently
                               available only to program
                               implementers. Non sensitive
                               information are made available
                               to all.

February 3, 2005
Fourth day of the Study Tour

           Event                         Philippines                            Laos                             Nepal

Day4: Visit to the Local Government of Pasay
Community Based-Monitoring The CBMS was discussed by
System (CBMS)                  the City Municipal Planning
                               Officer-Eng. Lagmay.

                             The use of CBMS was
                             introduced to the local
                             government and was enacted
                             by a local ordinance.

                             The monitoring tool and its
                             system is still in its infancy
                             stage of being used by the local
                             government in getting the
                             information that will help them
                             design poverty reduction
                             strategies and programs to the
                             urban poor segment.

                             A key factor in getting
                             information using the CBMS
                             approach is the use of
                             volunteers coming from church

                             The local government unit has
                             also tapped the “barangay”
                             people to do the data gathering
                             activity to track down the urban
                             poor in the city.
Comments from presentation
                             It is expensive to embark on the CBMS, however, participants saw the participatory nature of the
                             system as the poor are able to participate in gathering relevant data.
                             The data from the local and national level need to be harmonized better.
                             Decentralized information gathering and use of data to particular needs of the local people is

February 4, 2005
Fifth Day of the Study Tour

            Event                         Philippines              Laos   Nepal

Day 5: Visit to the Social Weather Stations
Mandate                         SWS was established in August
                                1985 as a private non-stock,
                                nonprofit social research
                                institution. Its members are
                                social scientists in economics,
                                political science, sociology,
                                statistics, market research, and
                                other fields. The objectives of
                                SWS are to educate,
                                conscienticize and provide
                                analysis to solve issues and
                                problems being studied.

                                 SWS's basic functions include:

                                     social analysis and
                                    research, with stress on
                                    social indicators
                                    and the development of new
                                    data sources;
                                     design and
                                    implementation of social,
                                    economic, and political

   surveys, including public
   opinion polls;
    the dissemination of
   research findings through
   seminars, briefings, and
   other channels.

SWS operates as a self-
supporting, non-subsidized,
academic institute for survey
research on topics of public
interest. It conducts regular
Social Weather Surveys, to
which it invites public
subscriptions. The general
concept is that funds from
survey-users are pooled
together and used to defray the
expenses for a continuing series
of social surveys.

To maintain its credibility as an
independent and unbiased
source of primary survey data,
SWS inhibits itself from
conducting proprietary or
confidential surveys. Thus, no
research sponsor can suppress
the use of data generated by the
surveys which it has helped to
finance. In cases of surveys

commissioned on highly
sensitive topics, the sponsors
may obtain a strictly temporary
period of embargo of the data
and of research findings.

Thus as a matter of institutional
policy, all SWS surveys are
ultimately accessible to
research without need for prior
permission from sponsors.
SWS materials, including raw
data diskettes, can be made
available to all interested
parties, without discrimination,
at reasonable charges reflecting
the cost of production. Some of
the activities of SWS are:

    Syndicated/Omnibus
    Special or Dedicated
    Training and
     Consultancy on social
     surveying and opinion
     polling for government
     and private institutions
    Cross-country Survey
    Data Dissemination

                                       Publications

Issues Raised During the           Government allows private
Discussion                        research institutions like SWS
                                  to exist but their findings are
                                  considered “unofficial”

                                  Funding support comes from
                                  donor agencies and private
                                  institutions through grants,

                                  SWS hopes that there will be
                                  more agencies like the SWS
                                  that could provide independent

                                  High cost of conducting
                                  surveys especially when these
                                  are done more frequently than

                                  Issue of complementation of
                                  efforts as against competition

Event 5: Synthesis and Learnings

Below are the expressed and articulated learnings and insights derived during the five day study tour in monitoring poverty and the
sharing and exchangea of best practices and systems of each country. Using metacards, the participants individually wrote their

learning insights to the questions asked from them. The following were the actual responses expressed by the participants to the
question on what they have learned in terms of the following areas.

                                          Matrix of Learnings from the 5-day Study Tour

1. Learnings on the sharing on the policy framework and system for poverty measurement and monitoring: knowledge
                                  Lao                                                           Nepal
 Poverty monitoring has to be linked to a budget provided by a      system for monitoring should be streamlined
    national plan                                                    Dynamic process and learning by doing is important
 Policy framework-structured well and varied across countries        rather than directly copying
    (good example-Phil. is chaired by the president)                 integrated national frameworks matters a lot for
 Tools to measure and monitor could be more detailed [ The           ownership and sustainability
    Philippines has systematic tools for poverty monitoring and      In the Phil its clear about monitoring system
    measurement for central government and local government ]        Good coordination between agency
 Policy framework and system for poverty measurement and            Streamlining surveys and designated statistics
    monitoring is good base on theory but in practice I worry about
    the funds by the government to provide or donor is not enough
    for implementing project
 Policy framework should be clear and precisely cited
 System for monitoring and measurement is essential
 Division of work and responsibilities among different
    institutions/agencies in monitoring and measurement
 Need for clear policy guidelines in implementation and
 Phil has started since 1990s to tackle poverty through poverty
    reduction policies and programs, Laos and Nepal are more or
    less at similar “stages” as did the PRSP
 Policy framework and system for poverty measurement and
    monitoring (M&M) all county have their own strategy paper

   In the Philippines-clear M&M system in agencies both in
    central and local levels
   Good coordination between concerned agency such as NAPC,
    NCSB, NEDA and LGUs
Issue: “ post-evaluation ” of the M&E not covered in the presentation

2. The importance of Data Support system for poverty measurement and monitoring
                            LAO                                                                     NEPAL

   Data collection at all four monitoring levels(input, output,            Data from internal reporting system and from household
    outcome, impact)                                                         survey can be used but it is very difficult to aggregate and
   Data support system should include periodic census and                   disaggregate information at the national and local levels
    surveys, specialized surveys and administrative records                  as well
   Devinfo is not only the system available in the Phil. However           Phil has good data collection system for poverty
    problem of coordination among them is unclear. This is                  Have a good support from government
    different from Nepal and Laos                                           Good linkages in the organization doing census/surveys
   Localization and minimized indicators(13 plus 1)                         data and administrative records
   Lack of tracking system for measurement of progress indicators          Clear roles and functions among agencies involved in
   Clear legislation and designation of roles of agencies involved          monitoring and measurement of poverty
    in monitoring                                                           Streamlining the data sources both at national and local
   Identification of indicators(i.e. harmonization at the local level       district level is urgent
   Combination in measurement of poverty(i.e.                              Proper mix of quantitative and participatory data is
    income/consumption and other social aspects)                             urgent(but it is a dynamic process)
   Data support system for poverty measurement and monitoring              Good sharing of experiences
    must be practical                                                       Streamlining of local/central data not clear
   Phil has quite good data collection system for poverty                  CBMS results need sometime for piloting results
    monitoring and measurement
   Local government has their own data supported system(CBMS)
   Strong in collection, and analysis skills
   Good support from government in monitoring and

   Organization and data not clear at local level

3. Poverty monitoring at a local level
                                  LAO                                                             NEPAL
 The participation of concerned stakeholders in monitoring and          CBMS can be a good system for local level monitoring
    measurement is very important                                        Integration/linkages issues need further discussion
 Difficult to establish clear and concise linkages between central
    and local M&M systems
 Costly and time consuming
 Local m/e has different aim since data use is for local level
 Data-linkages to other data base system
 Poverty monitoring could be participated by poor people
 Poverty monitoring in a centralized context is needed however
    it is essential to have a strong mandate and appropriate system
 Poverty monitoring in a decentralized context
 Local government ownership and commitment(2)
 Phil. more autonomy than Laos and Nepal
 Coordination and technical support by national government
 Clear mandate for coordinating body backed by “decree” MoU
    and law
    Sufficient and reliable data is essential for poverty
    measurement and monitoring
Linkage of CBMS to devinfo
Information should be harmonized at one stage

4. Role of the private survey groups in poverty monitoring
                                 LAO                                                             NEPAL
 the important role of private survey groups in a “democracy” in        Should supplement the official indicators
    catching the feelings of the people on hunger and poverty(self-      Role of private survey group will be more appropriate for

    rated)                                                                 perception survey
   private survey groups also play an important role in poverty          Private sector role in poverty data collection and analysis-
    monitoring                                                             good for LGUs
   important source of information that can complement other             Providing technical support in terms of data analysis
    sources and highlight certain issues                                  Private sector agencies can play important role in
   involvement of private sector with budget constraints                  advocating peoples perception
   public more open to ascertain independent agencies-real               Perception-based surveys can substantiate income
    problems what people think about poverty                               poverty(survey-based)Enrich data for poverty monitoring
   role of private survey group and government group equally             Simple tools and regular update of poverty related
    important                                                              indicators on peoples perception
   helpful to government side                                            Easy capture and tools of peoples social well-being
   they have different data/information to compare
   role of private survey group in monitoring must be considered
    from the government agencies concerned

issue: lack of analysis vis-à-vis private survey and NSO information

Responses showed the very positive experiences of the participants and the insights/learnings derived from the visits and sharings
of best practices of the concerned agencies. What was highlighted was the clear policy framework by which the Philippines and
the rest of the countries do in monitoring and measuring poverty and poverty programs, including the appropriate indicators by
which these are measured.

Documented and Prepared by the Facilitators:

       Ms. Deanna R. Lijauco
       Ms. Aurma M. Manlangit

                                   List Of Acronyms

APIS        Annual Poverty Indicators- nationwide survey
BAS         Bureau of Agricultural Statistics
BDC         Barangay Development Council
BDO         Barangay Development Officer
CARP        Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program CBMIS Community Based
Management System
CPI         Consumer Price Index
CLPIMS      Core Local Poverty Indicators Monitoring System
DILG        Department of Interior and Local Government
FIES        Family Income and Expenditure Survey
HDI         Human Development Index
ICPD        International Conference on Population and Development
IRAP        Integrated Rural Accessibility Planning
ISH         Integrated Survey of Households
KALAHI      Kapit Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan(poverty reduction program of the Philippines)
             (“Fighting Poverty”)
LECS        Lao Expenditure and Consumption Survey
LFS         Labor Force Survey
LGUs        Local Government Units
MDG         Millineum Development Goal
MIMAP       Micro Impacts of Macroeconomic Adjustment Policies
MPDO        Municipal Planning Development Officer
MTEPF       Medium Term Expenditure Framework
NEDA        National Economic Development Authority
NCSB        National Census and Statistics Board
NAPC        National Anti-Poverty Commission
NGPES       National Government Poverty Eradication Strategy
NSO         National Statistics Office
PPDO        Provincial Planning Development Officer
PRS         Poverty Reduction Strategy
PMAS        Poverty Monitoring and Analysis System
RPMES       Regional Project Monitoring and Evaluation System
SWS         Social Weather Station (private monitoring organization in the Philippines)
WSSD        World Summit for Social Development
UNICEF      United Nations International Children Emergency Fund
VB          Village Book

Proposed Itinerary for Nepal and Lao PDR Visit
January 31 – February 4, 2005


The activity is designed as a sharing of experiences and lessons among the three
participating countries on poverty monitoring systems. The Philippine, as host, shall take
the lead in the discussions but the two other countries will also be sharing their experiences
and plans on the topics presented by the Philippines.

Day One will be devoted to welcome ceremonies, introduction and overview. The afternoon
of the day one shall be a discussion on the Policy Framework and System for Poverty
Measurement and Monitoring (Primary Reference: Balisacan (2002). Programme and Policy
Development on Targeting Poverty Areas). The forum may be a run-down of the systems in
place or that should be in place, from poverty profiling, targeting, planning and programming
to monitoring and evaluation. Some of the elements shall be the foci of discussions in the next
four days of the study visit. Day one shall be led and hosted by the National Anti Poverty
Commission (NAPC).

Day Two will focus on issues related to information requirements for poverty measurement
and monitoring at the national level. This session shall be led by the National Statistical
Coordination Board (NSCB), together with the National Statistical Office (NSO). The two
offices will discuss the Philippine Statistical System’s efforts at improving data support
systems for poverty measurement and monitoring, both in terms of the types and quality of
data from various data sources such as the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES),
Annual Poverty Incidence Survey (APIS), etc. as well as software/technology requirements
for public use files of FIES, APIS, etc.).

Days Three and Four will be devoted to a discussion on poverty monitoring in a
decentralized context, i.e. linking local with local with national monitoring systems, again
both in terms of the types and quality of data and software/technology requirement. This shall
be led by the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG), together with the
National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA). Day three will start with a
presentation by NEDA of the Social Development Management Information System
(SOMIS), which utilizes the DevInfo and which is also intended to capture local level data on
MDG-related indicators. This will be followed by a presentation by DILG of the Core Local
Poverty Indicator Monitoring System, including its “predecessors” like the Community Based
Monitoring System (CBMS), Minimum Basic Needs (MBN), etc. The afternoon of Day 3 will
be devoted to the government’s efforts at institutionalizing the Core Local Poverty Indicators
as well as discussions on poverty monitoring in a decentralized context, i.e. linking local with
national monitoring systems. Day Four will focus on a sample area wherein a local poverty
monitoring system is place. The proposed site is Bulacan, a CBMS province, which is
approximately an hour away from Quezon City.

Day Five shall be spent for a visit to the Social Weather Station, a public opinion polling
office, and then a synthesis of lessons and recommendations, as well as for a city tour.


Day 0, January 30
(Sulu Hotel, Quezon City)
    Arrival of participants

Day 1, January 31 (Lead Agency: NAPC)
(Venue: Malacañang Palace, Manila City)

   Welcome ceremonies
   Expectations check
   Overview of week-long activity
   Distribution of relevant materials from participating countries


     Presentation by NAPC on Policy Framework and System for Poverty Measurement
       and Monitoring (Primary Reference: Balisacan (2002). Programme and Policy
       Development on Targeting Poverty Areas). NAPC presentation may also include the
       Enhanced Integrated Monitoring System for Anti-Poverty Programs and Projects (e-
       IMSAPP) as part of the entire system, as well as other private sector efforts.
     Presentation by Nepal on its Poverty Monitoring and Analysis System
     Presentation by Lao PDR on its National Human Development Reporting (or if there
       is a larger framework / system)
     Open forum

Day 2, Feb. 1 (Lead Agency: NSCB)
Morning (venue: NSCB office, Makati City)
    Welcome by NSCB
    Presentation by NSCB and NSO on poverty related statistics produced by the
       Philippine statistical system (including measurement methodologies, data sources,
       data bases, software, institutional arrangements)
    Travel to NSO


Afternoon (venue: NSO Office, Sta. Mesa, Manila City)
     “Ocular inspection” of the Philippines existing databases; interviews, sharing of
       experiences with NSCB and NSO staff
     Sharing by Lao PDR delegation

       Sharing by Nepal delegation

Day 3, Feb. 2 (Lead Agency: DILG)
Morning (venue: DILG Office, Quezon City)
    Presentation on the MDG monitoring through SOMIS and DevInfo (NEDA)
    Sharing by Laos PDR delegation
    Sharing by Nepal delegation


    Presentation on the Core Local Poverty Indicator Monitoring System: Status, Issues
       and Future Directions (DILG). Other resource persons will be invited to talk about
       their specific experiences
           o Bohol poverty reduction framework (Dr. Nestor Pestelos)
           o Community Based Monitoring System (Dr. Celia Reyes)
    Open forum on linking local with national monitoring systems

Day 4, Feb 3 (Lead Agency: DILG)
Morning (Venue: Bulacan)
    Travel from Quezon City to Bulacan
    Presentation of the Bulacan Provincial Government
    Open forum

Lunch (Venue: Bulacan)

Afternoon (Venue: Bulacan)
     Interview with barangay officials of the chosen municipality on data gathering
     Interview with local chief executive and staff of a municipality in Bulacan on data
       aggregation and analysis
     Sharing by Nepal delegation
     Sharing by Lao PDR delegation
     Travel back to Quezon City

Day 5, Feb. 4 (Lead Agency: UNDP)
    Visit to Social Weather Station (Quezon City)
    Synthesis of discussions based on the overall policy framework and system for
       poverty measurement and monitoring (venue: UNDP Conference Room, Makati City)
    Possible next steps on how to address specific issues and concerns raised
    Closing ceremonies


     City tour

Day 6, Feb 5
    Travel back to respective countries


To top