Glenda Kodaseet (Winn)
PADM 590 – Program Evaluation
Dr. Mario A. Rivera, Regents’ Professor of Public Administration
April 19, 2010
Case Summary and Analysis of
A Partnership in Troubled Waters
CASE SUMMARY
Introduction
Ranked among the world’s top 25 bio-diverse hotspots, the Philippines’ rich marine
environment is in jeopardy as illegal fish practices, over-fishing, and population pressures
threaten its existence. Since the 1990s, marine life along the 32 square miles of Philippine
coastline has undergone considerable damage. Critical to its sustainment, the 27,000 square
kilometers of coral reefs are being destroyed by cyanide and dynamite fishing. A recent survey
conducted by an international NGO found that less than 5% are thriving and in excellent
condition. Degraded by migrant and transient fishers drawn to more abundant waters, marine
life is further aggravated by unbridled population growth.
Located in the middle of the Sulu Sea, the Philippines has 7,107 islands and a population
of 76 million. With 60% of the population living in coastal regions and dependent upon fishing
as their main source of food and livelihood, marine life is rapidly decreasing. Population
increases can further deplete marine life, creating a food crisis for the Philippine people. With
45% of its population nearing the reproductive age, it is predicted that the Philippine population
will double in less than 30 years (Castro, D’Agnes, and Aquino, 2004). While efforts to protect
the Philippines’ marine ecosystems have been in place since the 1980s, family planning to
control population growth was added in the 1990s. Concerns for the Philippines’ bio-diverse
marine life and population pressures became the link that brought together a local non-profit,
the Andres Soriano Foundation and an international NGO, PATH Foundation Philippines, Inc.
Through the commonalities of their missions and innovative solutions that address the
rapidly deteriorating marine eco-system, citizen empowerment contributed to the Municipality of
Cuyo embracing coastal management techniques and alternative livelihoods to decrease the
degradation of its marine life. While human population pressures also contribute to the
degradation of Cuyo’s once abundant fish population, social values and belief systems hindered
the implementation of family planning programs and resources. While this component was
successful throughout the Philippines in the early 2000s regarding integrated coastal
management techniques, Cuyo’s political and social arenas were not ready for this component to
be introduced into the community.
The Island of Cuyo
The Island of Cuyo is comprised of 32 square miles and is under the Palawan Province.
There are 79 provinces in the Philippines. The province is the primary local governance system.
Provinces are made up of municipalities with each having a mayor and a governing council.
Cuyo has two municipalities – the Municipality of Cuyo and the Municipality of Magsaysay.
Municipalities are further divided into barangays. Cuyo has 17 barangays. Each barangay is
headed by a captain and a council. This level of governance is closest to the people. For
Cuyonons, barangays employ policies and programs to sustain their livelihoods and quality of
life while finding solutions to challenges the community may face. This includes factors that
contribute to fish depletion.
Dependent upon fishing and farming, Cuyonons receive 80% of their protein intake from
fish. Since the 1990s, Cuyonons have been struggling to find enough fish to feed their families.
Where it took them only 1 day of fishing to catch a week’s worth of fish, they must now go
Kodaseet-Winn
2
further out to sea, often staying for days or weeks to find enough fish for only a couple of days
worth of food. With a political and social structure non-supportive of family planning programs
and resources, population growth only exacerbates the problem. Understanding the challenges
facing the Cuyonon community, Cuyo barangays were the crucial element to implementing
coastal environmental management techniques that addressed the growing problem of fish
depletion. The decrease in fish was attributed to over-fishing by migrant, transient, and Cuyonon
fishers and illegal fishing practices. The latter not only killed fish not being sought by fishermen,
it also killed the coral reefs.
Marine life, overall, is dependent upon coral reefs. In Cuyo, coral reefs not only
contribute to the population’s food source, they also support income generating opportunities.
For example, coral reefs alone contributed at least $1.35 billion (U.S. dollars) annually to the
Philippine economy during the 1990s and at least 1 million Filipinos work for the marine sector
in commercial fishing fleets or as subsistence fishers. Tourism also contributes to the country’s
economy as tourists visit Philippine beaches and coral reefs which are world-renowned. While
the coral reefs are important to the country, destructive fish practices are destroying fish stocks.
Cyanide fishing is on the rise in Cuyo. It kills coral and small reef fish on contact and
spreads throughout the reef on wave currents, killing a square meter of reef for every fish caught.
Approximately 160 live grouper fish are air-freighted out of Cuyo each day destroying the
island’s marine resources. Cyanide and dynamite fishing are driven by the live fish trade. Live
grouper fish are in high demand in Manila and China as individuals pay up to $300 (U.S. dollars)
“to pick a live coral grouper from a tank and have it cooked to order” (D’Agnes, 2006, p. 5).
Approximately 20,000 tons of live fish from the Philippines are eaten by gourmands in Hong
Kong annually. International traders from Hong Kong and Manila control the live fish trade out
Kodaseet-Winn
3
of Cuyo through local subsidiaries often owned by Cuyonons.
Because the live fish trade is lucrative, and fish are harder to find, many Cuyonons
engage in these illegal and destructive fishing practices. Cuyonon businesses provide cyanide to
fishers and buy the live fish which are flown on privately chartered planes directly to Manila or
Hong Kong. The Philippine fisher receives $12 (U.S. dollars) per fish which is 10 times the
going rate for a dead grouper and more money than a fisher makes in a whole month of fishing.
While cyanide and dynamite fishing are illegal fishing practices and are the type of practices
employed in finding groupers, local politicians and government officials ignore the presence of
illegal fishers. Due to their indifference or participation in the illegal fishing arena, the rich
marine eco-systems along their coastlines is slowing disappearing. While fishers and politicians
underestimated the threat of the live fish trade to Cuyo’s marine resources, Lemia Simbulan,
Executive Director of the Andres Soriano Foundation, knew the level of devastation that could
occur if marine resources were not protected.
Andres Soriano Foundation
The Andres Soriano Foundation (ASF) was founded in 1968 under the A. Soriano
Corporation. ASF’s initial funding was provided by the company’s beer profits – San Miguel
Beer. It was established with the vision of corporate social responsibility to communities. It
employs the community organizing model that promotes self-help and reliance, wherein, it
reverses control and accountability from central authorities to community organizations (COs)
which are supported by people organizations (POs) – citizen empowerment. Through ASF,
Lemia Simbulan administered two projects in the Philippines: (1) Cancer Research, Abatement,
and Rehabiliation Program, and the Small Islands Sustainable Development Program in Palawan.
The latter had been in place since 1986 and eventually included Cuyo as the program expanded
Kodaseet-Winn
4
through funding from the PATH Foundation Philippines, Inc. The Small Islands Project initially
focused on organizing communities to help with basic services such as potable water, electricity,
health care, education, microfinance, and social development. As profits dwindled from the sale
of San Miguel Beer and later through the loss of the beer company, it had to rely more on
charitable gifts from donors.
PATH Foundation Philippines, Inc.
ASF’s major donor was Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH)
Foundation Philippines, Inc. (PFPI), an international NGO. Its mission focuses on improving the
quality of health services, specifically, for women and children, and reducing the impact of
communicable diseases within communities. Headquartered in the U.S., with offices in 22
countries, it is internationally renowned for developing creative technologies and approaches that
address local health problems. Partnering with local NGOs working with at-risk populations
around the world and in the Philippines, PFPI provides tools and training as needed and gives
local partners latitude in program development and implementation which contribute to
culturally relevant practices. Viewing population pressures and over-fishing as causes of
Philippine marine environmental degradation, PFPI’s Leona D’Agnes, Technical Direcor, and
Dr. Joan Castro, Project Director, conceptualized the Integrated Population and Coastal Resource
Management (IPOPCORM) initiative to address the situation. Designed around environmental
issues, it was seen as a significant departure from its traditional focus on reproductive health.
IPOPCORM initiatives, however, appeared very relevant to their mission after the results of a
Philippine coastal survey were received: (1) high fertility rates among coastal populations; (2)
low contraceptive use; (3) high number of sexually active youth; and (4) high unmet demand for
family planning. Overall, according to the survey, the coastal area population growth rate is 3.9%
Kodaseet-Winn
5
compared to the national average of 2.4%. Thus, PFPI could tie IPOPCORM’s initiatives to their
mission of health concerns for women and children as health is connected to food sources.
Integrating environmental and population concerns, IPOPCORM identified four strategic
activities: (1) improve reproductive health of those living in coastal communities by providing
information on human sexuality and reproductive health and increasing access to affordable and
readily available reproductive health products; (2) encourage and build local capacity to manage
coastal and marine resources; (3) implement a micro-lending program to support alternative
livelihoods, relieving fishing pressure and reducing the risk of food insecurity; and (4) linking
grassroots activities to mass media campaigns for increased awareness among policymakers on
the link between population and environment and solutions. Implementing IPOPCORM also
meant identifying priority project sites.
Project site selection involved local consultants hired to conduct biophysical and
ecological assessments and baseline surveys on key population, environment, and development
indicators. Three specific groups were targeted: (1) fishers; (2) youth; and (3) small-scale
entrepreneurs. Twelve coastal municipalities covering 109 barangays were selected which
included Cuyo. While PFPI set overarching project outcomes per site and provided technical
assistance as needed, their role was mainly an advisory one. The goal of the first two years of
IPOPCORM, the first stage, was to produce changes in attitudes and perceptions about family
planning, increase in contraceptive use, and establishment of measures that protected coral reefs,
such as Marine Protected Areas (MPSs), and mangrove areas. While family planning programs
and reproductive health were included in IPOPCORM initiatives, Castro decided that Cuyo was
not ready for this program component. Given the problems facing Cuyo, Castro felt that
community organizing and environmental protection were the most important project activities.
Kodaseet-Winn
6
This was attributed to its isolation, lack of prior NGO presence, and inexperience with
participation in local governance. Challenges surrounding this aspect of Cuyo included finding a
core group of interested villagers, educating them about their rights under Philippine law to
support giving them a voice in the governing process, and teaching them about the coastal
environment supportive of management actions on their part in their barangays. Once
community organization and structures were in place, the reproductive health component would
be introduced in Cuyo.
Cuyo and IPOPCORM Successes and Challenges
Like PFPI, IPOPCORM was a departure for ASF. Now focused on the management and
conservation of marine ecosystems, ASF’s Cuyo staff were trained on basic marine and ocean
ecology, alternative livelihood strategies, and Philippine coastal laws and regulations. Cuyo had
five program staff and two supervisors from neighboring barangays. Nilo Ungui was the project
leader and was from the Island of Agutaya. He had used illegal fishing practices until he saw the
impact on fish. He was politically active in his community of Agutaya and worked diligently to
engage and educate the Cuyo community, placing importance on building trust relationships. He
saw Cuyo’s policymakers as the problem behind the continued practice of illegal fishing
activities. As staff engaged the community to establish and enhance Community Organizations
(COs) and People Organizations (POs), they ran into resistance but were successful in gaining
support from local officials and the youth whose ages were similar to ASF staff. To improve
resistance at other levels, Ungui mentored staff and accompanied them on their visits to the
barangays. While this allowed Ungui to personally meet with and know specific barangay
officials and community members and their concerns, it delayed IPOPCORM activities by nine
months. IPOPCORM activities were to be implemented in the first year of the program’s
Kodaseet-Winn
7
establishment.
Once activities were underway, Barangay Captains and Councils and youth became allies
of COs. Program outcomes included the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with Cuyo
officials which allowed IPOPCORM to be an official partner in community development. Two
types of POs were developed: fishermen and youth. COs established creative approaches to
community education: (1) performance art; and (2) music and songs – a Cuyo council member
recorded and sang songs about IPOPCORM’s initiatives; (3) study tours; (4) mangrove plantings
that built community; and (5) coastal clean-ups. COs also established the Barangay Fisheries
Aquatic Resource Management Committees (BFARMCs).
BFARMCs were nationally mandated advisory boards. Each barangay was to have one
BFARMC comprised of 8 fishermen and community members. They were to submit to the
Council formal coastal and fisheries management recommendations for passage into law. They
received training on the Philippine legal framework regarding : (1) coastal management; (2)
national coastal regulations; (3) national agencies that BFARMCs could call on for technical
assistance; and (4) received certification and training as bantay dagats or fish wardens.
BFARMCs’ duties included patrolling waters to apprehend illegal fishers and imposing fines;
opening and closing fisheries seasons; restricting net size; limiting amount of fish harvested in
landing sites; and establishing Marine Protected Areas – MPAs.
MPAs are a fisheries and coastal management tool used since 1974 and are segments of
the coastal environment designated as a marine reserve. They help improve: (1) coral reefs; (2)
mangrove density and seagrass cover; and (3) eco-system health. They increase fish varieties,
density or number of fishes, and fish catches. While BFARMCs were a crucial element to
IPOPCORM initiatives, they and COs and POs lacked the influence needed to change the
Kodaseet-Winn
8
municipal political process. While BFARMCs were given the authority to patrol and fine
individuals using illegal fish practices, they often received special protection from the municipal
and legal system process, discouraging and frustrating COs, POs, and ASF staff. To combat this
indifference and illegal fishing practices, BFARMCs demanded more resources from ASF.
Additionally, ASF project leader Nilo Ungui requested that ASF take a political approach
regarding IPOPCORM initiatives and endorse political candidates taking a stance against
cyanide fishing. Both ASF and PFPI wanted to avoid creating a non-supportive environment in
Cuyo regarding the IPOPCORM program.
CASE ANALYSIS
The evaluation framework for the IPOPCORM project called for decreasing population
pressure on the marine resource base in coastal communities to benefit sustainable levels of
fishing. While family planning and reproductive health programs were utilized in IPOPCORM
projects on other islands, they were not implemented in Cuyo. Instead, Dr. Joan Castro, PFPI
Project Director, wanted Lemia Simbulan, Executive Director of ASF, and her Cuyo staff to
focus on community organizing and environmental protection strategies as mechanisms to
protect the coral reefs while defining measures of protection such as designating coastal
segments as Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). In defining IPOPCORM’s strategic activities,
ASF’s experience with and use of community organizing models became key to gaining
community support for IPOPCORM’s initiatives.
With clearly laid out program implementation strategies, IPOPCORM’s approach was
based on Change Theory supported by Marten’s “linked eco-social systems” concept and the
belief that small improvements in social and/or ecological systems reinforce one another and can
turn around both systems from degradation to health (D’Agnes, 2009). In Cuyo, the linked eco-
Kodaseet-Winn
9
social systems were the damaged marine environment and behavioral change. It was assumed
that as behavior became more responsive to sustaining marine life, illegal fishing practices and
over-fishing would decrease, limiting the amount of damage inflicted on Cuyo’s marine
environment. If ASF had introduced family planning and reproductive health programs into
Cuyo’s population, further behavioral change might have been experienced. Further, Marten’s
concept and belief of systems reinforcing one another and turning around degradation to health
were addressed within the household survey conducted by PFPI that reflected high rates of
malnutrition in families reliant upon fishing and who lived along degraded coastlines (D’Agnes,
2009). It was assumed that as fish stocks increased and alternative livelihoods were pursued,
environmental damage and children’s malnourished state would improve as an outcome to the
change in the populations’ behavior towards marine life.
The Cuyo evaluators, along with Lemia Simbulan and Dr. Joan Castro, visited with the
Cuyo IPOPCORM staff and attended meetings with the local community, including barangay
captains and councils. They saw the outcomes of community engagement through theatre and
music performances reflective of the marine ecosystem concerns. By participating in meetings
and events with Cuyo staff, evaluators were able to identify and see first-hand the innovative
program activities that stemmed from the Cuyo staff outreach and challenges facing the Cuyo
staff. Evaluators also gained an understanding of ASF’s goals in designing the Cuyo
IPOPCORM project and the special circumstances that limited the feasibility of achieving
IPOPCORM goals in the initial 2-year period, all of which can impact the design of the
evaluation.
Within the evaluation design, the testing of the hypothesis that integrated approaches
yield bigger payoffs than single sector approaches is relevant to the change theory by Marten and
Kodaseet-Winn
10
relates to Chen’s (2005) program theory perspective. This perspective helps to answer four
factors that can influence the selection of evaluation approaches and methods. With its use of
descriptive and prescriptive assumptions, program theory becomes action-oriented. While
descriptive assumptions look at the causal process for identified problems and use the change
model, prescriptive assumptions prescribe components and activities deemed necessary to a
program’s success and, thus, use action models. Evaluators can look to the action model for the
nuts and bolts of the program as the model “determines the means of implementing and
supporting the intervention so that the processes described in the change model can occur”(Chen,
2005, p. 17). In other words, the program is put in motion when the action model is
implemented. Use of change and action models help evaluators to achieve a balanced view in
assessing a program’s worth. They can also contribute to data collection for empirical research
which supports the IPOPCORM evaluators’ use of a hypothesis in determining whether
integrated approaches yield bigger payoffs than a single sector approach. The IPOPCORM
framework also supported tracking of information allowing for measureable achievement of
goals. PFPI’s project design strategies also impacted the evaluation design.
PFPI developed a conceptual model for the IPOPCORM approach, a causal-chain model
that identified strategies to bridge a gap or redress a threat, a results chain model to test different
hypothesis which maps out a series of causal statements that link factors in an “if-then” situation,
and a two-part plan to monitor the outputs of strategies and measure the level of objectives
achieved. While the evaluators have access to detailed program materials and resources for a
broader understanding of the program goals and activities, being informed of the challenges at
the local level was also instrumental to the design of the evaluation.
Given IPOPCORM’s approach, Chen’s theory-driven outcome evaluation seems an
Kodaseet-Winn
11
appropriate choice for the IPOPCORM project as it takes into account causal mechanisms and
implementation proceses in assessing program effectiveness. It also addresses the hows and
whys of program success and failure to develop intervention changes as needed. In Chen, three
significant advantages to using a theory-driven outcome evaluation are defined as: (1) it serves
accountability and program improvement needs; (2) it can comment on construct validity; and
(3) it can increase internal validity. The guidelines for conducting a theory-driven outcome
evaluation also relate to the IPOPCORM project.
The first guideline for the theory is establishing common understanding between
stakeholders and evaluators of what the theory is and what it does. Steps and roles of each party
are defined with dialogue addressing what the evaluative information will be used for. In the case
of IPOPCORM, it can determine improved interventions. Dialogue among stakeholders or
parties involved can address whether an efficacy or effectiveness evaluation should be conducted
and can determine what the program theory is or should be. Given the varying groups of
stakeholders in Cuyo from the youth to the fishers to barangay officials, dialogue contributes to
understanding the evaluation process and its information use which may result in more
participatory activities.
The second guideline clarifies the stakeholders’ theory, should there be one, and whether
it differs from the program theory. Typically, program theory is the basis of a theory-driven
outcome evaluation with a focus on the change model which examines the relationship between
the intervention, the determinants, and the outcomes (Chen, 2005).
The third guideline addresses constructing the research design and data collection
methods. Because theory-driven outcome evaluation depends on contextual information, it
utilizes a mixed method approach to data collection, linking quantitative and qualitative data in
Kodaseet-Winn
12
order to gain a holistic view of a program (Chen, 2005). Given the different stakeholders in the
IPOPCORM project and focus on changing behavior, collection and analysis of data might result
in new program goals and activities or identify some variable that was not previously identified
which contributes to individuals not changing behavior.
Chen (2005) also defines two types of causal mechanisms that impact the relationship
between the intervention, the determinants, and the outcomes. These are mediating and
moderating. The mediating causal mechanism is defined as a component that intervenes in the
relationship between two other components. For example, in the IPOPCORM framework, if the
determinant mediates the relationship between the intervention and the outcome, the intervention
cannot affect the outcome unless it also affects the determinant. The determinate should have the
ability to change the outcome which makes the selection of a determinant a crucial part of the
program’s performance. If the study tours conducted by IPOPCORM do not help teach the value
of the marine environment, then individuals will continue using illegal fish practices, thus the
study tour intervention must affect the determinant of valuing the marine environment for the
outcome of not doing illegal fishing practices to occur.
The second type of causal mechanism is moderating which represents a relationship
between program components enabled by a third factor. The presence of the third factor
manifests the relationship between the two components, and when it is gone, the relationship
dissolves (Chen, 2005). For IPOPCORM, the moderating causal mechanism might be the family
having a zero income or no food to eat but are participating in the study tours and continuing to
employ illegal fishing practices. When the family has some income and food to eat and
participate in the study tours, they will abstain from employing illegal fish practices.
Kodaseet-Winn
13
CONCLUSION
With the change theory of Marten and the IPOPCORM’s framework comprehensively
addressed to include future evaluation processes, findings through the use of mix methods will
provide a clear and concise story of what is working and not working for IPOPCORM. The
mixed methods approach should also provide detailed information that is not otherwise seen or
discussed openly with ASF staff when conducting meetings or educational activities. The
hypothesis of determining whether integrated approaches yield bigger payoffs than single sector
approaches can already be seen in the program’s change and action models which contribute to
the measurement of goal or objective attainment. An example is the number of programs that
engage youth, specifically, the theater and music performance activities and the Miss Cuyo
pageant all of focus on scholarship of marine eco-system sustainment. Overall, the IPOPCORM
approach is comprehensive and conducive to implementing changes via the evaluation findings.
While IPOPCORM initiatives are clearly focused with defined goals and objectives, evaluation
outcomes can also identify benefits that the program has not addressed.
For example, while Cuyo does not have the family planning and reproductive health
component of IPOPCORM, individuals learning about the value of the marine environment and
negative outcomes of over-fishing due to population pressures may begin to think about family
planning and seek out contraceptives. While parents may not employ family planning practices,
they can begin dialogue with their children, who may be nearing child-bearing age, on family
planning practices as they see the impact of population growth, fertility, on the marine ecosystem. The merging of ASF’s and PFPI’s missions allowed for the development of a Food
Security Model replicable in other communities facing the same dilemma as the Philippines.
###
Kodaseet-Winn
14
Kodaseet-Winn
15