LMC - Lake Mainit Cooperative

CALMWRAI - Community Action on Lake Mainit Rehabilitaiton Association, Inc.

LAMWADECO - Lake Mainit Watershed Development Cooperative

FDFI - Forestry Development Foundation, Inc.

FOCUS, Inc. - Forest and Community Services (FOCUS), Inc.

VIRTUE, Inc. - Development Workers for Underprivilege Community and Environment, Inc.

DEVELOPERS, Inc. - Development for Environmental and Rural Sustainability, Inc.

CCDC - Coastal Construction and Development Corporation

LIST OF ACCRONYMS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ---------------------------------------------------------------- i

I. Subproject Description --------------------------------------------------------- 1

1. Purpose/ Objectives

2. Subproject Scope and Dimension

A. Comparison of Original and

Actual Scope and Dimensions

B. Reasons for Revision/ Modification

Of Scope and Dimensions

C. Contribution of Subproject to

Relevant (Sub) Sectors

II. Subproject Implementation -------------------------------------------------- 13

1. Organizations for Implementing

Subproject

2. Implementation Period

3. Subproject Cost

4. Comments on Performance of

AO, AP, PO, M&E, and Infra Contractors

5. Other Matters Relating to

Subproject Implementation

III. Action taken by the AO, AP, and PO --------------------------------------- 25

Relating to Recommendation(s)

IV. Initial Operation and Maintenance

Of the Subproject Facilities ------------------------------------------------ 26

1. Present Condition of Facilities

2. Organization for Operation and Maintenance

3. Annual Budget or Actual Expenditure

For Operation and Maintenance (by year)

4. Maintenance Method

V. Benefits Derived from the Project ------------------------------------------ 31

1. Indirect Effects

VI. Conclusions and Recommendations ------------------------------------------ 33

LIST OF TABLES:

Table 1 : Trainings Attended by the PO ---------------------------------------- 34

Table 2 : Subproject Performance ---------------------------------------------- 35

Table 3 : Subproject Site Management Office Equipments ------------------- 36

Table 4 : Trainings Attended by the SUSIMO --------------------------------- 37

Table 5 : Copra Trading Livelihood Project ------------------------------------- 38

Table 6 : Subproject Status Report -------------------------------------------- 39

Table 7 : Community Organizing Cost Estimate Per Activity ------------------ 40

Table 8a : Agroforestry Cost Estimate By Activity ---------------------------- 41

Table 8b : Cost Estimate for Bamboo Plantation Per Activity ----------------- 42

Table 8c : Cost Estimate for Tree Plantation/Reforestation Per Activity --- 43

Table 9 : Monitoring and Evaluation Cost Estimate Per Activity -------------- 44

Table 10 : Infrastructure Project ----------------------------------------------- 45

Table 11 : Annual Work and Financial Plan --------------------------------------- 46

ANNEXES:

1. Organizational Structure ------------------------------------------------------ 49

1a. CO

1b. PO

1c. M & E Contractor

1d. SUSIMO

2. Pictures ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 53

3. CSD Accomplishment Map ---------------------------------------------------- 55

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Community-Based Forest Management Program (CBFMP) revolutionized

forest development and rehabilitation efforts of the government when it was

institutionalized in 1995 by virtue of Executive Order No. 263.

Before the adoption of the CBFM approach, the sole motivating factor of

contract reforestation awardees was primarily financial gains. With the

implementation of the Forestry Sector Project (FSP) using CBFM as its main

strategy to rehabilitate the upland ecosystem, it empowered beneficiary

communities economically, socially, technically and politically while transforming

them into environmentally responsible managers. The tenurial right to develop

subproject sites alongside the various inputs from the Subproject deepened their

commitment to collaborate with other stakeholders in the implementation of these

subprojects.

The Lake Mainit Watershed Subproject site covers Barangays San Pablo,

Bunga, Magdagooc, San Jose and San Vicente in the Municipality of Jabonga, in

Agusan del Norte. The rehabilitation of the watershed area is noteworthy, it

being a portion of what used to be the concession area of the Lake Mainit Timber

Corporation which was subjected to severe degradation in the eighties. The

Subproject envisions a turn-around in its condition and the socio-economic

situation as well of the upland communities.

The Subproject had been plagued by problems early on. There were lapses,

among others, in the implementation of community organizing activities as there

were in the comprehensive site development and even in the monitoring and

evaluation component because of failure of contractors to perform some provisions

in their contract. Change of contractors in some cases resolved the constraints.

There are benefits too, however. For one, savings from the CSD funds and

the Community Forest Development Fund enabled the communities to engage in

various livelihood projects. Income from these projects coupled with the wages

earned from CSD activities increased their income from PHP 20,690.81, registered

at the start of the Project, to PHP 57,892.00 during the Project or a raise of 56%.

In terms of infrastructure, the Subproject turned over a six-km farm-to-

market road; a three-km concrete pathway; two-km concrete road and a one-km all-

weather road all of which provide access and mobility to community members.

ii

The Lake Mainit Watershed Subproject has definitely given valuable

learning to all those who have been involved in its implementation. Out of these

experiences, they are now ready to face new challenges to sustain the Project.

1

SUBPROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

of

LAKE MAINIT WATERSHED SUBPROJECT

Forestry Sector Project

Loan Agreement No. PH-P 135

I. Subproject Description

The Lake Mainit Watershed Subproject site embraces Barangays San Pablo,

Bunga, Magdagooc, San Jose and San Vicente, all within the Municipality of

Jabonga, Agusan del Norte Province. The area lies between 9º21’9” and 9°21’16”

latitude and 125°27’12” and 125°30’8” longitude. It is bounded on the north by

the provincial boundary of Agusan del

Norte and Surigao del Norte, on the

south by Brgy. Sto Nino, on the east

by Brgys. San Pablo and Bunga

overlooking Lake Mainit and on the

west by Brgys. San Vicente, San Jose

and Magdagooc facing Mindanao Sea.

The Lake Mainit Watershed area

occupies a portion of the former Lake

Mainit Timber Corporation’s concession which was ravaged by timber poachers

when the company ceased operating in the early eighties. The occurrence of

typhoons and forest fires aggravated its degraded condition thus, adversely

affecting the upland communities even more.

1. Purpose/Objectives

A. Original

1. To establish and maintain adequate forest cover within the 2,171

hectares of land through 1,086.85 ha. forest plantation; 334.5 ha. of

agro forestry and 29.65 ha. bamboo plantation;

2. To develop and harness the capabilities and potentials of the communities

in various aspects of resources management for effective implementation

of the project on a sustainable basis.

3. To provide employment opportunities and livelihood activities to the

community.

2

4. To establish appropriate soil conservation and erosion measures along

erosion prone areas.

5. To enhance biodiversity and restore wildlife habitat.

6. To develop eco-tourism potentials of the area along the coastal and lake

zones.

B. Modification

a. Modified purpose/objectives

The modified purpose/objectives are as follows:

1. To establish and maintain 1,410.13 ha. of tree plantation; 144.90 ha. of

agroforestry; and 17.80 ha. of bamboo plantation;

2. To guide the five barangays covered by the Lake Mainit Watershed

Subproject become a unified body capable of managing the Subproject

on their own;

3. To promote sustainability of the Subproject through development of

alternative livelihood projects for the communities;

b. Reasons for the modification

The modification was made to provide flexibility in the final

determination of the extent of development to be pursued. This was

resorted to when the PO (CALMWRAI) failed to accomplish the original

target of 2,171 hectares before the effectivity of the extension period

on January 2000 due to prevailing conflict within the organization.

Hence, reduction of target area was made.

Modifications 2 and 3 above are details which were not indicated in the

original purpose and objectives.

2. Subproject Scope and Dimension

A. Comparison of Original and Actual Scope & Dimensions

a.1. Please check: There has been ( revision and/or modification or

no revision and/or modification) of the Subproject scope and

dimensions.

a.2. If “revision and/or modification”, please complete the Table

3

ITEM

ORIGINAL SCOPE

AND DIMENSION

(At the time of

appraisal/planned)

REVISED/ MODIFIED

( Actual)

I. REFORESTATION/

WATERSHED/CBFM

A. SMA

B. CO 1

Year 1

FDFI

Year 2

FOCUS, INC.

3,043 hectares

June 30, 1997-June

29, 1999: 2,171

hectares

IEC activities

Socio-economic

profiling

TNA assessment

and Core Group

formation

CSD WFP

preparation and

CSD contracting

preparation and

approval of

livelihood

feasibility studies

June 30, 1998-June

29, 1999.

Preparation in the

awarding and

approval by DENR

of CBFMA;

Submission of

Phase-out Plan;

Preparation and

submission of

Terminal Report;

and

Submission of

Process

3,043 hectares

June 30, 1997-June 29,

1998: 2,171 hectares

(Blacklisted and Cancelled)

IEC activities

Socio-economic profiling

TNA assessment and

Core Group formation

CSD WFP preparation

and CSD contracting

preparation and approval

of livelihood feasibility

studies

September 1999 to

December 2000

Conducted the unfinished

activities of the blacklisted

NGO

4

C. CSD

1. SOIL

EROSION/SWC

a. Infrastructure:

b. Trail & Footpath

c. Tree plantation

&/or cover crop in

riverbanks

2. VEGETATIVE

MEASURE 2

a. Agroforestry

b. ANR

c. EP

d. Tree

Plantation:

d.1 Bamboo

d.2 Rattan

d.3 Plantation

spp

e. TSI

3. INVENTORY OF

RESIDUAL

FOREST

4.INCOME ENHANCE-

MENT SUBPROJ.

5. INFRASTRUCTURE

Trail/Footpath

Look-out Tower

Bunk House

D. INFRASTRUCTURE

Farm to market road

Documentation

Report.

85 km

334.50 ha.

29.65 ha.

1,806.85 ha.

85 km.

5 unit

5 units

85 km.

144.90 ha.

17.80 ha.

1,410.13 ha.

32 km.

2 units

2 units

5 km.

5

E. MONITORING &

EVALUATION

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Inspection Chart

Mapping (ICM)

October 1999 to October

2000.

Physical validation conducted

in two (2) passes :

1,263 hectares

Verification of

boundaries, monuments,

and block corners;

Seedling production

inventory and analysis

Survival counting with 20%

sampling intensity,

including mapping of

developed areas;

Height and diameter

measurement, assessment

of overall health

/appearance;

DEVELOPERS- Physical (3rd

pass)

VIRTUE –IPBA

Institutional and Project

Benefit Assessment:

Assessment of the overall

development of the PO;

Assessment of the

capability of the PO to

pursue sustainable

resource management and

livelihood initiatives;

Identification of various

issues/problems/

constraints related to the

development and

strengthening of the PO

and the relevant support

system;

Identification of

6

II. SUSIMO 3

Equipment provided

to the office

Researches

Conducted

Trainings attended 4

immediate benefits of the

project and evidences that

would indicate the

intermediate and long-

term socio-economic and

environmental impacts.

1 unit KIA Cross truck

1 unit Power Generator

1 unit Computer

1 unit Printer

6 units Motorcycle

1 unit UPS 500 VAT

1 unit GIS Software

(Maptitude);

2 units GPS

1 unit Base Radio

3 units Handheld Radio

2 units Forester’s Transit

1 unit Typewriter (Manual)

4 units Brunton Compass

2 units Steel Nylon Tape

2 units Diameter Tape

1 unit Planimeter

4 units Abney Hand Level

1 unit Rain Gauge

3 units Binocular

1 unit Lettering Set

NONE

FSP reorientation

assessment & SUSIMO

Action planning workshop

PO FSP re orientation &

action planning workshop

On-the-job training on

GIS/GPS operation

Re-orientation course for

FSP implementers

On-the-job training on

map digitization

7

Others

FSP Phase out/Phase in

workshop for DENR and

POs

Subproject Site Management

Office with 60 sq.m. area,

concrete with GI sheets roof

Manned by 12 SUSIMO

personnel

Infra Turned-Over facilities

at the Regional Office:

o Desktop computer with

printer, UPS & table

o Sala set, dining set

o Office building 1 Please refer to Table 1 for the details on trainings attended by the POs

2 Table 2 for details of the subproject performance in terms of area planted

3 Table 3 shows the details of the equipment provided to the SUSIMO

4 Please refer to table 4 for the trainings attended by the SUSIMO staff

B. Reasons for Revision/Modification of scope and Dimensions

b.1. Where there has been “revision/modification” of the Subproject scope

and dimensions.

Please choose the reason(s) from the following list and check.

Revision of the superior plan (e.g. sector development plan, etc.)

Revision of the supply-and-demand estimate

Large fluctuation in the Subproject cost

Substantial revision of design due to the unforeseeable physical

condition at the time of the original design (e.g. poor soil

condition, etc.)

Natural disaster/bad weather

Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing Agency

Structural and organizational problems of the agencies concerned

(e.g. lack of staff, inadequate coordination with other agencies,

etc.)

Availability of funds (e.g. lack of funds, use of contingency,

fluctuation of the exchange rate, etc.)

Unrealistic initial plan/Technical problems

Procurement problems

Performance of CSD contractor (PO)

Performance of consultant

8

Change in construction period

Others:

Performance of 1st CO contractor

Performance of the 1st M&E contractor

Circumstances beyond the control of the PO

Infrastructure support

b.2. Detailed statement of reasons (with background)

Performance of the CSD Contractor (PO)

There was a revision of CSD targets due to the failure of the PO to

accomplish the original target of 2,171 hectares before the effectivity of the

extension period on January 2000. The failure has been attributed to internal

conflict within the Peoples Organization that started with the rift between

the president and his assistant on leadership styles and caused low turn-out

of accomplishment because of officers taking opposite sides. Until the

termination of the CSD contract, planting covered only 1,572.83 hectares.

The DENR did not allow planting to be conducted during the extension period

and just opted for maintenance and protection activities for the 1,572.83

hectares.

Performance of the CO Contractor

The modification in the schedule of CO was the result of the cancellation of

the contract due to the failure of the CO contractor, FDFI, to discharge

their terms of reference (TOR) effectively. It took almost two years before

another CO contract was awarded to another NGO due to the combative

stance of FDFI with regard to the cancellation of its contract.

Performance of the M&E Contractor

The first contractor that was tapped by the DENR to conduct the three (3)

passes begged off from doing the 3rd pass due to some unfinished

commitment in other regions. The conduct of the 3rd pass, therefore, was

slightly delayed until the hiring of two (2) non government organizations, one

to conduct the Physical Evaluation and the other to conduct the Institutional

Project Benefit Assessment (IPBA).

Circumstances Beyond the Control of the PO

There were changes in the actual accomplishment of trails and footpaths, look

out towers and bunkhouses. For the former, it was due to lapses in the

estimate of the PO as to the length to be established. Moreover, there were

areas that do not necessitate trail and footpath but were considered to be

9

necessary during the planning stage. The number of bunkhouses and look out

towers were as also reduced for the same reason.

Others

Infrastructure Component

Result of the assessment made by the Forestry Sector Project on the overall

implementation of the subprojects in CY 2000 disclosed the need for

infrastructure support to the PO. The infrastructure support is an added

component of the Forestry Sector Project, which seeks to promote the

livelihood development project of the PO.

C. Contribution of Subproject to Relevant (Sub) Sector(s)

c.1. (Sub) Sector(s) to which the Subproject belongs

Electric power and Gas Telecommunication Social services

(Multipurpose) Dams Telecommunication Water supply

Power Plants Broadcasting Sewerage

Transmission lines Education Health

Distribution Systems Irrigation and Flood control Tourism

Gas Irrigation Others

Others Flood control

Transportation Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Roads Agriculture and Forestry

Bridges Fisheries

Railways

Airport Mining and Manufacturing

Ports Mining

Marine Transportation Manufacturing

Others

c.2. Original (At the time of appraisal/Planned) -

Item Description

1. Project Development

2. Flood Control

There will be an increase in the number

of trees in per hectare basis. This will

be the direct result of the establishment

of tree plantations and fruit orchards.

The plantations will produce more

biomass in the form of dead trunks,

10

3. Increase water yield

4. Socio-Institutional Development

5. Employment Generation

branches, twigs and leaves that drop to

the ground. This biomass covers the

surface of the ground and plays a role in

flood control . Since they are soft and

absorptive, raindrops will penetrate

through them in their movement

downward to the water table such as

water found in creeks and streams as

compared to surface run-off. Water

from surface run-off is heavily silted

while water that comes from the water

table is devoid of silt.

The establishment of tree plantations is

expected to increase water yield by

transforming the entire watershed into a

giant sponge capable of holding water

during rains to slowly release them into

creeks and other water channels. This

ultimately sustains the flow of water

which is just what is needed to also

sustain the operation of hydroelectric

plant, like the planned hydroelectric plant

in Barangay.Magdago-oc.

The communities will be trained to

establish linkages/networks with other

government and non-government entities

in the improvement of their economic

conditions such as a) Department of

Agriculture (DA), b) Department of

Trade and Industry (DTI), c)

Department of Health (DOH), d)

Department of Education ( Dept. Ed.) e)

Department of Interior and Local

Government (DILG), and g) Department

of Public Works and Highways (DPWH)

and civilian volunteers.

The Subproject is expected to bring

employment opportunities to local

residents for a total of 268,593 man

days annually or an equivalent of 1,074

11

6. Income Generation

5. Improvement of the area for

eco-tourism

full-time jobs.

The Subproject is expected to increase

the income above the poverty level. This

is equivalent to an additional average

annual income of P9,371 for each

household or the projected annual

household income of P24, 432.00.

The area has a scenic view of Lake Mainit

and Butuan Bay from atop the ridge that

runs parallel to the shoreline and

lakeshore.

c.3. Present situation and outlook for the future

Item

Description

1. The Community

2. Security of Tenure

3. Plantations

The reorganization of the PO from

CALMWRAI to LMC gave the PO a brighter

future. Although the PO was not able to claim

its retention fee, the present condition looks

promising and indications are that they can

move ahead in their next endeavours. In the

course of project implementation, the

participating communities had been equipped

with the technical skills acquired through

training and seminars. This made them capable

in managing similar projects in the future.

CBFMA makes the PO the virtual manager of

the entire area within its coverage and can do

any development activity within their

jurisdiction so long as it does not contradict

the agreement. The PO may use it to

negotiate for any economic activity that fits

the site. This will be the jumping board for

the full development of their farms. This will

boost their morale and will give them the

confidence of managing similar projects in the

future.

The PO will not stand to gain economically out

of their tree plantations but will benefit in

12

4. Tourism Potential

5. Livelihood projects 5

6. Farm to Market Road

7. LGU support

due time out of their agro forestry

plantations. They have planted an area of

approximately 145 hectares in agroforestry

or a total of 14,500 trees comprising durian,

mango, lanzones and jackfruit. If 50% of

these trees will survive and bear fruit, the PO

will surely stand to gain economically.

The LGU of Jabonga is pushing for the

construction of a “view deck” within the

plantations. The site is ideal for the purpose

since there is a ridge that runs longitudinally

along the strip between the lake in the east

and Butuan Bay in the west. It is within this

strip where the plantations of LMC are

situated. The PO will have the opportunity to

engage in economic activities to service the

needs of those who will go on sightseeing trips

to the area.

The PO has been implementing livelihood

projects out of its savings from CSD funds

and CFDF. This will sustain the Organization

even after the termination of financial

support from the funding institution. It is

expected that these projects will expand and

will generate more income in due time.

The plantation is accessible by a 6-km road

wherein 3 kilometers is concrete pathway; 2

kilometers, partially concreted road and 1

kilometer, an all-weather road. This road will

be the main access to the planned view deck.

The PO can devise an economic activity out of

this road like establishing a tollgate at some

distance from the view deck. The proceeds

may be used for the maintenance of the road

and for other worthwhile economic activities.

The LGUs concerned have been very

supportive to the project. This was

manifested through the signing of a

memorandum of agreement between the POs,

DENR and the LGUs concerned during the

turn-over of the infrastructure project. It is

13

8. Agriculture and Forestry

expected that a strong partnership will be

established which will contribute to the

Subproject’s sustainability.

The Subproject has improved the overall

aesthetic beauty of the watershed including

its ecological and production functions and

sustained forest cover. It is expected that

the land use would be improved and sustain

land production and is expected to provide

tremendous opportunities in the future as

reserved wood stock.

Please refer to Table 5 for the livelihood project being implemented by the POs

II. Subproject Implementation

1. Organizations for Implementing Subproject

Function in the Name of Organization Reasons for

Subproject

Implementation

(1) Original (2) Changed Change

1. SMA (By Admin)

2. AO for CO

3. Assisting Prof.

4. PO

5. M&E Contractor

6. Infra

Contractor

FDFI

Mr. Froilan C.

Montero

CALMWRAI

LEAF Inc.

Coastland

Construction and

Development

Corporation

FOCUS

LMC

DEVELOPERS

- for physical

VIRTUE, Inc.-

for

Institutional

Project

Benefit

Assessment

Underperformance

of the FDFI

Poor performance

of CALMWRAI.

LEAF did not

complete M & E

activities (3rd

pass) by June

2003

14

(CCDC)

Please state:

1.1 Reasons for the change

On Community Organizing

The first Assisting Organization (AO) which was contracted by DENR to

conduct Community Organizing (CO) was Forest Development Foundation Inc.

(FDFI). This contractor was blacklisted and its contract eventually cancelled on

December 14, 1998 due to unsatisfactory performance. Re-awarding of contract

was made to Forest and Community United Services Inc (FOCUS Inc.) to carry

out the remaining CO activities.

On Comprehensive Site Development (CSD)

The Community Action on Lake Mainit Watershed Rehabilitation Association,

Inc. (CALMWRAI) was formed as a result of community organizing. The CSD

contract was awarded to CALMWRAI which was then converted to a cooperative

known as Lake Mainit Cooperative (LMC). With the extension given by the JBIC

to the FSP, the implementation of the Lake Mainit Watershed Subproject was

also extended and the remaining activities on maintenance and protection of the

plantations were undertaken by the LMC. As basis of LMC to implement the

remaining activities of the Subproject, the DENR issued them an amended

contract for CSD.

On Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

The first contractor hired by DENR to conduct monitoring and evaluation was

the LEAF Foundation, Inc. Its activities included the physical and institutional

project benefit assessment for a period of 18 months covering three (3) passes.

However, LEAF, Inc. was only able to conduct the first two (2) passes. The 3rd

pass was deferred to give the PO enough time to resolve the existing conflict

within their organization.

When the DENR finally allowed the resumption of LEAF, Inc. activities for the

3rd pass, it begged off citing conflict of schedule with other activities in other

regions. The physical aspect of M&E was contracted to DEVELOPERS while the

institutional project benefit assessment was contracted to the NGO, VIRTUE.

1.2 Problems arising, counter measures adopted and results

15

In fighting among officers of the PO:

The first set of PO officers was not up to the job of implementing the

provisions of their CSD contract. The vice president contested the leadership

of the president and the other officers took sides. When the President took a

leave of absence, he was prevented by the vice president from reporting back to

office. What followed was intense leadership crisis as manifested in the

malversation of funds and a freeze in the conduct of activities indicated in the

contract.

The DENR acted by hiring another NGO to continue the unfinished activities in

CO. The new NGO, FOCUS, started where FDFI stopped. The PO was

reorganized and CALMWRAI was changed into a cooperative named

LAMWADECO and was further changed to Lake Mainit Cooperative (LMC). The

2,171 hectares target of the Subproject was reduced to 1,572.83 hectares. This

final target was based on the total planting accomplishment of the then

CALMWRAI, which was made as the target of LMC in its contract for

maintenance and protection only. The plantation needed massive replanting and

LMC was guided by the SUSIMO in focusing their efforts to accomplish their

targets in maintenance and protection. The problem affected them in such a

way that it had prevented LMC to fully replant the targeted area of 1,572.83

hectares. When funding support from the FSP was terminated, LMC was able to

replant 1,263 hectares only.

Lack of Political Will on the Part of Concerned DENR Officials

FSP was implemented with complete guidelines. This project was funded by JBIC

and ADB. The lapses in some ADB-funded subprojects within the Caraga Region

caused over zealousness on the part Commission On Audit personnel assigned in

the DENR Regional Office. Procedures indicated in the FSP were ignored. One

example was concerning the disallowances imposed by the COA regarding the

disbursements to ADB-funded subprojects that shocked the personnel of the

Accounting office. They became overcautious in the processing of monetary

claims by the PO of Lake Mainit Watershed Subproject such that billings were

routed to COA prior to disbursement with documents going through the

circuitous route. The guidelines of DENR regarding FSP implementation were

ignored. Since concerned COA personnel lack understanding of the technical

guidelines, what they were suggesting ran counter to the technical guidelines.

The documents were “tossed and dribbled and passed on” to several units

causing delay in the processing of documents for the disbursement of funds.

This was corrected when top regional officials were reshuffled and those

assigned in Caraga region showed firmness and promptness in their decisions.

16

Designation of Inexperienced Foresters to the Subproject During the

Initial Stage of Implementation

Those who were tasked to supervise the CSD activities were inexperienced

foresters. The implementation plan called for the observation of the approved

spacing to come up with the required density of trees per hectare. Instead,

planting was done without due regard to the approved spacing and payment for

the planting accomplishment was no longer based on a per hectare basis but on

the number of hills planted , transformed into hectarage. At a spacing of 2m x

5m, one hectare will have a density of 1,000 hills. This is merely translated into

one hectare without doing the actual ground survey.

This situation was corrected when the DENR created the SUSIMO (Subproject

Site Management Office) and stationed this office within the community.

1.3 The latest organization chart (or equivalent) for the implementation of the

Subproject is ( attached or not available).

The Organizational Structure are attached as Annex 1a for Forest and

Community United Services, Inc. (CO Contractor), Annex 1b for Lake

Mainit Cooperative (PO), Annex 1c for Development for Under-privilege

Community and Environment, Inc. (M&E Contractor), Annex 1d for SUSIMO

Lake Mainit, and Annex 1e for Ulticon Builders, Inc. (Infra Contractor),

respectively.

2. Implementation Period

A. Comparison of Original Schedule and Actual Period

ITEM

ORIGINAL

SCHEDULE

ACTUAL PERIOD

1. SMP

2. Contract of AO for CO

3. Contract of PO for CSD

4. Contract of NGO for M&E

5. Contract of Infrastructure

n/a

June 30, 1997 – June

29, 1999

October 17, 1997 to

October 16, 2000

October 1999 to Dec.

2000

Nov. 2002 to June

n/a

June 30, 1997 to

December 2000

October 17, 1997

to July 31, 2003

October 1999 to

Dec. 2000

July 2003

Nov. 2002 to July

17

Component

Completion

(completion of subproject)

2003

December 2000

2003

December 2003

Please refer to Table 6 for the Subproject Status Report

Notes: Completion of the Subproject was defined as ( completion ceremony or

final disbursement or other than the above).

The completion date was scheduled for December 31, 2000 (at the time

of appraisal) and is indicated (thus ) in the above Table.

B. Reasons for Delay or Early Completion

b.1. In case of delay or early completion, please choose the reason(s) from

the following list and check.

Change in scope/dimensions

Natural disaster/Bad weather (e.g. earthquake, typhoon, etc.)

Shortage of funds/Fluctuation of the exchange rate

Problems in procurement

Inflation

Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing

Agency

Structural and organizational problems of the agencies concerned

(e.g. lack of staff, inadequate coordination with other agencies,

etc.)

Legislative matters

Unrealistic initial plan/Technical problems

Performance of CSD contractor

Performance of consultant

Others

Organizational Problem of the A

Organizational Problem of the M&E contractor

b.2. Reasons and background for delay or early completion

Natural disaster/ Bad weather (e.g. typhoon, earthquake, etc.)

On Infrastructure Component

The project on farm-to-market road rehabilitation was adversely affected

by typhoon and unrelenting rain. There were work stoppages that caused

the delay in attaining work objectives.

Performance of the CSD contractor

18

On Comprehensive Site Development

The internal management problems within the PO resulted to the reduction

of the target. Problems range from usurpation of authority by the vice

president to malversation of funds, court litigations and dormancy of

activities; etc. The PO officers continued with their squabbles until all

activities completely stopped by their self-imposed inaction. Out of the

target of 2,171 hectares, the PO was only able to plant 1,572.83 hectares.

Organizational Problem of the M&E Contractor

On Monitoring and Evaluation

The first M&E contractor was hired to conduct the three (3) passes of

M&E for both the physical evaluation as well as the Institutional Project

Benefit Assessment (IPBA) of the Subproject. However, after the 2nd

pass, the DENR requested the NGO to reschedule the 3rd pass until such

time that the necessary intervention by the PO is accomplished. The NGO

heeded the and found time to bid for a similar activity in another region.

When DENR resumed the operation of the contract, the NGO begged off

for lack of time as it had already committed its resources to another

contract in another region.

C. Remedial Action Taken in Each Case of Delay

Natural disaster/ Bad Weather (e.g. typhoons, earthquake, etc.)

On Infrastructure Component

Affected by this problem was the farm-to-market road rehabilitation.

DENR extended the contract by one month and thus was moved to July 4,

2003.

Performance of the CSD contractor

On Comprehensive Site Development

The DENR made a series of consultations with the PO and sealed a

commitment to effect reorganization immediately. The agreement to

reorganize was supported with a resolution from the PO CALMWRAI to

change the name of their organization and their organizational structure as

well. The SUSIMO with the assistance of the Assisting Professional (AP)

worked out the formation of the first cooperative named LAMWADECO

(Lake Mainit Watershed Development Cooperative). However, this was

resented by CALMWRAI Officials. With the concurrence of the Cooperative

19

Development Authority (CDA), LAMWADECO was dissolved and replaced by

Lake Mainit Cooperative (LMC). The DENR awarded this cooperative with a

CSD contract to do maintenance and protection of the 1,572.83 hectares.

Organizational problems of the AO

On Community Organizing

The DENR hired the services of FOCUS, Inc to continue the unfinished

activities of FDFI from September 1999 to December 2000.

Organizational problem of the M&E contractor

On Monitoring and Evaluation

DENR invited other NGOs to conduct the 3rd and final pass. DEVELOPERS,

Inc. and VIRTUE, Inc. were awarded with the contracts. DEVELOPEPRS,

Inc. was contracted for the physical aspect while VIRTUE, Inc. was

contracted to implement the Institutional Project Benefit Assessment

Component.

3. Subproject Cost

A. Comparison of Original Estimated Cost and Actual Expenditure (by

Component

Item

Original Cost

(in M pesos)

Actual Expenditures

(in M pesos)

Community Organization

Comprehensive Site

Development

Monitoring and

Evaluation

Infrastructure

Development

Subproject

Coordinating Office

3.907800

41.116259

1.936925

11.386504

3.292070

3.528647

30.176576

2.261463

11.386504

2.005090

TOTAL 61.639558 49.358282

20

Please refer to Tables 7,8a-8c,9 for the details on CO,CSD and M&E. List of Infra project/s with its corresponding

cost is also attached as Table 10

B. Reasons for Difference between Original Estimated Cost and Actual

Expenditure

b.1. If there is any difference between the 2nd column and the 3rd column of

the Table in Paragraph A, please choose the reason(s) from the following

list and check.

Increase in reconstruction cost arising from natural disaster/Bad

weather (e.g. earthquake, typhoon, etc.)

Increase or decrease arising from a change in construction period

Increase or decrease arising from inflation

Increase or decrease arising from fluctuation in the exchange rate

Increase or decrease arising from a change in the scope/work

volume of the Subproject

Decrease arising from keen competition in tender

Unusual circumstances beyond the control of the Executing Agency

Unrealistic cost estimates/Technical problems

Others

Contract termination and unfinished activities

Discontinuance of contract

b.2. Description of the detailed reason(s) and background

Increase or decrease arising from a change in the scope of work volume

of the Subproject

One of the reasons in the difference of the planned cost and the actual

expenditure is the reduction of the Subproject’s target from 2,171

hectares to 1,572.83 hectares, an decision resorted to when the DENR

was certain that the PO couldn’t attain the original target.

Contract termination and unfinished activities

FDFI, the first CO contractor, was blacklisted and its contract

cancelled after rendering 1-1/2 years of poor performance. Since

there were unfinished activities upon cancellation of contract, the

actual expenditure was also reduced.

Discontinuance of contract

The discontinuance of LEAF Foundation’s M&E contract resulted to the

difference between the planned cost and the actual expenditure. Out

of the 3 passes which were contracted to LEAF, it was able to

21

accomplish the first 2 passes only. It begged off from pursuing the 3rd

pass because of commitment in other regions for similar activity. The

actual difference is the cost of the 3rd pass, which remained unspent.

C. Action taken in Case of Cost Overrun and Results

Additional obligation for M&E and corresponding revision of WFP were

undertaken. All financial obligations have been paid with corresponding

physical accomplishments.

D. Comparison of Original Estimated Expenditure and Actual Expenditure (by

Year)

Calendar

Year Original Cost (in M pesos)

Actual Expenditures (in M pesos)

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

6.647685

26.824712

5.782723

7.705862

1.103600

0.651500

12.293474

4.919397

5.369903

10.542992

6.656585

2.342413

1.933063

17.593926

Total 61.639558 49.358282

Please refer to table 11 for the details of the Annual Work and Financial Plan.

4. Comments on Performance of Assisting Organizations (AOs), Assisting

Professionals (APs), Peoples Organizations (POs), M&E and

Infrastructure contractors.

Please describe the performance of each organization after checking the

item(s) in the relevant lists on which you have any comment.

A. Performance of Assisting Organizations & Assisting Professionals (if any)

Peoples Organizations, M&E and Infrastructure contractors

a.1. Overall performance Design

Contract administration Construction supervision

Expertise Staff qualifications

Coordinating ability Compliance with contract

Performance related to any other than the Subproject scope, if

any.

Others

a.2. Description (in detail)

22

Overall Performance

Peoples Organization (PO)

CALMWRAI was the first PO formed during the initial stage of the CSD

operation through the efforts of FDFI. That PO, however, came into

trouble when its officers failed to focus their efforts in preserving unity

within the organization. The target of 2,171 hectares was greatly

compromised such that by December 31, 2000, the PO was only able to

accomplish 1,572.83 hectares. The squabble among the officers made the

PO inactive for ore than a year. Through the intercession of DENR, the

PO agreed to reorganize and transform their organization into a

cooperative registered with the CDA. The unfinished activities in CSD

was pursued by the new cooperative renamed Lake Mainit Cooperative or

LMC through the awarded CSD contract. The target was subsequently

reduced from 2,171 hectares to 1,572.83 hectares. The CSD contract of

the LMC covers the maintenance and protection of the reduced target of

1,572.83 hectares.

The LMC struggled to replant the entire 1,572.83 hectares. Because of

unpaid dues to the stakeholders during the operation of the former

organization CALMWRAI, LMC found it very difficult to draw out the

cooperation of the majority of the members. By July 31, 2003, the LMC

was able to replant 1,263 hectares or 80% of the 1,572.83 hectares.

Working beyond the termination of the project, by December 31 2003,

the entire area planted was wholly replanted with an average survival rate

of approximately 65.57%.

On the whole, LMC management has performed against the odds.

The livelihood aspect of the Project has also become a continuing problem

especially when the usage of fund/conversion of livelihood fund cannot be

controlled by SUSIMO. The contract administration can be considered

poor/unsatisfactory.

For Community Organizing (Assisting Organizations (AO)

a. Forest Development Foundation, Inc. (FDFI ) - This AO failed to finish

its contract due to poor performance but was able to organize the PO

CALMWRAI. This AO was later blacklisted for cause.

b. Forest & Community United Services (FOCUS, Inc.) - This AO was the

replacement of FDFI when it was blacklisted by the DENR. FOCUS

succeeded in transforming CALMWRAI into a cooperative, which was the

original direction of CALMWRAI when FDFI was still in operation.

23

The contract performance of FOCUS is considered as satisfactory. This

NGO was more responsible in the strengthening of the newly organized

PO renamed Lake Mainit Cooperative.

Assisting Professional (AP)

Performance can be considered satisfactory although there is failure to

have a strong and highly motivated PO as reflected by its financial

management performance as well as the result of final area maintained

and protected under the CSD contract. Expertise maybe concentrated to

planning.

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

a. LEAF Foundation, Inc. – This is not an ideal NGO to work with. Its

expertise in land survey is questionable and made glaring when they

produced the map yet they could not provide the technical

descriptions as well as the field notes derived from survey. It is also

unreliable as proven when they begged off from executing an activity

citing other commitment in other regions. Hence, their performance

was rated poor.

b. Development Worker for Environmental and Rural Sustainability

(DEVELOPERS, Inc.) – Their contract called for the validation of the

physical accomplishments of the PO. They were given the rating fair

considering that they were able to finish all activities in their

contract in one month. However, it was not clear whether they

actually did the survey for all parcels or they merely scanned the map

provided by the SUSIMO and produced a separate map including the

attendant information that DENR needed.

c. Development Workers for Underprivileged Community and Environment

Inc. (VIRTUE, Inc.) – was contracted to conduct the Institutional

Project Benefit Assessment of the Subproject or IPBA. This NGO

performed very satisfactorily but they were not able to find out the

true picture of the PO’s situation due to time constraints. At any

rate, they were able to deliver the services required in accordance

with the provisions stipulated in their contract.

Infrastructure Component

ULTICON BUILDERS, Inc. - This contractor has performed well as far

as the implementation of the infrastructure project in Lake Mainit

Watershed is concerned. However, they were not able to complete the

project on time due to unpredictable weather condition. Heavy rains

24

occurred causing landslide in the project area hence, they were granted

an extension period of almost one (1) month.

5. Other matters relating to Subproject Implementation

Please choose the item(s) from the following list on which you have any

comment, check it (them), and describe it (them) with measure and

results in (B) below.

A. Technical Financial Institutional Economic

Social/Distributional Others

Decision making at the Regional Office

B. Description (in detail)

Technical

In implementing the Subproject, the implementers were guided by the

approved planting density or spacing for Lake Mainit Watershed.. The

reforestation component has a spacing of 2m x 5m; agro forestry: 10m x

10m; and bamboo: 5m x 5m. It should be noted that the total area of

1,572.83 hectares were already fully planted before the creation of the

SUSIMO and the subsequent deployment of personnel to the field

office. There were only two (2) personnel who supervised the activities in

the field and another two (2) were tasked to oversee the organizational

development of the PO. Although the PO stakeholders were trained on

various CSD activities, the application of their training was a different

matter. Spacing for all components was not observed. The activities

should have been personally supervised by DENR personnel but it was

just too much for just two individuals tasked to supervise all activities

in plantation development spread widely over a 1,572.83 - hectare land.

Institutional

Development of an institution in the community takes some process using

community organizing principles. It may take a short period of two years

or may extend for even 10 years depending on the maturity of community

in taking the responsibility as members of the society and as a thinking

element of the environment.

In the case of the PO in Lake Mainit Watershed Subproject, all efforts

were exerted by the DENR to uplift its organizational capability including

the hiring of professionals. It may be that in order to successfully

encourage change within the community, the process of community

organizing should totally engulf the community before and after the

25

development of the landscape to whatever use. Development of the

landscape is of little value to settlers without the promise of reform

that will also upgrade the quality of life thereat. Community Organizing

should continue to nurture the community after the “birth” of the new

landscape to make it meaningful to the life of the community.

Decision Making at the Regional Office of DENR

The role of the DENR at the regional level is significant. The constant

changing of the guard at the regional office had created its toll on

project implementation. Newly-installed heads of office had varying

degrees of familiarity and understanding about Forestry Sector Project

(FSP). Guidelines in the processing of billing documents and pertinent

reports, which are necessary for the replenishment of disbursed funds

were always delayed. The Office of the Auditor, which has less technical

knowledge in FSP had been a source of undue influence that forestalled

prompt decision-making process by DENR management.

III. Action Taken by the AOs, APs and POs relating to Recommendation(s)

1. Recommendation(s) made by SUSIMO

SUSIMO check: This article is ( applicable. The recommendations are

given in Annex – I herewith or not applicable. There has been no

recommendation with regard to the Subproject).

Recommendations of the SUSIMO to the PO & AP and Actions Taken with

Results:

Issues Recommendations Actions Taken and

Results

Peoples Organization (PO)

Lack of seedlings for

replanting and no more time

to grow them in the nursery

PO could not afford to hire

The SUSIMO and the

AP recommended the

use of wildlings for

replanting

Assign a board member

The SUSIMO and the AP

assisted the PO in

sourcing out wildlings of

Narra and mahogany in

Misamis Oriental and

Surigao del Sur and plant

them as bare roots to

augment their seedling

requirements in

replanting.

The matter was

26

technical people to supervise

the operations at the

barangay level.

Money collected by LMC

during billings were utilized

to pay for the unpaid

accounts of the CALMWRAI

administration jeopardizing

those who worked out for

the accomplishment paid by

that billing.

to supervise the

activities in each of the

barangays.

PO to prepare a budget

plan that will guide

disbursements of funds

from the latest billing.

discussed in a meeting

facilitated by the AP

with the assistance of

the SUSIMO. The

Board of Directors then

adopted said

recommendation. The

advantage was, more

people participated in

the activities with the

supervisor occupying

high position in the

organization and comes

from the same barangay.

Expected drawbacks

were written reports

submitted very late.

The AP conducted

training on financial

management to guide the

PO in keeping/tracking

financial transactions.

The PO adopted a system

of submitting a list of all

those to be paid to

DENR as additional

requirement in billings.

This list ensures that no

one is left out unpaid for

his efforts in producing

necessary CSD output as

required in a particular

billing of the PO.

2. Action Taken and Results (Please refer to the Table above)

IV. Initial Operation and Maintenance of Subproject Facilities

1. Present Condition of Facilities

A. Please check: This article is ( applicable due to problem(s) or not

applicable. No particular problem has occurred since the initial

operation started). If there have been any problems, please check the

relevant space in the Table.

27

Item Status Initial

Operation

Mainte-

nance

Manage-

ment

Others

SUSIMO

Office/bunkhouse

Radio base

Generator set

Water tank

Motorcycle

KIA

Computer w/

software &

printer

GIS software

maptitude)

GPS

Hand Held Radio

Forester’s Transit

Brush Cutters

Water Pump/water

system

PO : None (Facilities

are below P

10,000.00)

Serviceable

Unserviceable

Serviceable

Serviceable

Serviceable

Serviceable

Unserviceable

Serviceable

Unserviceable

Serviceable

Serviceable

Serviceable

Unserviceable

B. Please check: The Problem(s) has arisen owing to the following reason(s).

Technical Financial Institutional Economic

Social/Distributional Others

Prioritization of funds

C. Description (in detail)

Prioritization of Funds

The Subproject was supported with enough funds under the Maintenance and

Other Operating Expenses (MOOE). The problem is that the operational and

maintenance needs of the facilities were always left out. Since the need for

funds for these facilities is unpredictable, money was spent for other needs.

When breakdown and other inputs for the facilities were needed, they had to

wait for the replenishment.

28

D. Aspect of utilizing the Subproject facilities

For the SUSIMO

Item Original Plan Actual Operation

1 unit Office/

Bunkhouse

1 unit Radio base

1 unit Generator set

1 unit Water tank

6 units Motorcycle

1 unit KIA Cross truck

1 unit Computer w/

software & printer

1 unit GIS software

(maptitude)

2 sets GPS

3 units Hand Held Radio

1 unit Forester’s Transit

1 unit Typewriter

1 unit Water Pump/water

system

FOR SUSIMO

LAKE MAINIT

OPERATIONS

It was used by

SUSIMO but after

the termination of

the project, same was

borrowed by the LGU.

Note : The PO has not purchased any equipment/facilities due to financial

constraints. They have prioritized utilizing their finances for the

establishment and maintenance and protection of plantations.

Likewise, funds were used for the payment of unpaid accounts of

the previous PO management (CALMWRAI).

2. Organization for Operation and Maintenance

A. Name of PO and SUSIMO

a.1. Please give the name of PO and/or Body in charge of O/M.

PO : Lake Mainit Cooperative (LMC)

SUSIMO : Lake Mainit Watershed Subproject

a.2. Please check:

The latest organization chart (or equivalent) for O/M of the

Subproject facilities is ( attached or not available).

29

a.3. If the organization chart (or equivalent) is not available, please state

the reason.

Inasmuch as the PO’s facilities only amounted below P10, 000.00,

the PO management simply sent somebody to inspect the facilities

and submit a recommendation to that effect in cases when

something had to be done regarding these facilities.

In the case of SUSIMO, maintenance of facilities is not applicable

as there is only one person in-charge to take care of the

maintenance needs of the said facilities.

B. Number of staff/workers of the PO or Body for Operation and

Maintenance of Subproject Facilities.

PO : None

SUSIMO : 1

C. Please check and explain the following.

c.1. The number of staff is currently ( sufficient or insufficient).

If “Insufficient”, please describe your estimate of the optimum

number of staff and your plan for providing them.

c.2. Average employment period of the present staff.

PO : 7 years

SUSIMO : 5 years

c.3. Availability of training program to promote the vocational ability of

the staff, its contents and expected effects.

None

3. Annual Budget or Actual Expenditure for Operation and Maintenance (by

Year)

Original Expected Expenditure (Unit: Mil Pesos)

For the SUSIMO

Item

Calendar year

Maintenance Operation Total

2001

2002

2003

0.125800

0.040000

0.093000

0.310000

0.187700

0.105120

0.435800

0.227700

0.198120

30

Total 0.258800 0.602820 0.861620

Actual and Currently Expected Expenditure

For SUSIMO (Unit: Mil Pesos )

Item

Calendar year

Maintenance Operation Maintenance

(For

expanded

&

Operation

portion)

Total

2001

Computer

Motorcycle

Power

Generator

KIA Cross

Truck

2002

Computer

Motorcycle

Power

Generator

SUSIMO

Office

KIA Cross

Truck

2003

Computer

Motorcycle

Power

Generator

SUSIMO

Office

KIA Cross

Truck

2004

0.008000

0.007000

0.002500

0.002500

0.003000

0.003000

0.005158

0.004000

0.005000

0.001800

0.009000

0.010000

0.016666

0.013333

0.025453

0.030884

0.018000

0.015500

0.030885

0.020000

0.030000

0.008000

0.005840

0.006000

0.015000

0.030000

0.060000

0.010000

0.024666

0.013333

0.032453

0.033384

0.020500

0.018500

0.033885

0.025158

0.034000

0.013000

0.005840

0.007800

0.024000

0.090000

TOTAL 0.050958 0.245561 0.030000 0.060000 0.386519

31

Note: Actual and currently expected expenditure for expansion, replacement or

any other improvement purposes.

Please describe the basis for the above estimate and your financing plan for the

same.

Maintenance of equipment is not applicable as there was no equipment purchased

by the PO out of their own funds. In the case of SUSIMO, facilities were

maintained depending on the fund allocation downloaded by the NFDO. However,

it will be the responsibility of the concerned CENRO to oversee and maintain

these facilities when it will be turned over to them. Maintenance could be

sourced out from the DENR regular funds.

4. Maintenance Method

A. Content of Method

Repair and replacement of defective parts of the KIA Cross truck, motorcycles

and computer set were made as the need arose. Change oil, tune-up, regular

check-up of body parts and wheels rotation of the KIA Cross truck will be

undertaken on a regular basis. Change oil will likewise be undertaken periodically

for motorcycle. Upgrading of computer system and check up on a regular basis

will be done.

B. Frequency

Kind of Facility Maintenance Method Frequency

1. KIA Cross truck Repair/replacement of

defective parts,

Change oil,

Wheels rotation

As the need arises

Every after 3,000 km

annually

2. Motorcycle Repair/replacement of

defective parts,

Change oil,

Once a year

Every after 3,000 km

3. Computer Repair/replacement of

defective parts,

As the need arises

Others, if any.

V. Benefits derived from Subproject

1. Indirect Effects

A. Please choose and check the item(s), which are dealt with this Article by

you.

32

Technological transfer (e.g. application of technology used in the

Subproject to other similar projects and subprojects)

Employment creating (e.g. during construction, contribution to the

sector(s) after completion)

Income-raising (e.g. income of the residents in the region)

Other intended or unintended effects on the relevant sector(s)

and/or the region concerned

B. Please give details for each of the item(s) you checked.

Employment Creating

The Subproject had provided employment even at the early stage of

subproject implementation to members and non-members alike during the

nursery establishment, plantation establishment and the conduct of the

main activities of maintenance and protection. After the project

implementation, the Subproject had generated employment totaling

324,249.64 man days that greatly improved their standard of living.

Income Generation

Prior to the implementation of the Subproject, the main occupations of

the participants were farming, fishing and vending. The project has

significantly improved the quality of life of the participating

communities particularly their economic status in terms of increased

income. It was noted that there was an 56% increase in average annual

income of the participating members from PHP 20,690.81 at the start of

the project to PHP 57,892.00 during the Project due to employment

opportunities in CSD and infrastructure construction. Upgrading of socio-

economic condition of the community is evident in the construction of

individual houses, procurement of equipment/facilities, and the

enrollment of their children to public and even private schools.

33

VI. CONCLUSION and RECOMMENDATIONS

The issues and problems that beset the Subproject did not deter the project

implementers: the PO, the DENR through the SUSIMO as well as the LGUs to

continue with what has been started and what have been accomplished.

The accomplishment fell short of the expectation but it gave the PO

experiences/learning to meet new challenges ahead in the area of development

and management

It is recommended that the DENR Regional Office show prompt decision on

matters involving issues and problems affecting the implementation of any

reforestation activity by the PO. Actions delivered on time earn the respect

of community members.

The DENR Regional Office should designate an officer-in-charge with a signing

authority to act on papers on behalf of the RED when he is away so as not to

cause delay in processing of documents especially billings.

Selection of Assisting Organizations and/or Assisting Professionals for the

conduct of community organizing activities should be intensified.

Awarding of M&E to AO should only be done if budget is already available and

with a longer time to implement the activities to avoid poor result of the

exercise. The implementers will be greatly affected by the results more so if

these will turn out to be unfavourable.

.

.

Forestry Sector ProjectLoan No. Ph-P 135Table 1. TRAININGS ATTENDED BY THE PEOPLES ORGANIZATION

TRAINORS# OF

PARTICIPANTS

INCLUSIVE

DATES

1 Pro-active Project

Management Training

Workshop

NGO/FDFI 35 23-Jul-98

2 Officers Training and

Workshop in the

Preparation of CRMF

NGO/FDFI 35 July 4-5, 1998

3 PIAPS Seminar/Workshop NG0-FOCUS, Inc. 40 6-Mar-994 Forestry Technical Skills

Training

NG0-FOCUS, Inc. 15 April 89, 1999

5 CSD Cooperative Master

Plan Developmenet Seminar

NG0-FOCUS, Inc. 15 11-Apr-99

6 CSD Re-orientation and

Mobilization Seminar

Workshop

RFDO 15 September 27-28,

2001

7 GPS-GIS Orientation and

Training Seminar

Reg'l. GIS

Group/SUSIMO

10 April 9-11, 2001

8 Financial Management

Training Workshop

DENR-Finance and

Accounting Division

5 April 22-26, 2002

9 Livelihood Development

Seminar Workshop

NFDO-TA 25 June 26-28, 2002

10 Basic Course in Cooperatice

(PMES)

DENR-SUSIMO 25 August 7-9, 2002

TRAINING

FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135

Year Planted Component Species Planted Area Planted Survival

1998 Reforestation Mh,Bg,Gm, Na,F, Mg 592.47 69.59 Agroforestry Lansones, Jackfruit, Marang 31.90 61.00

Bamboo 13.5 66.50 Subtotal 637.87 65.69

1999 Reforestation Mh,Bg,Gm, Na,F, Mg 519.9 65.04

Agroforestry Mango, Jackfruit 101.1 61.00

Subtotal 621 63.02

2000 Reforestation Mh,Bg,Gm, Na,F, Mg 297.76 65.88 Agroforestry Lansones, Jackfruit, Marang 11.90 66.74 Bamboo 4.30 66.23

Subtotal 313.96 66.28

TOTAL Reforestation Mh,Bg,Gm, Na,F, Mg 1410.13 66.81

Agroforestry Lansones, Jackfruit, Marang 144.90 62.91 Bamboo 17.80 65.27

WASR 1,572.83 65.00

Table 2. SUBPROJECT PERFORMANCE

FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT

LOAN NO. PH-P 135

ProcuredDate/year procured

1. Truck KIA cross truck,

4x41 9/30/2002 680,000.00

2. Motorcycle Honda MC, XL

1253 -

3. Power generator Engine, gasoline,

GS 280, 3.5 KVA1 4/23/2001 44,096.00

4. Computer HP Brio PC Intel

Pentium III 733

mhg1 2/20/2001 70,850.00

5. Printer Hp Deskjet model

840 C1 4/27/2001 5,811.52

6. UPS Gamatronic

Compact Model

520VA

1 4/15/2001 5,720.00

7. GIS maptitudeComb software &

geographic data1 3/18/2001 44,460.00

8. GPS Global positioning

Promark X2 3/28/2001 210,000.00

9. Handheld radio VHF, FM COM

Model IC-F3GT3 1/12/2001 44,899.92

10. Foresters transit Surveying

compass,

Ushikata, model S-

27

2 5/21/2001 69,680.00

11. Base radio VHF/FM ICOM 1 -

12. Manual typewriter Oliveti, 18

carriage1 3/28/2001 8,309.60

13. Brunton compass Kataoke br.,

Model BCD-903 3/28/2001 14,664.00

14. Steel nylon tapeTajima Br. 2 4/23/2001 2,700.00

15. Diameter tape Kinglong brand, 20

meters2 3/29/2001 1,331.20

16. Planimeter OSKK KOIZUMI 1 10/26/2001 7,800.00

17. Abney hand levelModel:OSK 17251

3 5/21/2001 7,176.00

18. Rain gaugeDigital rainwise 1 5/28/2001 6,300.00

19. Lettering setLeroy set 1 12/27/2001 -

20. Desk & chairs Wood 5 12/27/2001 15,000.00

21. Drafting tableWood 1 2/27/2001 3,000.00

22. Camera Canon Zoom 85 &

652 12/3/2001 16,525.00

23. Tape recorder Sony 2 battery

AAA2 12/3/2001 4,600.00

24. Flashlight Eveready 2 big

battery8

25. Lantern lampKamaru, Butane 5 12/27/2001 4,750.00

TOTAL 1,267,673.24

Table 3. SUBPROJECT SITE MANAGEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTS

Cost (PhP)ITEM Specifications Qty

Forestry Sector ProjectLoan No. Ph-P 135Table 4. TRAININGS ATTENDED BY THE SUSIMO

TRAINING TRAINORS# OF

PARTICIPANTS

INCLUSIVE

DATES

1 FSP reorientation, assessment

& SUSIMO Action planning

workshop

NFDO_TA 9 Nov. 23-24, 2000

2 Workshop on benefit sharing

system for CBFM-POsFSP-TA 10 Feb. 7, 2002

3 Re-orientation course on FSP

implementersFSP-TA 10 March 5-8,2002

4 On-the-job training on

GIS/GPS operationGIS staff 10 Jan. 15-17, 2003

5 Workshop on Business Plan

PreparationNFDO-TA 10 April 1-3, 2003

Forestry Sector ProjectLoan No. Ph-P 135Table 5. Livelihood Projects Established

Name of Livelihood Project:

Copra Trading

Implementor : Lake Mainit Cooperative

No. of Beneficiaries : 292 members

Amount of investment : 66,470

Date of Feasibility Study : N/A

Date started : Sep-03

Status : On-going

Net Income : 19,883.10

CFDF : 86,353.20

Linkages Developed:

GRANEX, Surigao City

FORESTRY SECTOR PROJECT LOAN NO. PH-P 135Table 6. SUBPROJECT STATUS REPORT

SMP CO CSD M & E INFRA

13

LAKE MAINIT

WATERSHED

REHABILITATION

SUBPROJECT,

Jabonga, Agusan del

Norte

1,572.00 47.353192 C C C C C

1,572.00 47.353192

PROJECT

AREA (ha)

PROJECT COST (Mil

peso)

TOTAL

STATUS OF PROGRESS(O:on going C: Completion)Region

NAME/LOCATION OF

THE SUBPROJECT

Forestry Sector Project

Loan Ph-P135

ACTIVITIES TARGET

1. Social Investigation 352,864.76

2. Information and

Education Campaign 247,005.33

3. Documentation Process 141,145.90

4. Identification of Possible

CBFMA 105,859.43

5. Organizing Activities 1,199,740.17

6. Community Activities 1,023,307.80

7. Others (CO staff dev't) 458,724.19

Total 1,572 ha. 3,528,647.58

UNIT of

MEASURE UNIT COST TOTAL COST

Table 7. COMMUNITY ORGANIZING COST ESTIMATE PER ACTIVITY

Forestry Sector Project

Loan No. Ph-P135

TARGET UNIT OF UNIT TOTAL

OUTPUT MEASURE COST COST

1. NURSERY OPERATIONS Seedling production/purchased 144.90 ha 10,115.17 1,465,688.59

2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENTa. Strip brushing/clearing 144.90 ha 2,590.89 375,420.67b. Staking 144.90 ha 2,590.89 375,420.67c. Hole Digging 144.90 ha 2,819.05 408,479.67

d. Planting 144.90 ha 5,923.95 858,380.50e. Tools and materials/Fert. 144.90 ha 51.76 7,500.00

3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTIONa. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer 144.90 ha 2,280.58 330,455.34b. Replanting 144.90 ha 496.81 71,987.20c. Patrol Works 144.90 ha 353.34 51,198.37

d. Tools/Materials/fertilizer 144.90 ha 44.96 6,514.61

e. Const. Of Small Water Impounding Dam 4,024.58

4. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION 144.90 ha 1,410.06 204,318.00

GRAND T O T A L 144.90 ha 28,705.23 4,159,388.20

Table 8a. COST ESTIMATE FOR AGROFORESTRY PER ACTIVITY

MAJOR ACTIVITY/ACTIVITY

Forestry Sector Project

Loan No. Ph-P135

MAJOR ACTIVITY / ACTIVITYUNIT OF

MEASURE

TARGET

OUTPUT Unit Cost TOTAL COST

1. Nursery Operations Seedling Production/Procurement

Giant Bamboo/K. Kiling ha 17.80 4,873.48 86,748.00

2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENTa. Spot brushing ha 17.80 925.84 16,480.00 b. Staking ha 17.80 182.70 3,252.00 c. Hole digging ha 17.80 544.94 9,700.00 d. Hauling ha 17.80 782.02 13,920.00 e. Planting ha 17.80 400.00 7,120.00

3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer ha 17.80 529.72 9,429.00

b. Patrol works ha 17.80 226.10 4,024.60

5. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION ha 17.80 2,211.15 39,358.40

GRAND T O T A L ha 14.90 12,753.83 190,032.00

Table 8b. COST ESTIMATE FOR BAMBOO PLANTATION PER ACTIVITY

Forestry Sector Project

Loan No. Ph-P135

ACTIVITY UNIT OF

MEASURE

TARGET

OUTPUTUnit Cost TOTAL COST

1. NURSERY OPERATIONS a. Seedlings procured/purchased Fast Growing/Premium Sp. ha 1,410.00 4,174.41 5,885,923.39

2. PLANTATION ESTABLISHMENT

a. Stripbrushing ha 1,410.00 263.57 371,631.21 b. Staking ha 1,410.00 689.66 972,424.57 c. Spot Hoeing ha 1,410.00 162.85 229,612.00 d. Hole Digging ha 1,410.00 112.87 159,150.60 e. planting ha 1,410.00 504.47 711,304.50 f. Tools/materials/fertilizer ha 1,410.00 801.36 1,129,920.00

3. MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION

a. Ringweeding, cultivation, fertilizer ha 1,410.00 4,407.00 6,213,870.48 b. Replanting ha 1,410.00 1,674.12 2,360,510.19 c. Patrol Works ha 1,410.00 1,584.45 2,234,077.43 d. Tools and materials (Fertilizer) ha 1,410.00 240.78 339,499.00

4. INFRASTRUCTURE

a. Graded Trail/footpath km 32.00 1,718.75 55,000.00 b. Access Road km 18.00 11,111.33 200,004.00 c. Bunkhouse unit 5.00 20,000.00 100,000.00 d. Lookout Tower unit 5.00 11,000.00 55,000.00 e. Field Office unit 1.00 1,000,000.00

5. ADMINISTRATION & SUPERVISION ha 1,410.00 2,206.29 3,110,870.84

G R A N D T O T A L ha 1,410.00 17,821.84 25,128,798.21

Table 8c. COST ESTIMATE FOR REFORESTATION PER ACTIVITY

Forestry Sector Project

Loan No. Ph-P135

Unit

ACTIVITIES of

Measure

Physical Validation Component

1,572.00 ha 524.94 825,211.00

1,572.00 ha 25.00 39,295.75 3. Seedling Production/Inventory Analysis 1,572.00 ha 30.00 47,154.90

1,572.00 ha 469.95 738,760.10

5. Documentation/others 222,091.72

S U B T O T A L 1,572.00 ha 1,191.17 1,872,513.47

Institutional and Project Benefit Assessment

1,572.00 ha 129.44 203,475.14 2. Project Management Cost 1,572.00 ha 117.99 185,475.94

S U B T O T A L 1,572.00 ha 247.42 388,951.08

G R A N D T O T A L 1,572.00 ha 1,438.59 2,261,464.55

Total Cost

Table 9. MONITORING and EVALUATION COST ESTIMATE PER ACTIVITY

4. Survival Inventory (height and diameter

measurements and related observations per

area/components and parcels

2. Verification of Boundaries, UTM

monuments and block corner post

1. Preparatory Activites/Primary data

collection and preliminary assessment

Target

Output Unit Cost

1. Development of appropriate tools for

participatory M&E.

Forestry Sector ProjectLoan No. Ph-P 135Table 10. Infrastructure Project

Infrastructure Project : Farm to Market Road rehabilitation Project

Location : Magdagooc, Jabonga, Agusan del Sur

Contractor : Coastland Construction and Development Corporation

Contract Cost : P10,921,557.78

Contract Duration : 210 calendar days (15 months)

Effectivity of Notice to proceed : 11-Dec-02

Expected Completion date : 9-Jul-03

Revised Completion date : 20-Aug-03

Date of MOA with LGU : 17-Dec-03

Brief description :

Road Width: 4.0 m

Total length of Drainage lines: 14.43 km3,150 m.Culverts for construction: 17

Major Items of work: Gravel pavement, side drainage ditch, cross drains

(pipe culverts and vented spillway) and slope protection

Shoulder Width: 5m x 2m

Over all project Length: 5 km

Forestry Sector Project

Loan No. PH-P135

TABLE 11. ANNUAL WORK AND FINANCIAL PLAN

Actual

Unit cost Total cost Unit cost Total cost Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

1. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM 26,875.86 58,347,488.87 30,107.00 47,353,192.55

A. SMP - -

B. CO (Phase 1 & 2) 1,800.00 3,907,800.00 1,625.36 3,528,647.58 2,171.00 2,089,949.80 2,171.00 361,661.20 2,171.00 1,817,850.20 2,171.00 604,981.82

1. Old Sites

- Year 1

-Year 2

2. New Sites 1,800.00 3,907,800.00 1,625.36 3,528,647.58 2,171.00 2,089,949.80 2,171.00 361,661.20 2,171.00 1,817,850.20 2,171.00 604,981.82

- Year 1 962.67 2,089,949.80 166.59 361,661.20 2,171.00 2,089,949.80 2,171.00 361,661.20

- Year 2 837.33 1,817,850.20 278.67 604,981.82 2,171.00 1,817,850.20 2,171.00 604,981.82

- Year 3 218.49 474,337.28

- Year 4 687.40 1,492,343.28

- Year 5

- Year 6 274.22 595,324.00

C. CSD 18,938.86 41,116,259.00 19,186.17 30,176,576.21 - 4,557,735.91 - 4,557,735.91 2,171.00 25,006,862.36 637.87 4,764,921.66

1. Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping 324.38 704,239.00 321.68 698,357.80 2,171.00 704,239.00 - -

2. Soil Erosion Control/SWC

a. Infrastructure

b. Trails and footpath

3. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment) 18,614.47 40,412,020.00 18,742.15 29,478,218.41 - 4,557,735.91 - 4,557,735.91 2,171.00 24,302,623.36 637.87 4,764,921.66

a. Agroforestry 46,898.90 15,687,681.22 28,705.23 4,159,388.20 - 713,786.34 713,786.34 334.50 10,252,956.16 31.90 229,928.78

b. Assisted Natural Regeneration

c. Enrichment Planting

d. Tree Plantation 13,462.75 24,724,338.78 17,731.14 25,318,830.21 - 3,843,949.57 - 3,843,949.57 1,836.50 14,049,667.20 605.97 4,534,992.88

d.1. Bamboo 22,245.99 659,593.74 10,675.96 190,032.00 50,699.78 50,699.78 29.65 290,382.08 13.50

d.2. Rattan

d.3. Mangrove

d.4. Plantation Species/Reforestation 13,318.62 24,064,745.04 17,820.20 25,128,798.21 3,793,249.79 3,793,249.79 1,806.85 13,759,285.12 592.47 4,534,992.88

e. Timber Stand Improvement

4. Inventory Residual Forest

5. Income Enhancement Project

D. Infrastructure Component 11,386,504.87 11,386,504.87

E. Monitoring & Evaluation 892.18 1,936,925.00 1,437.83 2,261,463.89

-Year 1 892.18 1,936,925.00 665.87 1,047,302.05

-Year 2 - 771.96 1,214,161.84

2. SUSIMO 3,292,070.00 2,005,090.00

Equipment provided to the Office

Researches conducted

Trainings

Others

GRAND TOTAL 28,392.24 61,639,558.87 31,381.83 49,358,282.55 6,647,685.71 4,919,397.11 26,824,712.56 5,369,903.48

Planned Planned ActualACTIVITIESPlanned Actual

1997 1998

Forestry Sector Project

Loan No. PH-P135

TABLE 11. ANNUAL WORK AND FINANCIAL PLAN

1. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM

A. SMP

B. CO (Phase 1 & 2)

1. Old Sites

- Year 1

-Year 2

2. New Sites

- Year 1

- Year 2

- Year 3

- Year 4

- Year 5

- Year 6

C. CSD

1. Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping

2. Soil Erosion Control/SWC

a. Infrastructure

b. Trails and footpath

3. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment)

a. Agroforestry

b. Assisted Natural Regeneration

c. Enrichment Planting

d. Tree Plantation

d.1. Bamboo

d.2. Rattan

d.3. Mangrove

d.4. Plantation Species/Reforestation

e. Timber Stand Improvement

4. Inventory Residual Forest

5. Income Enhancement Project

D. Infrastructure Component

E. Monitoring & Evaluation

-Year 1

-Year 2

2. SUSIMO

Equipment provided to the Office

Researches conducted

Trainings

Others

GRAND TOTAL

ACTIVITIES

Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

- - 2,171.00 474,337.28 - - 2,171.00 1,492,343.28 - - - -

2,171.00 474,337.28 2,171.00 1,492,343.28

2,171.00 474,337.28

2,171.00 1,492,343.28

2,171.00 5,782,723.09 1,258.87 10,068,654.93 2,171.00 5,768,937.64 1,572.83 4,692,332.47 - - 1,555.03 663,421.73

2,171.00 698,357.80

2,171.00 5,782,723.09 1,258.87 9,370,297.13 2,171.00 5,768,937.64 1,572.83 4,692,332.47 - - 1,555.03 663,421.73

334.50 2,221,278.46 133.00 273,878.75 334.50 2,499,660.26 144.90 2,338,824.81 - 144.90 181,051.12

1,836.50 3,561,444.63 1,125.87 9,096,418.38 1,836.50 3,269,277.38 1,427.93 2,353,507.66 - - 1,410.13 482,370.61

29.65 159,255.69 13.50 45,792.02 29.65 159,256.19 17.80 41,680.00

1,806.85 3,402,188.94 1,112.37 9,050,626.36 1,806.85 3,110,021.19 1,410.13 2,311,827.66 1,410.13 482,370.61

2,171.00 1,936,925.00 1,572.83 471,910.18 1,572.83 575,391.87

2,171.00 1,936,925.00 1,572.83 471,910.18 1,572.83 575,391.87

1,103,600.00 1,103,600.00

5,782,723.09 10,542,992.21 7,705,862.64 6,656,585.93 1,103,600.00 2,342,413.60

Planned ActualPlanned Actual Planned Actual

2000 20011999

Forestry Sector Project

Loan No. PH-P135

TABLE 11. ANNUAL WORK AND FINANCIAL PLAN

1. REFORESTATION/WATERSHED/CBFM

A. SMP

B. CO (Phase 1 & 2)

1. Old Sites

- Year 1

-Year 2

2. New Sites

- Year 1

- Year 2

- Year 3

- Year 4

- Year 5

- Year 6

C. CSD

1. Delineation, Landuse Survey & Mapping

2. Soil Erosion Control/SWC

a. Infrastructure

b. Trails and footpath

3. Vegetative Measures (Plantation Establishment)

a. Agroforestry

b. Assisted Natural Regeneration

c. Enrichment Planting

d. Tree Plantation

d.1. Bamboo

d.2. Rattan

d.3. Mangrove

d.4. Plantation Species/Reforestation

e. Timber Stand Improvement

4. Inventory Residual Forest

5. Income Enhancement Project

D. Infrastructure Component

E. Monitoring & Evaluation

-Year 1

-Year 2

2. SUSIMO

Equipment provided to the Office

Researches conducted

Trainings

Others

GRAND TOTAL

ACTIVITIES

Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget Target Budget

2,171.00 58,347,488.87 1,572.83 47,353,192.55

- -

- - - - - - 2,171.00 595,324.00 2,171.00 3,907,800.00 2,171.00 3,528,647.58

- -

- -

- -

2,171.00 595,324.00 2,171.00 3,907,800.00 2,171.00 3,528,647.58

2,171.00 2,089,949.80 2,171.00 361,661.20

2,171.00 1,817,850.20 2,171.00 604,981.82

- 2,171.00 474,337.28

- 2,171.00 1,492,343.28

-

2,171.00 595,324.00 2,171.00 595,324.00

- - 1,572.83 1,586,553.26 - - 1,572.83 3,842,956.25 2,171.00 41,116,259.00 1,572.83 30,176,576.21

2,171.00 704,239.00 2,171.00 698,357.80

- -

- -

- -

- - 1,572.83 1,586,553.26 - - 1,572.83 3,842,956.25 2,171.00 40,412,020.00 1,572.83 29,478,218.41

- 144.90 145,953.32 - 144.90 275,965.08 334.50 15,687,681.22 144.90 4,159,388.20

- -

- -

- - 1,427.93 1,440,599.94 - - 1,427.93 3,566,991.17 1,836.50 24,724,338.78 1,427.93 25,318,830.21

17.80 25,097.86 17.80 26,762.34 29.65 659,593.74 17.80 190,032.00

- -

- -

1,410.13 1,415,502.08 1,410.13 3,540,228.83 1,806.85 24,064,745.04 1,410.13 25,128,798.21

- -

- -

- -

11,386,504.87 11,386,504.87 11,386,504.87 11,386,504.87

1,572.83 1,214,161.84 2,171.00 1,936,925.00 1,572.83 2,261,463.89

2,171.00 1,936,925.00 1,572.83 1,047,302.05

1,572.83 1,214,161.84 - 1,572.83 1,214,161.84

651,500.00 346,510.00 1,536,970.00 554,980.00 3,292,070.00 2,005,090.00

- -

- -

- -

- -

651,500.00 1,933,063.26 12,923,474.87 17,593,926.96 2,171.00 61,639,558.87 1,572.83 49,358,282.55

Planned ActualActual (TOTAL)

2002 2003Planned (TOTAL)

Planned Actual

Table 1a

COMMUNITY ORGANIZING

FOCUS, INC. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

PROJECT DIRECTOR

OFFICE CLERK

AREA

SUPERVISOR

TECHNICAL

OFFICER SOCIAL

WORKER

AREA

SUPERVISOR

TECHNICAL

OFFICER

SOCIAL

WORKER

Table 1d

SUSIMO-LAKE MAINIT

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

SITE MANAGEMENT

OFFICER

HEAD, ADMIN

SUPPORT UNIT

DRIVER

HEAD, SITE

MANAGEMENT UNIT HEAD, COMMUNITY

ORG. & STRENTHENING

UNIT

HEAD,

VALIDATION &

BILLING UNIT

COSU STAFF SDMU STAFF VBU STAFF

SDMU STAFF

VBU STAFF

Table 1b

FOREST PROT.

COMM. LAKESIDE

COMM

LIVELIHOOD

PROJ. COMM.

BODs BODs

CORE GROUP CORE GROUP

CORE GROUP CORE GROUP

ACCOUNTANT/

BOOKKEEPER

SECRETARY

EDUC.& TRNG.COM

GENERAL MANAGER

TREASURER/DO

BODs BODs

SEA SIDE

SUB.COMM

PROD CLERK/

PIO

CSD OPERATIONS

LAKE MAINIT COOPERATIVE (LMC)

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

AIC ELECOM

Annex 1c

VIRTUE, INC.

M&E Organizational Chart

GENERAL

ASSEMBLY

BOARD OF

TRUSTEES CHAIRMAN

AUDIT &

INVENTORY

ELECTION

COMMITTEE

EXECUTIVE

COMMITTEE

CORPORATE

SECRETARY

FIN. OFFICER

ADMIN OFFICER

Personnel

Officer

Legal

Officer

Support

Service

Officer

FIELD OPERATION

MANAGER

Accountant Cashier Bookkeeper

SOCIO-ECONOMIC

OFFICER

COMM. DEV’T.

OFFICER

RESOURCE MANG’T.

OFFICER

ECONOMIST

Agriculturist Sociologist Extension

Agricultural

Engineer

Forester

Completed Pathway Completed Farm to Market Road.

Eucalyptus Plantation

Agroforestry Plantation

Mahogany Plantation

Showing the mid-year consultative conference intended for the assessment of mid-year implementation of the FSP.

SUSIMO office of Lake Mainit Watershed Rehabilitation Subproject.

Monitoring and Evaluation — height and diameter measurement.

Corner DISTANCE (meter)

1-2 N 0 ° 40 ' W 636.52

2-3 N 14 ° 21 ' W 1,309.93

3-4 N 39 ° 40 ' W 1,461.48

4-5 N 12 ° 55 ' W 1,175.51

5-6 N 28 ° 25 ' W 923.78

6-7 N 35 ° 29 ' W 890.18

7-8 N 0 ° 24 ' W 1,823.98

8-9 N 51 ° 16 ' W 1,387.93

9-10 N 23 ° 37 ' W 828.17

10-11 S 28 ° 14 ' W 680.14

11-12 S 77 ° 56 ' W 881.08

12-13 N 5 ° 16 ' E 1,398.01

13-14 N 16 ° 11 ' E 3,919.50

14-15 N 37 ° 11 ' E 298.96

15-16 S 80 ° 6 ' E 1,597.68

16-17 S 28 ° 42 ' E 736.51

17-18 S 15 ° 1 ' E 820.85

18-19 S 35 ° 25 ' E 577.42

19-20 S 6 ° 15 ' W 1,829.63

20-21 S 27 ° 55 ' E 995.93

21-22 S 0 ° 51 ' W 1,024.32

22-23 S 18 ° 52 ' E 1,884.35

23-24 S 14 ° 24 ' E 2,822.94

24-25 S 45 ° 6 ' E 666.05

25-26 S 12 ° 53 ' E 915.03

26-27 S 23 ° 25 ' W 861.28

27-28 S 62 ° 14 ' W 422.32

28-29 S 38 ° 34 ' W 270.78

29-30 S 6 ° 11 ' E 401.59

30-31 S 19 ° 35 ' E 569.16

31-1 N 68 ° 38 ' W 397.52

Reference point:

Corner 1: long-X 125 ° 29 ' 50 "lat-Y 9 20 ' 44 "

BEARING

TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION

Lake Mainit Watershed Subproject