Socialized Housing
Rosa Babel Calilung
I. Davao City Profile
Davao City is located the province of Davao del Sur in Mindanao. It is the country’s third
leading city and the most developed area in Mindanao. It is the largest City in the world
in terms of land area with 2,440 sq. km., representing 62% of the province’s total land
area (3,934 sq. km.). Approximately 41% of the City’s land area is classified as alienable
and disposable while about 45% is classified as forestlands with established timberland.
As of 1995, the population of Davao City was 849,947 representing 57.32% of the
provincial total. Majority of the City’s working age population is located in the urban
areas at 71.38% and about 13% of the total labor force are unemployed. Of the total
employed persons, most are employed in the services sector (65%), followed by industry
(19%) and agriculture (16%).
Davao City is endowed with natural resources favorable for agriculture and has attracted
large agribusiness firms to invest in extensive production and marketing of most
agricultural crops. These include coconut, grains, fruits, coffee, cacao, vegetables and
banana.
The availability of raw materials and technology has spurred the development of the
City’s processing and manufacturing industries and contributed to the growth of the
service sector like trading, transportation, packaging, and technical services. To date, the
City has been considered as one of the top five industrializing regions in the Philippines.
Davao City not only serves as a production area of major agricultural crops but as well as
a major market center of the province with two major seaports and an international
airport. It has been regarded as having the best airport, telecommunications and pier
facilities in Mindanao and is the leading agribusiness center of the country.
Aside from being the center of trade for the Southern Mindanao area, the City is also
known for its numerous tourist destinations, which has also contributed to the economic
growth of the area. It has been identified as among the three major national tourist
destinations.
Davao City also plays an important role in the Brunei Darussalam Indonesia Malaysia
Philippines – East Asean Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA) as the gateway in Mindanao.
II. Davao City within the Urban Development and Housing Framework for
Southern Mindanao (Region XI)1
Davao City serves as the regional center of Region XI comprising 30% of the regions ‘s
total area and contributing to 19% of the region’s population. As a regional center, Davao
City serves as the seat of the regional government and exerts a dominant influence over
the outlying areas and the whole region administratively and politically. This influence is
not only manifested in population size and density but as well as the heavy concentration
of industry, infrastructure, transport, educational and health facilities, among others.
The City continues to experience accelerated land development brought about by rapid
population growth and urban expansion generated by industrialization, intensive business
and commercial activities. The rapid urbanization and expansion of economic activities
brings about adverse impacts on the environment which includes: (1) urban sprawl,
1
Contents of this section have been lifted from the National Urban Development and Housing Framework
1993-1998 by the Housing and Land Regulatory Board, November 1994.
scattered and unrelated residential development; (2) uneven distribution of residential
densities; (3) strip commercial development; (4) pollution and health hazards; (5)
inadequate open spaces and recreational areas; and (6) indiscriminate conversion of
agricultural areas into urban areas.
III. The Community Mortgage Program under the National Shelter Program
In December 1986, the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council
(HUDCC) was established, a coordinating and policy making body with the key housing
agencies under its umbrella – the National Housing Authority (NHA), National Home
Mortgage Finance Corporation (NHMFC), Housing Insurance Guaranty Corporation
(HIGC), and Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB). In 1987, the HUDCC
formulated the National Shelter Program (NSP), in which the four most important policy
lines are: increase of access to home ownership by the lowest income group, creation of
adequate financing possibilities for the long-term, liberation of regulations, and
stimulation of the informal sector. The NSP focused its attention on the lowest 50%
income group, "on-site development" and relocation within the city. The NSP was set up
under the Aquino Administration that saw the role of the government as an enabler rather
than provider.
Several shelter financing programs are part of the NSP. The most important are the
Unified Home Lending Program (housing loans), the Social Housing Development Loan
Program (to secure the production of low cost housing stocks) and the Community
Mortgage Program (low income home financing).
Prior to the implementation of the NSP, the housing programs failed to address three
fundamental problems: the problem of land tenure, affordability, and accessibility to
those employed working in the informal sectors. The idea of on-site land acquisition is an
important factor in relieving the shelter problems of this vulnerable group as this allows
them to live in areas proximate to their work places. On-site land acquisition gives the
urban poor the chance to secure their often vulnerable tenural arrangements without being
relocated to remote areas. Often the financing schemes of housing projects especially in
the commercial market are way beyond the affordability levels of the poor. Moreover,
people working in the informal sectors, those without regular incomes, could not avail of
loan packages under social housing programs. Thus, a large part of the poor and informal
dwellers was excluded from participation in the previous housing programs.
The Community Mortgage Program (CMP) is the first program to address such problems.
The CMP secures the tenural arrangements through communal land acquisition which
also offers the landowners the possibility to sell their property in a single deal. Further,
the loans under the CMP are granted at a subsidized interest rate of 6% and is also
accessible to people without a regular income.
CMP has been designed to assist residents of blighted2 or depressed areas to initially own
the lot they occupy and eventually to afford the building of a decent house. CMP is also
an instrument for land acquisition wherein landowners are convinced to sell their land as
Areas for Priority Development (APDs), including lands where so called blighted
communities are already in place to enable its poor residents to buy their own lots and
have security of land tenure.
These factors make the CMP a unique and promising shelter program and has been
considered by many as an innovative approach for low income housing. The program is
one of the first to actually reach the poor. As of October 1999, CMP has benefited
98,343 families nation-wide. The an average loan per family is only P27,645, which is
much less than 10% of ordinary housing loans. Loan repayment for CMP loans is also
much higher than that of ordinary housing loans.
Under the CMP, the NHMFC, which is the major implementing agency of the CMP,
requires the services of an originator. These originators must be a Local Government Unit
2
The Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992 (Article 1, Section 3.c) refers to blighted areas as
“areas where the structures are dilapidated, obsolete and unsanitary, tending to depreciate the value of the
land and prevent normal use of the area”.
(LGU), a National Government agency, bureau or corporation, or a Non-Government
Organization (NGO). According to the policy guidelines, an originator must be able to
perform the following: 1) initiate the formation of community association among
intended beneficiaries; 2) assist in the organization of credit groups for efficiency
collection; and 3) inform the community beneficiaries on the mechanics of housing
finance, construction of dwelling units, receiving government assistance, and complying
with government housing regulations and other related matters.
Origination refers to the process of applications, underwriting (risk assessment) and
disbursement of loans that are then sold to the government through its proper housing
agencies. In this way, the originator recuperates its funds and earns a fee plus interest for
the use of the funds. This function is traditionally performed by banks (using their own
short-term funds) that can pass on the long-term contract to the government. Processing is
expected to be simplified because it is performed by banks which guarantee processing
accuracy and quality, thereby allowing the government to purchase the loan without
additional procedures. Used in the context of CMP, origination was expended to include
community-based organizations and a guarantee of repayment (some kind of community
underwriting).
The initial step is to form informal dwellers (squatter families) into community
associations or cooperatives and register their associations with the proper government
agency. Then the government negotiates with the landowners to purchase the land to be
subdivided among the members of the association. The government agency facilitates the
purchase of lands for housing of associations through a commitment line with the
NHMFC. Under the scheme, the originator whether it is the NHA, the HIGC, the PAGIBIG Fund or LGUs or NGOs, partially or fully pays for the land and turns over the
mortgaged property to the NHMFC. The beneficiaries, on the other hand, may partially
fund the purchase of the land and pay for the mortgage to the NHMFC in monthly
installments for 25 years.
CMP undergoes three phases: the first involves financing for land acquisition and the
provision of security of land tenure to the beneficiaries through community ownership of
the land; the second involves additional loans for land development which include
provision of basic utilities like drainage, roads, water and electrical connections under the
same community ownership; and the third involves individual housing loans which may
be obtained by the members for home improvements or house construction.
Organizations Involved in the Implementation of the CMP
There are seven major implementing agencies involved in the CMP. These are:
1. Housing Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC). The HUDCC is
responsible for the administration of the NSP. It coordinates all government agencies
concerned with housing. In Executive Order No. 357 of 1989, the HUDCC is given
general administrative supervision over all key housing agencies.
2. National Home Mortgage Finance Corporation (NHMFC). The NHMFC is the
major implementing agency of the CMP. It negotiates with the funding agencies
Government Social Insurance System (GSIS), Social Security System (SSS) and
Home Mutual Development Foundation (HDMF) to release their funds in favor of the
program. The NHMFC evaluates all the documents that have to be submitted to be
eligible for the loans under the CMP. Further, the NHMFC is tasked to perform land
appraisal for on-site projects, and the performing of a background investigation of the
beneficiaries and a site inspection.
3. Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB). The appraisal of subdivision
plans of the area as required by the CMP can be obtained from the HLURB. This
agency checks if the plans are in accordance with Batas Pambansa 220, a law on
socialized housing standards. Once the HLURB has given its approval for a
subdivision plan, these plans can be used in the process of individual titling of the
property and the loan.
4. Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor (PCUP). The PCUP has several
functions under the CMP. Community associations that want to avail of the CMP
have to be accredited by PCUP. The PCUP has appointed area coordinators to
identify potential CMP areas and beneficiaries and provide them information about
the program. PCUP has the ‘legal personality’ to act as the government overseer of
the projects.
5. National Housing Authority (NHA). The NHA is one of the three government
agencies that act as an originator under the CMP. In general, NHA is responsible for
housing production under the NSP. The NHA performs its own background
investigation and site inspection (BI/SI) as well as socio-economic survey of the
community. For projects to be accredited with the NHMFC, the requirements have to
evaluated by NHA.
6. Home Insurance Guaranty Corporation (HIGC). The HIGC is the second agency
that acts as an originator under the CMP and has the privilege to conduct BI/SI and
socio-economic survey on its own. Other than this, community organizations can
choose to be registered with this organization instead of the Bureau of Cooperative
Development or the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Further, the HIGC
is tasked to conduct appraisal of projects worth P10 million (total billing of the loan)
and above, upon request of the NHMFC.
7. Bureau of Cooperative Development (BCD). The beneficiaries under the CMP can
organize themselves in an organization or a cooperative. When the choice is made for
a cooperative, in which case the CMP imposes stronger conditions, the cooperative
has to be registered with the BCD. This is the sole agency entitled to register
cooperatives.
There are three funding agencies for the CMP. They lend their money to the NHMFC
who pays the landowner for his property. Beneficiaries pay their loans to the NHMFC in
the capacity of monthly amortization to the NHMFC. The three funding agencies are:
1. Social Security System (SSS). The SSS is the primary provider of long-term housing
mortgages for low and middle-income private sector employees.
2. Government Social Insurance System (GSIS). The GSIS is the primary provider of
funds for long-term housing mortgages for low and middle income government
employees.
3. Home Mutual Development Foundation (HMDF or Pag-Ibig). The HMDF
implements a voluntary savings scheme for home acquisition by private and
government employees. HDMF uses part of the savings for housing loans that are not
required for provident benefits.
Other agencies involved in the process of CMP implementation are:
1. Assessor’s Office. Under the Local Government Code, it is the task of the Assessor’s
Office of local government units (LGUs) to determine the value of the land being
purchased by the community association. It also determines the amount of tax to be
paid by the landowner and responsible for controlling the authenticity of the original
titles of the property.
2. Registry of Deeds (ROD). The ROD is responsible for the registration of all real
property under its jurisdiction. The ROD is also responsible for the provision and
approval of the Transfer Certificate of Title and the three titles back (titles of the land
which were held by the three former owners of the land a community association
wants to acquire). The three titles back guaranty that once the community association
acquires the land, it is in fact the legitimate owner of the property. The ROD is also
involved when the community held title is to be transferred to the individual members
of the community association., referred to as the unitization of title.
3. Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). The DAR is in charge of converting nonresidential land into residential, so the residents of these properties can avail of a loan
under the CMP. As a result of the passage of the 1991 Local Government Code,
LGUs are also granted this reclassification power3.
IV. Profile of Mindanao Land Foundation, Inc.
Davao City has a population of 1,072,724 in 1997. With an estimated household size of
5.05 and a population growth rate of 3.22%, the total number of households in need of
housing is 70,113. Housing units needed arising from backlog4 is 39,478. Thus, the
combined housing need in the city is 109,590 units in the next ten years.
Table 1. Profile of Housing Need in Davao City
3
Local Government Code 1991, Chapter 2, title 1, section 20.
Households classified as homeless, displaced (those with threat of demolition, living in danger areas and
infrastructure projects), doubled-up, landless/informal settlers
4
Area of Housing Need of Household
1998 – 2006
Housing Need Due to Population Growth
70,113
Housing Need Due to Backlog
39,478
Total
109,950
Civil society organizations participating in the housing delivery in Davao City, focus
much of their development efforts in addressing the housing backlog where the lowest
30% of the population has the greatest demand for housing and is most affected by
poverty (poverty threshold for the region is P7,500 monthly income per household).
One such organization involved in the delivery of housing services is Mindanao Land
Foundation, Inc. which has been actively assisting the urban poor of Davao City for a
decade now.
The Mindanao Land Foundation, Inc. (MLF) is a non-stock, non-profit foundation
formed in 1988 by a group of private and concerned individuals based in Davao City.
Formerly, named as the Mindanao Land Acquisition, Housing and Development
Foundation, Inc., it was registered with the Philippine Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 1989.
The Board of Directors of MLF is presently composed of Eduardo Estores, Damaso
Vertido, Florante Tarona, Alex Rendon, and Nancy Camporendo. This same group
comprise the original incorporators of MLF. The board’s composition and background
indicate a homogeneity as seen from the field of expertise that each one brings into the
Foundation: a lawyer, a social worker, a rural development worker, a development
education specialist and a sociologist.
Since its inception in 1988, MLF hinged its programs on the urban poor by acting as an
originator under the CMP. As an NGO originator, MLF’s function is not only limited to
the loan documentation phase of their CMP applications but as well as the organizing of
potential communities into cooperatives and associations.
On the average, MLF’s social preparation and community organizing process is normally
completed within eight to 17 months while loan documentation takes approximately six
months. Based on their experiences, MLF’s origination work was between six months
(shortest) and three years (longest).
To date, MLF has serviced 24 communities and has succeeded in facilitating the
ownership of residential lands to six urban poor communities in Davao City with a total
of 882 household beneficiaries. In 1994, the overall repayment rate of the six taken out
communities was registered at 90 % for the total land worth of P18,885,155.
For the other communities being handled by MLF, six are currently under the Letter of
Guarantee status, while two communities are under the Purchase Commitment Line
status. The other ten urban poor communities are in the process of completing their
documentation requirements and negotiating with the landowners for the land acquisition.
MLF, over the years, have earned the confidence of urban poor communities as a
competent CMP originator. After only a year in operations, two of the communities being
assisted by MLF were successfully taken-out and the following year, three more
communities were taken out. The successful accessing from CMP for these communities
during the infancy stage of CMP was considered a milestone for MLF and a precedent for
CMP origination in Mindanao.
Urban Poor Development Programme of MLF
With land acquisition for urban poor families as its main objective, MLF came up with
the Urban Poor Development Programme (UPDP) in 1990, designed and formulated as a
development model for an integrated program for the urban poor. The UPDP provides the
framework for MLF to plot out its involvement with the urban poor sector through the
strengthening of communities to access resources for their own benefit and to prepare
those communities as recipients of MLF’s projects and services. The UPDP employs a 5track approach: 1) Land Acquisition to address the security of land tenure of the poor,
particularly but not exclusively those inhabiting endangered zones, slums and squatter
area; 2) Enterprise Development to address the need for access and control of enterprises
by the poor as additional and augmentative sources of income and employment, including
additional capital for other enterprises; 3) Housing and Community Infrastructure
Development to address the need for access and control of social and technical processes
to build a community of homes and trees rather than just a collection of roofs and walls;
4) Social Services Development to address the need for establishing basic social services
such as education, health, nutrition, day care, medical care, population control and
recreation in the community; 5) Advocacy and Political Lobby to address the need to
raise the consciousness of the community and the general public on the rights of the poor
particularly on housing rights as a basic right, including political lobbying to gain respect,
protection and observance of housing rights under the Philippine laws and international
covenants.
CMP origination remains to be the focus of MLF’s efforts as they believe that land
acquisition and ownership is a pre-condition for other programme thrusts to proceed.
They further believe that for other development projects to be sustainable, the settlement
of land tenure has to be secured, first and foremost.
While origination is the major function of MLF, there were other activities implemented
in line with the UPDP approach. A total of 15 cooperatives have been assisted through
the Enterprise Development Programme though not all were MLF-initiated. Of the
organized cooperatives, only 11 started business operations, three of which transformed
into multi-purpose cooperatives by entering into credit transactions.
From the 24 urban poor areas of MLF, there are nine micro-scale cooperatives that are
functional. Majority of these cooperatives are consumer-focused such as rice trading and
variety (sari-sari) store operation. These community cooperatives are essentially the
initiatives of the residents themselves, MLF’s role in their formation are mainly technical
advisory and training, and resource mobilization to some.
For the Housing and Community Development Program, MLF provides the linkage by
which the community-identified needs of the MLF-assisted communities will be known
by the city government through their technical expertise and knowledge of the funding
support channels / process. MLF facilitated the installation of open drainage canals in one
of their communities, the earth filling of some flooded communities, and repairs of
community passageways. MLF coordinates with city officials and other resource centers
for the community infrastructure needs of their project areas.
The provision of pre-school children’s day care centers at the community-level is the
major concern of the Social Services Development component of the UPDP. Assistance
provided by MLF to the communities include the sourcing of funds for the construction
of a building (where there is none) to be used as a school, training and hiring of a teacher
(using the Department of Social Welfare Development’s curriculum), and financial
support for the teacher’s administrative maintenance and the purchase of teaching
materials. MLF’s role in the delivery of social services is to access these services for the
community from government agencies who are mandated by law to discharge these
services.
MLF plays a major role in the advocacy of urban poor-related issues in the Mindanao
area. MLF was one of the lead groups in the Mindanao Urban Poor Congress of 1991.
The Foundation lobbied for the passage and effective implementation of the Urban
Development and Housing Act (UDHA) and for the establishment of the Davao City
Shelter Programme including the conduct of a rational and updated land use and zoning
regulations for the City. It also advocated for the repeal of the government’s AntiSquatting Law (PD 772), the decentralization of the service delivery component of the
CMP, the allocation of resources of the local government for the CMP in Davao, and the
representation of urban poor groups in barangay and city councils.
The Foundation considers the work of community organizers in the community as part of
advocacy so that this is expressed as an external lobbying support for the needs and
demands of the community. Community organizers assist the community in arriving at
some common demands and when necessary, they extend advice and technical support so
the community can work on its own lobby.
Network-building with Other Formations
MLF is a member of Hugpong-Davao, a federation of CMP originators in Davao City
that was formed in 1990. Hugpong is primarily focused in the implementation of the
CMP while being an advocacy group which deals with the issues related to shelter
provision.
Hugpong is seen by its members as a venue for sharing experiences and concerns on the
issues of CMP and social housing. Hugpong’s advocacy is directed at the Davao City
government.
As a federation, Hugpong-Davao spearheaded the formation of the Mindanao Congress
of CMP originators, a grouping that is made up of federations of CMP originators in
Mindanao.
At the national level, Hugpong is part of the CMP Originators and Social Development
Agencies for Low-Income Housing (CMP Originators), a federation of 39 government
and non-government organizations or agencies that facilitate land acquisition and housing
for the urban poor.
MLF is also a member of the Association of Social Development Agencies in the Region
(ASDAR), a network of development NGOs operating in the Southern Mindanao region.
MLF is currently working with ASDAR on the development of an alternative bank that is
projected to support the enterprise activities of its member-NGOs in Davao City and in
Southern Mindanao.
V.
Findings of the Case Research
Under the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA), the primary responsibility for
housing provision has shifted from the national government to the local governments.
The identification of socialized housing sites and establishment of socialized housing
programs have, by virtue of UDHA, become the domain of local governments. Enormous
responsibilities have been passed on to the local governments which now must not only
plan and implement socialized housing projects but as well raise the funds necessary to
underwrite these projects (Karaos: 1996)
Local governments under the UDHA are mandated to perform the numerous tasks,
among them are: a) prepare a comprehensive land use plan; b) conduct an inventory of all
lands and improvements thereon within their respective localities in coordination with the
HLURB and appropriate government agencies; c) identify lands for social housing and
resettlement areas and areas for the immediate and future needs of the underprivileged
and homeless in urban areas; d) certify as to the blighted status of lands and identify and
register all qualified socialized housing beneficiaries within their respective localities.
Seven years after the implementation of UDHA (signed March 28, 1992), the City
government of Davao has yet to come up with their comprehensive land use plan (at
present, they are in the process of reviewing the draft comprehensive plan). The same is
true for the rest of the tasks enumerated above, they have not been complied with.
For Davao City which serves as the regional center of region XI, the formulation of an
overall development plan together with its comprehensive land use plan, zoning
ordinance and shelter plan is significant as this will provide the direction of growth for all
sectors. With the influx of development projects in the area, it is important to earmark
lands for social housing before the market prices of available and suitable lands for
housing become unaffordable.
MLF took note of the absence of a development vision/direction for the housing sector in
Davao City, and together with the other NGO members of Hugpong Davao have taken
the lead in local housing efforts by formulating the proposed City Shelter Development
Plan for Davao which they have submitted to the City Council for resolution and
adoption.
To further their efforts to include the urban poor in the decision-making process of the
City, Hugpong Davao is also pushing for sectoral representation in the Sangguniang
Panlunsod. The resolution is moving for the inclusion of three representatives from the
women, agriculture and urban poor sectors. Once the resolution is adopted and the PONGO-PS mechanism is institutionalized, the city council will have official representation
from the concerned sectors during committee hearings and consultations.
Aside from the absence of a development direction for the housing sector, there is a
general lack of interest and political will on the city government’s part to address the
housing needs of the “homeless and underprivileged” constituents.
At the time of the research, the city government is being questioned for their approval of
the construction of a ‘state of the art’ Astrodome worth P300M to be loaned at an interest
rate of 16%. MLF, in the past, have been proposing for a P50M budget to fund a Local
Housing Corporation to address the housing needs in the city which the government
officials have not approved due to lack of financial resources. Yet they are willing to loan
P300M at a high interest rate for a recreational project whose benefits to the city is
uncertain. MLF has raised awareness about this issue through radio broadcast and since
then, the processing of their application for documentary requirements from the city
government have been slower.
The NHA CMP officer also observed the lack of interest for social housing of city
government officials. In one of their community’s application, the land to be purchased
was a government owned land, therefore, the application had to be taken up by the City
Council. Having their application included in the council meeting agenda alone proved to
be a major task already – not only do they have to wait the whole day but at times they
have to go back the following day (not to mention the numerous telephone follow up
calls). The NHA CMP officer further explained that based on the accounts of their
assisted communities, there were instances when they had to give ‘presents’ to local
officials so that their applications will be taken up and processed.
While MLF can fast track and efficiently process the CMP application of their
communities, the city government are not complementing its efforts.
As mentioned in the description of the CMP process, there are several government
organizations involved in the implementation of the program. Both MLF and NHA have
experienced delays in the issuance of the necessary clearances from the city government.
It would take several follow-up visits before the necessary requirements would be acted
upon. According to the representatives of MLF and NHA, if the officer or handler is not
persistent in their follow-up efforts, the application for clearances are always at the
bottom of the pile.
The same is true for national government agencies. This was experienced by MLF several
times in their application process and there was even one instance when the entire
application folder was lost at the central office of NHMFC. MLF had to undergo the
process of documentation for the community all over again – from the collection of
individual documents from the community to securing the necessary permits from the
concerned agencies. According to NHA, there were also instances when their application
folders were misplaced at the central office and took some time before it was recovered
and finally processed.
The inefficiency in the processing of documentary requirements by the city government
and national housing agencies have actually caused some members of the communities
being assisted by MLF to doubt the originator and to lose hope in the project. Further, the
constant follow-up activities which has been proven to be a necessary component of the
application process could lead to constraints in the originator’s budget as central offices
of the national agencies concerned are located in Manila.
The case may be that the city government is undermanned to facilitate the processing of
such applications, however, the UDHA mandates them to restructure their bureaucracy to
accommodate the numerous tasks vested on them with the implementation of the law.
Seven years, after the passage of UDHA, is beyond the adjustment period needed to
institutionalize the law, especially for a highly urbanized city with all the resources
available to them.
On a related issue, local governments in the peripheries are not aware of the policy
guidelines for the CMP. Such is the case in Surigao del Sur, where the employees of the
Housing Affairs Office are not aware of the policies of CMP and consequently, the
necessary documentation requirements that their office needs to process.
According to the community officer of MLF in Surigao del Sur where MLF has an
extension office, the local government housing office is not aware of the CMP process
and as such, does not have the technical capability to handle the processing of the
necessary documentary requirements of the applicants. In such cases, the MLF
community organizer had to explain to the concerned local offices the process of CMP
origination and application process as well as the processing of the requirements.
The presence of MLF in Surigao del Sur and other smaller NGOs provide the means by
which the local residents would know about the housing programs offered by the national
government. In this instance, MLF serves not only as originator and community
organizer, but as well as an information channel for the national housing programs to the
local residents of the area in general. More importantly, MLF assumed the responsibility
of national housing agencies in enhancing the technical capability of the local housing
employees by providing them policy guidelines of CMP.
It is also worth noting that under the CMP, non-government organizations and
government units/agencies/offices not only perform complementary functions but as well
as parallel functions. The succeeding section documents the performance of CMP
origination between MLF and NHA.
The main difference between the CMP origination function between NHA and MLF is
that the latter provides community organization. Aside from the required tasks of
originators to initiate the formation of community associations among intended
beneficiaries and to inform the community beneficiaries on the mechanics of housing
finance, construction of dwelling units, receiving government assistance, and complying
with government housing regulations; MLF has incorporated community enabling /
empowerment mechanisms to its community organizing activities. Such enabling
mechanisms include seminars on value formation, self-help enterprise development, and
leadership and technical training for association officials. These additional functions
being undertaken by MLF will ensure that the communities will be able to sustain their
gains after addressing their land tenure problems.
In the study of the Planning and Development Collaborative International (PADCO) in
May 1993, it pointed out in its assessment of the CMP that there has been a general
failing of the program with regards to membership training and community development.
Training refers to the organizing process involved and the acquisition of skills of
members that are needed to ensure strong communities, thereby strengthening continuity
when communities expectedly sustain the program.
Since the implementation of the CMP in 1988, MLF has successfully taken-out the
mortgage of 11 communities with an average repayment rate of 87.71% as of September
1999.
There have been instances when communities under NHA have actually terminated their
contract with NHA as originator and transferred to MLF. This was the case of the Fatima
Homeowners Association who have been unsatisfied with NHA’s origination for three
years before they transferred to MLF. Fatima’s mortgage was taken out in January 1998
with 198 beneficiaries with repayment rate of 140.39% (some members have made full
payments for their lots). Fatima is currently undertaking the reblocking of their houses to
give way to the construction of a secondary road being funded by the local government.
Residents are well aware of the project and are moving their houses voluntarily among
themselves using the ‘bayanihan’ concept. According to interview Mr. and Mrs. Perfecto
Casanilio, active members of Fatima who have lived in the area since 1958, with the
entry of MLF, the facilitation of their application was faster and the group learned more
about improving their efficiency in payment collection and documentation. MLF is
presently considering to phase out their community organizing work in Fatima to give
way to other communities who need their assistance. Preparatory activities are being
conducted by MLF for the officers of the association such as management skills training
and monitoring and evaluation. After the phase out period, MLF will only conduct
regular monitoring activities on Fatima. This experience proves that there are some
communities who have potentials that need to be tapped to work to their advantage.
NHA on their part have successfully taken out four communities in Davao City between
1988 and 1995 with a total of 836 beneficiaries. The highest number of beneficiaries for
the communities taken out is 275 while the lowest is 172 – this is so because NHA only
provide origination work for communities with more than 100 beneficiaries as this will
be more cost-effective for them to undertake.
Since NHA only provide origination work for communities with more than 100 members,
then small squatter communities are left to the NGOs for assistance. This also means, that
with larger communities to handle and with no supporting community organizing
activities provided, cohesiveness and unity in objectives are not enhanced in NHA’s
communities. This is evident in their low repayment rate as mentioned by the NHA CMP
officer interviewed.
In 1997, NHA launched their own Land Tenurial Assistance Program (LTAP) which is
very similar to the CMP. Since then, NHA has postponed their CMP origination work to
concentrate more on the LTAP which is their agency’s own program thus, easier to
process and to implement.
The creation of the LTAP has caused confusion among the community associations since
once they apply for CMP origination under NHA, their application will be transformed to
LTAP. According to some communities being organized by MLF, word has been
spreading that the CMP have been cancelled and replaced by the LTAP. This issue,
though unintentional on the part of NHA, must be addressed, as there are no clear
changes in the CMP policy guidelines which state that NHA is no longer involved in
CMP origination. Thus, the targets for CMP are not being met even if NGOs have been
working hard in their origination efforts as NHA have postponed their participation in the
program.
VI. Conclusion
Over the years, MLF have pushed for the advancement of the social housing sector in
Davao City. They have introduced innovations such as the creation of a local housing
corporation that will oversee the management and development of the housing sector in
Davao City where all the concerned sectors will be represented in the Board. However,
the city government officials have dismissed the proposed innovation without considering
the merits of the plan. Together with the other members of Hugpong Dabaw, they have
also formulated the proposed City Shelter Development Plan which still awaits the
approval of the City Council.
MLF has also pushed for the empowerment of the homeless and the underprivileged.
MLF not only confined their task to the effective origination of housing to their
communities but they have complemented this task with other programs as outlined in
their Urban Poor Development Program which includes: land acquisition, enterprise
development, housing and community infrastructure development, social services
development and advocacy and political lobby.
But even with the dynamic role of MLF in the provision of social housing in Davao City,
their efforts are not optimized as their efficiency and dedication is not complemented
with the same degree of commitment on the part of the city government and the local
housing agencies involved.
Part of the problem may be addressed by restructuring the bureaucracy as mandated by
UDHA to enable the city government to effectively perform the tasks placed on them by
the law. Seven years, after the implementation of the UDHA, is way beyond the
adjustment period for local governments to institutionalize the law. Moreover, the
administration of CMP must be decentralized in order to increase its efficiency and
coverage.
The seeming reluctance to appropriate lands for socialized housing is critical especially
for highly urbanized areas. The city government must move quickly in allocating lands
for urban poor housing and identify socialized housing sites to keep pace with the
development demands in the area. Not to do so is a question of political will.