phi: malolos-clark railway project (pfr 1) · 2020. 3. 23. · social monitoring report semi-annual...

Social Monitoring Report

Semi-annual Report (April - September 2020) December 2020

PHI: Malolos-Clark Railway Project (PFR 1)

Prepared by the Department of Transportation for the Asian Development Bank.

This social monitoring report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (as of 14 December 2020)

Currency unit – Philippine Peso (₱) P1.00 = $ 0.0207 $1.00 = ₱ 48.1410

ABBREVIATIONS

ADB – Asian Development Bank AH – Affected Household AP – Affected Person CIS – Customer Information Sheet CF – Community Facilitator CP – Contract Package DED – Detailed Engineering Design DHSUD – Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development DOLE – Department of Labor and Employment DOTr – Department of Transportation DPWH – Department of Public Works and Highways ECQ – Enhanced Community Quarantine EMA – External Monitoring Agent FAQ – Frequently Asked Question FGD – Focus Group Discussion GBV – Gender-Based Violence GC – General Consultant GCQ – General Community Quarantine GCR – Greater Capital Railway GFI – Government Financing Institution GIS – Geographic Information System GR – Grievance Redress GRM – Grievance Redress Mechanism HUDCC – Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council

(currently DHSUD) IA – Implementing Agency IEC – Information, Education, And Communication ISF – Informal Settler Family JDT – JICA Design Team JICA – Japan International Cooperation Agency KII – Key Informant Interview KSA – Key Shelter Agency LBP – Land Bank of the Philippines LDP – Livelihood Development Program LGU – Local Government Unit LHB – Local Housing Board LIAC – Local Inter-agency Committee LRIP – Livelihood Restoration and Improvement Program MCRP – Malolos-Clark Railway Project MOA – Memorandum Of Agreement NGA – National Government Agency NHA – National Housing Authority

NoT – Notice of Taking NTC – Notice to Compensate O&M – Operations and Maintenance OTB – Offer to Buy OTC – Offer to Compensate PhP – Philippines Peso PIAC – Project Inter-Agency Committee PIB – Project Information Brochure PMO – Project Management Office PNR – Philippine National Railways PROW – Project Right-of-Way RAP – Resettlement Action Plan RCS – Replacement Cost Study RIMC – RAP Implementation Management Committee ROW – Right-of-Way RRAP – Relocation and Resettlement Action SCM – Stakeholder Consultation Meeting SES – Socio-Economic Survey SHFC – Social Housing Finance Corporation SPS – Safeguard Policy Statement TWG – Technical Working Group

GLOSSARY

Affected business – All types of businesses regardless of scale whose normal operation will be severely or marginally affected by the project.

Affected households (AHs)

– All households whose residence will be affected by the project.

Affected persons (APs)

– All persons or entity who are residing, using, or operating, at the time of cut-off-date, and/or owning a property in an area which will be acquired for project right-of-way, regardless of type of displacement and severity of impact.

Informal settler family (ISF)

– A household that does not have a legal or legal right to own the land they occupy, homeless or do not own property anywhere else. This may include structure owners and renters, rent-free occupants, caretakers, and sharers.

JICA Design Team – Refers to the team of international and Philippine consultants engaged by JICA to assist DOTr in undertaking surveys, conducting interviews with affected persons, and drafting resettlement plans and policies.

Landowner – Refers to legal owners of affected land that will be acquired for the project.

Non-landowner – Refers to project affected persons who responded that they do not own the land during the SES. These include structure owners (with or without permission from the landowner), renters, sharers, rent-free occupants and caretakers (in both formal and informal structures), regardless of income.

PNR Right-of-Way (PNR ROW)

– Refers to the existing right-of-way owned by the PNR.

Project ROW (PROW) – Refers to the ROW of this project. Replacement cost – The cost necessary to replace the affected structure or

improvement with a similar asset based on current market prices. The cost of replacing lost assets and incomes includes cost of transactions, repair cost and other associated costs for the restoration of residual property, if any.

Temporary accommodation

– An interim site or rental unit where the APs will move temporarily while awaiting completion of permanent relocation site.

Validation – The process of verifying or checking the accuracy of census information provided by the APs during the preparation of the RAP.

NOTE

(i) The fiscal year (FY) of the Government of Philippines and the Department of Transportation ends on {31 December} y

(ii) In this report, "$" refers to United States dollars unless otherwise stated}

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ I

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................................... 1

LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................... 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 2

I. CONTEXT OF THE SOCIAL MONITORING REPORT.................................................................... 6

A. PROJECT DETAILS ............................................................................................................................... 6 B. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF THE SEMI-ANNUAL SOCIAL MONITORING REPORT ......................................... 6 C. MONITORING INDICATORS AND PARAMETERS ........................................................................................ 7 D. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH ............................................................................................................. 8

II. SEMI-ANNUAL MONITORING RESULTS ....................................................................................... 9

A. FINALIZATION OF RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLANS .................................................................................. 9 1. Updating of the Detailed Engineering Design Resettlement Action Plans ................................... 9 2. Verification of the Replacement Cost Study ............................................................................... 10 3. Conduct of Surveys on Landlocked Areas .................................................................................. 11 4. Establishment of the Monitoring System ..................................................................................... 12

B. DISBURSEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ASSISTANCE ......................................................................... 12 1. Preparatory Works for the Issuance of Required Documents .................................................... 12 2. Establishment of the Entitlement Distribution Mechanism .......................................................... 14

C. CONDUCTING CONSULTATION, PARTICIPATION, AND DISCLOSURE DURING THE PANDEMIC .................... 14 D. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM .................................................................................................... 22

1. Status of Central Hotline and Local Help Desks ......................................................................... 22 2. Launch of the Mobile Help Desk ................................................................................................. 22 3. Status of the GRM Team Composition and Capacity Building ................................................... 24 4. Grievances Recorded ................................................................................................................. 26 5. Resources Devoted to the GRM ................................................................................................. 27

E. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR LAND ACQUISITION AND RESETTLEMENT ..................................... 28 1. MCRP Project Management Office ............................................................................................. 28 2. Partner Institutions ...................................................................................................................... 29 3. General Consultant ..................................................................................................................... 30

F. LIVELIHOOD RESTORATION AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ................................................................... 31

III. SAFEGUARDS PERFORMANCE MONITORING ......................................................................... 34

A. SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE TO RAP REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................... 34 B. ISSUES IDENTIFIED IN THIS REPORTING PERIOD .................................................................................. 35

IV. PROPOSED MAJOR ITEMS OF FOCUS FOR THE NEXT REPORT .......................................... 39

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE II-1: STATUS OF THE DED RAP SUBMISSION ............................................................................. 9

TABLE II-2: STATUS OF THE DED RAP SUBMISSION ........................................................................... 10

TABLE II-3: RESULTS OF THE DESK REVIEW ON THE LOSS OF ACCESS ........................................ 11

TABLE II-4: RESULTS OF VALIDATION THROUGH SITE INSPECTION ................................................ 12

TABLE II-5: STATUS OF LOCATION MAP PREPARATION ..................................................................... 13

TABLE II-6: STATUS OF NOT REVISION AND UPDATING ..................................................................... 13

TABLE II-7: RESULTS OF PARCELLARY SURVEY REVIEW .................................................................. 13

TABLE II-8: RESULTS OF AS-BUILT SURVEY REVIEW ......................................................................... 14

TABLE II-9: SUMMARY OF SECOND SCMS CONDUCTED FOR THE MALOLOS-CLARK SECTION .. 16

TABLE II-10: ISSUES AND CONCERNS RAISED DURING SECOND SCMS OF THE DED PHASE ..... 16

TABLE II-11: STATUS OF ONLINE AND OFFLINE STRATEGIES ADOPTED PER AFFECTED LGU ... 24

TABLE II-12: COMPOSITION OF THE CENTRAL GRM TEAM ................................................................ 25

TABLE II-13: STATUS OF RECEIVED GRIEVANCES AND INQUIRIES .................................................. 26

TABLE II-14: TYPE OF RECEIVED GRIEVANCES AND INQUIRIES ....................................................... 26

TABLE II-15: STATUS OF CASES RECEIVED THROUGH THE REMOTE HELP DESK ........................ 27

TABLE II-16: PERSONNEL STATUS OF THE MCRP PMO ...................................................................... 28

TABLE II-17: STATUS OF AGREED INSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................ 30

TABLE II-18: COMPOSITION OF THE GCR RAP TEAM .......................................................................... 31

TABLE II-19: SUMMARY OF SECOND FGDS WITH AFFECTED BUSINESS OWNERS ....................... 32

TABLE II-20: MAIN FINDINGS DISCOVERED DURING SECOND FGDS WITH AFFECTED BUSINESS

OWNERS ............................................................................................................................................ 33

TABLE III-1: KEY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 35

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE II-1: EXAMPLE OF THE ONLINE STRATEGY FOR THE MOBILE HELP DESK ....................... 23

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. The main objective of the semi-annual social monitoring report is to assess the progress between April and September 2020 in updating detailed engineering design (DED) resettlement action plans (RAPs) and evaluate the conduct of relevant pre-implementation activities in consideration of the Guidelines for Environmental and Social Considerations (2010) of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the Safeguards Policy Statement (SPS) of the Asian Development Bank (ADB 2009). This report also identifies key issues and challenges on the timely and effective implementation of resettlement planning and enumerates mitigating actions taken by the Department of Transportation (DOTr). 2. In this reporting period, the DOTr has conducted the following activities in compliance with social safeguards covenants:

(i) Updating of Resettlement Action Plans. A major achievement for this reporting period was that the DOTr has obtained ADB approval on three updated DED RAPs, i.e., RAP for contract package (CP) N-04 and N-05 on 16 June 2020 and landowner and non-landowner RAPs for CP N-01 to N-03 on 28 August 2020. However, the two DED RAPs for CP N-01 to N-03 were approved by ADB under the condition that the valuation of affected lots and structures appraised by the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP), a government financing institution (GFI) needs to be reflected in the RAPs by the end of October 2020. For the Solis-Blumentritt Section, landowner and non-landowner DED RAPs for CP S-01 have been reviewed by the DOTr. The non-landowner RAP will be updated by the Greater Capital Railway (GCR), the DOTr`s general consultant (GC), while the landowner RAP will be updated by the DOTr with assistance of the JICA Design Team (JDT). The two updated RAPs are expected to be submitted to ADB at the end of October 2020.

(ii) Verification of the Replacement Cost Study. To appraise the values of affected

land, structures, improvements, and trees and crops located in the Malolos-Clark Section which were evaluated through the replacement cost study (RCS), the DOTr appointed the LBP as a GFI and conducted appraisal activities in all of the eight local government units (LGUs) concerned in the Malolos-Clark Section. As of 30 September 2020, site appraisal on all of the affected land lots and structures in the section has been completed except ongoing appraisal in San Fernando City, Pampanga. By the end of October 2020, the LBP will prepare and submit appraisal reports to the DOTr as per the bilateral agreement. Upon receipt of the reports, the DOTr will update both landowner and non-landowner DED RAPs for CP N-01 to N-03, which were approved by ADB on 28 August 2020.

(iii) Conduct of Surveys on Landlocked Areas. To ensure the compliance with the

social guidelines of ADB and JICA, the DOTr prepared an inventory of 157 project-affected roads in CP N-01 to N-03 and assessed the potential loss of existing access due to the project. The DOTr in partnership with the Philippine National Railways (PNR) and the local government units (LGUs) conducted a joint site inspection in August 2020 to assess the seven access roads in Calumpit, Apalit, San Fernando, and Angeles. As a result, it was found that all of the seven access roads would be permanently affected by project activities. The DOTr will develop concrete measures for all of the possible landlocked areas to ensure that no

affected persons (APs) to ensure that there will be access and an alternative road provided to them in lieu of the closed roads.

(iv) Establishment of the Monitoring System. As for internal monitoring on land acquisition and resettlement, the Project Management Office (PMO) of the Malolos-Clark Railway Project (MCRP) has regularly held internal meetings and submitted three quarterly social monitoring reports and one semi-annual social monitoring report during this reporting period. For external monitoring, the DOTr has undertaken the rebidding process for the external monitoring agent (EMA) due to the low participation rate of bidders and planned to complete the bid award by October 2020.

(v) Disbursement of Compensation and Assistance. In preparation for the issuance of the notice of taking (NoT), the DOTr has completed the creation of location maps for 1,712 affected lots in the Malolos-Clark Section. In September 2020, the DOTr completed revision and updating of 1,073 draft NoT for Malolos to Angeles and prepared location maps of structures and trees for APs in Mabalacat to be attached on the notice to compensate (NTC). For the Solis-Blumentritt Section, the DOTr has completed the review of parcellary and as-built surveys conducted by the JDT. The DOTr and PNR signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) in September 2020 with the LBP to establish a RAP entitlements distribution mechanism for the project which shall be effective until all eligible APs receive their respective cash entitlements and designate the LBP as the distribution agent. The DOTr interviewed the first batch of 50 APs in September to fill out the customer information sheets (CIS) which are required to create cash cards for compensation. The actual distribution of cash cards for the first batch of APs in Mabalacat is expected to be implemented in mid-October 2020.

(vi) Consultation, Participation, and Disclosure. The second round of stakeholder consultation meetings (SCMs) for non-landowners at the DED stage which was cancelled due to the government`s movement restrictions has been conducted by adopting alternative or supplementary consultation mechanisms and observing each LGU’s and the DOTr’s COVID-19 health and safety protocols. The blended modalities are the following: (i) small-scale meetings, (ii) distribution and collection of project information brochures (PIBs), (iii) phone consultations and interviews, and (iv) the combination of different alternative consultation modalities. As a result of PIB distribution and collection activities, a total of 1,706 non-landowner affected households (AHs) included in the master list expressed their opinions and preferences for relocation. In updating the non-landowner DED RAP for the Manila PO Section, the DOTr prepared the conduct of the second round of SCMs for non-landowners in close coordination with Manila LGU throughout August and September 2020. Upon agreement of the Local Inter-Agency Committee (LIAC), the schedules for the conduct of the second SCMs for non-landowners in the Manila PO Section will be disseminated in October 2020.

(vii) Grievance Redress Mechanism. Due to the government’s ongoing movement restrictions under the enhanced community quarantine (ECQ) and general community quarantine (GCQ), the operation of local help desks for the Malolos-Clark Section has been suspended since March 2020 while the establishment of local help desks in the Solis-Blumentritt has been postponed. The central hotline operates continuously to accommodate grievances and inquiries of APs from both sections. The Central GRM Team of the MCRP PMO rolled out the mobile help

4

desk for the Malolos-Clark Section in July and for the Solis-Blumentritt Section in September. This fills the void in the local help desks and ensures that APs are fully informed of the change in the project timeline and able to freely lodge their complaints concerning the project. During this reporting period, a total of 107 grievances or inquiries (100 RAP-related, two environment-related, and five other issues) were received through the central hotline and mobile help desk, 103 cases of which were resolved as of 30 September 2020 within an average of 4 days upon receipt. In particular, three cases were received through the mobile help desk; with one case resolved, the two pending grievances will be followed up in the next month. To improve the GRM operation, the DOTr will conduct the GRM assessment and risk communication workshop in October 2020 and develop an integrated GRM database by early next year.

(viii) Institutional Arrangements for Land Acquisition and Resettlement. As of September 2020, the MCRP PMO has filled a total of 77 positions including 26 positions dedicated to the implementation of resettlement and land acquisition. For capacity building of the current RAP related staff, the MCRP PMO has conducted four online training sessions. Regarding partnership for the RAP implementation, the DOTr has transmitted a draft MOA for the creation of the RAP Implementation and Management Committee (RIMC) to all concerned LGUs and aim to complete its legal pass and signing of all signatories by the end of the year. Almost all LGUs except the three LGUs of Apalit, Minalin, and Sto. Tomas have completed the LIAC creation through an executive order (EO) signed by each mayor. These three LGUs will reactivate the Local Housing Board (LHB) in lieu of the LIAC creation. Upon the completion of documentary requirements by the National Housing Authority (NHA) in September, the DOTr`s fund transfer to NHA for the resettlement activities will be implemented in the following month.

(ix) Livelihood Restoration and Improvement Program. The MOA for Implementation of Kabuhayan Program between Mabalacat LGU and the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) was concluded in June 2020. The DOLE has transferred funds to the LGU for the procurement of Nego Karts (Negosyo sa Kariton) and equipment required for the livelihood restoration and improvement program (LRIP). The DOTr has also prepared a supplemental MOA to transfer funds to the LGU for the conduct of the financial management training and vocational training with starter kits and the provision of transportation allowances to trainees. In preparation of the DED RAP for CP N-01 to N-03 for non-landowner, the DOTr conducted additional focus group discussions (FGDs) with business owners in six affected LGUs in June 2020. The FGDs were conducted through phone interviews due to the government`s movement restrictions. For the Solis-Blumentritt Section, the DOTr has submitted to the Social Housing Finance Corporation (SHFC) an improved validation tool for the socio-economic profile of affected informal settler families (ISFs) which will be the basis for the design of the LRIP. For the following months, the DOTr plans to conduct a livelihood workshop with SHFC to harmonize the DOTr`s LRIP and SHFC`s livelihood development program (LDP) and proceed with coordination meetings with the concerned LGUs to discuss the LRIP planning.

3. During this reporting period, the ongoing pandemic has hampered the preparation and updating of DED RAPs which require site activities such as RAP surveys, relocation site selection, validation of DED master list of APs, public consultations, and LBP appraisal. In response, the

DOTr has closely coordinated with LGUs and KSAs to facilitate the conduct of required field activities in compliance with health and safety protocols. In the next reporting period, the DOTr will focus on (i) full-fledged RAP implementation especially in the project`s priority areas, including Mabalacat LGU; (ii) revision of DED RAPs for CP N-01 to N-03 based on LBP appraisal reports; and, (iii) submission of landowner and non-landowner DED RAPs for the Solis-Blumentritt Section.

4. There were no significant safeguards issues identified during this reporting period. For the next reporting, the focus will be on the progress of the implementation of the approved RAPs including milestones achieved in the following areas: (i) delivery of entitlements, (ii) grievance redress mechanism, and (iii) the livelihood restoration and improvement program.

6

I. CONTEXT OF THE SOCIAL MONITORING REPORT

A. Project Details

1. The Government of the Philippines (GoP) requested the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in the provision of financial assistance to the Malolos-Clark Railway Project (MCRP) also known as North-South Commuter Railway Extension Project (NSCR-Ex). The NSCR-Ex has two sections: the Malolos-Clark-Clark International Airport (CIA) (Clark Extension), and the Solis-Blumentritt-Calamba (Calamba Extension). The project affected locations in the Solis-Blumentritt segment within the City of Manila Partial Operation (Manila PO) section is covered in this Social Monitoring Report. The project will have impacts associated with the clearance of project right-of-way (ROW) involving land taking, improvements of non-landowners, trees and crops of people residing within PNR existing ROW. The impacts have been identified and measures to addressed them have been included in the approved RAPs within the socio-economic context of affected people in the locations and present agreed measures to fully mitigate impacts within a time-bound plan.

B. Objective and Scope of the Semi-annual Social Monitoring Report

5. The main objective of the semi-annual social monitoring is to assess the progress in updating detailed engineering design (DED) resettlement action plans (RAPs) and evaluate the conduct of relevant pre-implementation activities. The semi-annual social monitoring also identifies key issues and challenges on the timely and effective implementation of resettlement planning. The specific objectives are the following:

(i) Ascertain whether the social safeguards plan has met its objectives and whether the objectives were suited to the conditions encountered by affected persons (APs);

(ii) Assess the extent to which consultation and disclosure activities are inclusive, accessible, and effective in conveying key information on RAPs and there are opportunities for APs to participate in decision making involving project components that affect them such as resettlement and livelihood restoration activities;

(iii) Review the effectiveness of the grievance redress mechanism (GRM), its accessibility, and responsiveness in addressing grievances and issues raised from APs; and

(iv) Suggest modifications to the implementation procedure of the social safeguards plan, if necessary, to achieve the objectives of RAPs.

6. This semi-annual social report covers safeguards compliance and internal monitoring activities conducted from April to September 2020. The report specifies monitoring results and relevant recommendations in the following aspects: (i) finalization of the RAPs, (ii) disbursement of compensation and assistance, (iii) consultation, participation, and disclosure, (iv) GRM, (v) institutional arrangements for land acquisition and resettlement, and (vi) livelihood restoration and improvement program (LRIP).

C. Monitoring Indicators and Parameters

7. Qualitative and quantitative data were obtained in preparing the semi-annual social monitoring report by adopting the following parameters and monitoring indicators:

(i) Adequacy of Resettlement Planning

• Status of the updating and finalization of DED RAPs

• RAP compliance with the policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

• Availability and adequacy of the socio-economic survey (SES) database based on DED surveys

• Verification of the replacement cost study (RCS)

• Establishment of the internal monitoring system

(ii) Delivery of Entitlements

• Compensation disbursed according to the entitlement matrix

• Entitlements disbursed on time and before displacement

(iii) Effectiveness of the Consultation and Disclosure Process

• Consultations held as scheduled including meetings and community activities

• Knowledge of entitlements by displaced persons

• Consultation meetings exclusively with women and with vulnerable groups

• Dissemination of project information brochures to APs in a local language

(iv) Accessibility of Grievance Redress Mechanism

• GRM accessible to APs

• APs familiar with the GRM system including the local help desk

• Information on the resolution of grievances

• Proper communication of GRM decisions to PAPs

• Grievances addressed as scheduled

(v) Established Institutional Arrangements for the RAP Implementation

• Establishment of the Project Management Office (PMO) of the Malolos-Clark Railway Project (MCRP) with required staffing for the RAP implementation

• Adequacy of knowledge and experience of the MCRP PMO staff for the RAP implementation

• Capacity building measures of the MCRP PMO staff undertaken

• Establishment of the Project Inter-Agency Committee (PIAC)

• Signing of a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with key shelter agencies

• Establishment of the RAP Implementation and Management Committee (RIMC)

• Establishment of the GRM according to RAP provisions

• Funds allocated to resettlement agencies as scheduled

(vi) Livelihood and Income Restoration

• Inclusion of PAPs in rehabilitation programs (women, men, and vulnerable groups).

• Availability of vocational/entrepreneurial training

• Availability of soft loans for PAPs

• Adequacy of vocational/entrepreneurial training

8

• Availability of employment activities

D. Methodological Approach 8. Guided by the monitoring indicators and parameters, this report was produced based on the documentation of the DOTr`s general consultant (GC), the Greater Capital Railway (GCR) and with inputs from the MCRP PMO staff on the status of RAP activities. The following data gathering methods were employed: 9. Review of available data. The review of available project-related documents, minutes of meetings with various project stakeholders, RAP survey data including master lists of APs, the central GRM database, and written agreements concluded between the DOTr and key shelter agencies (KSAs) or government financing institution (GFI) in a form of MOA or letters were the basis of the analysis. The documents submitted by the JICA Design Team (JDT) to the DOTr were useful to verify the status of the preparation of the DED RAPs and provided an update on the implementation of public consultations. The document review provided a balance between qualitative and quantitative data and insights into the existing resettlement and program strategies.

10. Field visit and consultation with key stakeholders. In this reporting period, site activities were conducted to: (i) verify the RCS on affected land, structures, improvements, and trees and crops; (ii) assess possible impacts on landlocked areas; and, (iii) consult with non-landowner APs as part of the second round of stakeholder consultation meetings (SCMs).

11. Interview with affected persons. Due to the government`s movement restrictions and health and safety risks, some consultation activities including SCMs and focus group discussion (FGD) were implemented through the adoption of blended communication modes such as phone interviews.

II. SEMI-ANNUAL MONITORING RESULTS A. Finalization of Resettlement Action Plans

1. Updating of the Detailed Engineering Design Resettlement Action Plans 12. The DOTr submitted the updated DED RAP for contract package (CP) N-04 and N-05 to ADB on 23 March 2020 after conducting a supplementary SES interviews with 27 affected persons through phone interview. The first batch of the DED RAPs was approved by ADB on 16 June 2020. 13. The DOTr submitted the updated landowner and non-landowner DED RAPs for CP N-01 to N-03 to ADB on 19 June 2020 and 24 July 2020, respectively. On 28 August 2020, the two DED RAPs were approved by ADB under the condition that the valuation of affected lots and structures appraised by the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP), the GFI, will be reflected in the RAPs by the end of October 2020. 14. For the Manila PO Section, the DOTr has thus far updated the landowner DED RAP with assistance of the JDT and the non-landowner DED RAP with assistance of the GCR. Due to data discrepancies, the JDT re-submitted to the DOTr its revised non-landowner DED RAP on 11 September 2020 and will submit its revision for the landowner DED RAP in October 2020. As of 30 September 2020, both RAPs are expected to be submitted by the DOTr to ADB by end of October 2020. Table II-1 summarizes the status of the DED RAP submission.

Table II-1: Status of the DED RAP Submission Alignment RAP Batch JDT`s RAP

Submission Date

Status (as of 30 Sep 2020)

Malolos-Clark Section

DED RAP for CP N-04 and N-05 (Mabalacat)

14 Feb 2020 • The DOTr submitted the updated DED RAP to ADB on 23 March 2020.

• ADB approved the DED RAP on June 16.

Landowner DED RAP for CP N-01 to N-03

3 Mar 2020 • The DOTr submitted the updated DED RAP to ADB on 19 June 2020.

• ADB approved the DED RAP on 28 August 2020 on the condition that it is further updated after the LBP completes field appraisal activities and submits appraisal reports by October 2020.

Non-landowner DED RAP for CP N-01 to N-03

6 Mar 2020 • The DOTr submitted the updated DED RAP to ADB on 24 July 2020.

• ADB approved the DED RAP on 28 August 2020 on the condition that it is further updated after the LBP completes field appraisal activities and submits appraisal reports by October 2020.

Solis-Blumentritt Section

Landowner DED RAP for Manila Partial Operation

13 Mar 2020 (Revised draft to be submitted in October 2020)

• The DOTr will submit the updated DED RAP to ADB at the end of October 2020.

• The DED RAP is expected to be approved by ADB in early December 2020.

Non-landowner DED RAP for

3 Apr 2020 • The DOTr will submit the updated DED RAP to ADB at the end of October 2020.

10

Alignment RAP Batch JDT`s RAP Submission

Date


Manila Partial Operation

(Revised draft submitted on 11 Sep 2020)

• The DED RAP is expected to be approved by ADB in early December.

Source: DOTr and GCR.

2. Verification of the Replacement Cost Study

15. The Landbank of the Philippines, a government financial institution (GFI) was engaged by the DOTr to verify the values of affected land and improvements indicated in the Replacement Cost Survey (RCS). The RCS was the basis of the budget prepared to compensate affected people in the Malolos-Clark Section. The field activities for LBP’s appraisal were scheduled in April 2020, but because of the movement restrictions, the commencement of LBPs work was pushed back to June 2020 due to movement restrictions under the enhanced community quarantine (ECQ) and the subsequent general community quarantine (GCQ). 16. In compliance with the government`s COVID-19 health and safety protocols, the LBP, DOTr, the PNR, and GCR have embarked on appraisal activities in June 2020. On 15-16 June 2020, a total of 85 affected structures in Mabalacat were appraised by the LBP. Throughout July and September 2020, the parties conducted full-scale appraisal activities in eight local government units (LGUs) of the Malolos-Clark Section. As of 30 September 2020, on-site appraisal on all of affected land lots and structures in the section has been completed except ongoing appraisal in San Fernando. By the end of October 2020, the LBP will prepare and submit appraisal reports to the DOTr as per bilateral agreement. Upon receipt of the reports, the DOTr will update both landowner and non-landowner DED RAPs for CP N-01 to N-03, as approved by ADB on 28 August 2020. For the Solis-Blumentritt Section, the DOTr will coordinate with the LBP to plan the implementation of appraisal activities in Manila. Table II-2 summarizes the results of appraisal activities conducted in the Malolos-Clark Section during this reporting period.

Table II-2: Status of the Appraisal Report Submission LGU Contract

Package Batch On-site

Appraisal Date

Expected Date of LBP

Report Submission


Mabalacat N-04 & N-05

3 15-16 Jun & 2 Sep 2020

18 Sep 2020 (complete)

Appraisal report submitted to the DOTr by the LBP

Minalin N-01 & N-02

1 8 Jul 2020



Sto. Tomas N-02 9-10Jul 2020



Malolos N-01 2 3, 7, 8, 10 Sep 2020

31 Oct 2020 Appraisal report under preparation by the LBP

Apalit N-01 10-11Sep 2020


Calumpit N-01 5 14-18 Sep 2020


Angeles N-03 21-25 Sep 2020


LGU Contract Package

Batch On-site Appraisal

Date

Expected Date of LBP

Report Submission


Sapang Balen (San Fernando)

N-03 12 Oct 2020

1 Nov 2020 Appraisal report under preparation by the LBP

San Fernando

N-02 & N-03

4 28 Sep-16 Oct 2020

31 Oct 2020 Ongoing appraisal activities


3. Conduct of Surveys on Landlocked Areas 17. In compliance with the social safeguards guidelines of ADB and JICA, the project will provide alternative access routes to and from landlocked areas generated by project activities, particularly during construction works in case that APs temporarily or permanently lose access to their residence or place of livelihood. The DOTr prepared an inventory of project-affected roads in CP N-01 to N-03 and assessed the potential loss of existing access due to the project. 18. Based on the desk review, a total of 157 access roads in the seven affected LGUs of the Malolos-Clark Section were assessed whether APs might retain, temporarily lose access or permanently lose access. As presented in Table II-3, 78 out of 157 access roads (49.7%) are expected to be maintained even during construction, while two (1.3%) and 71 access roads (45.2%) are foreseen to be temporarily and permanently affected by this project. The seven remaining access roads (4.5%) are subject to further assessment through site inspection.

Table II-3: Results of the Desk Review on the Loss of Access Contract Package

LGU Classification Assessment on the Loss of Access Total

Public Private Others To be Maintained

Temporary Loss

Permanent Loss

To be Further

Assessed

CP N-01

Malolos 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 6

Calumpit 13 5 12 19 1 10 1 30

Apalit 4 0 6 4 0 5 1 10

Minalin 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2

CP N-02

Sto. Tomas 3 0 6 5 0 4 0 9

San Fernando

26* 7 28 26 1 30 4 61

CP N-03

San Fernando

7 1 6 5 0 9 0 14

Angeles 16 1 8 12 0 12 1 25

Total 72 18 67 78 2 71 7 157

% 45.9 11.5 42.7 49.7 1.3 45.2 4.5 100.0 Note: Four out of 26 access roads in San Fernando are presumed to be public.


19. With an understanding that the result of the desk review will be validated, the DOTr and GCR discussed the following concerns during the 27 May 2020 coordination meeting: (i) the necessity of site inspection for potential landlocked areas; (ii) the assessment criteria for landlocked areas; (iii) the composition of a joint site inspection team; (iv) the expected activities during site inspection; and, (v) the timeline for site inspection. On 20 and 25 August 2020, the

12

DOTr, PNR, and LGU subsequently conducted joint site inspection of the seven access roads in Calumpit, Apalit, San Fernando, and Angeles, which required further site assessment. The site inspection was aimed to evaluate whether APs are expected to temporarily or permanently lose the access to their residence or place of livelihood due to project activities. It was found that all of the seven access roads would be permanently affected by project activities. The DOTr will further validate the desk review results of the other 150 access roads through site inspection when viable under the government`s health and safety protocols and develop concrete measures for the possible landlocked areas to ensure that all APs will have alternative access roads in lieu of the roads that will be closed. Table II-4 summarizes the results of validation of the seven access roads through site inspections.

Table II-4: Results of Validation Through Site Inspections Contract Package

LGU Assessment on the Loss of Access Total

To be Maintained

Temporary Loss

Permanent Loss

CP N-01 Calumpit 0 0 1 1

Apalit 0 0 1 1

CP N-02 San Fernando 0 0 4 4

CP N-03 Angeles 0 0 1 1

Total 0 0 7 7

% 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 Source: DOTr and GCR.

4. Establishment of the Monitoring System 20. As for internal monitoring on land acquisition and resettlement, the RAP Team of the MCRP PMO has held internal meetings once a month to (i) supervise and monitor the RAP implementation, (ii) share key resettlement data, (iii) discuss pending issues related to the RAP implementation, and (iv) prepare required RAP monitoring reports. Apart from monthly RAP meetings, the sub-teams for both sections under the RAP Team conducted regular meetings to discuss the progress and pending issues pertaining to RAP activities under the ECQ and GCQ. To fulfill reporting requirements, the MCRP PMO has submitted Quarterly Social Monitoring Report No. 1 (September-December 2019), No. 2 (January-March 2020), and No. 3 (April-July 2020) to JICA and Semi-annual Social Monitoring Report No. 1 (September 2019-March 2020) to ADB. 21. As defined by ADB SPS of 2009, this project is classified as Category A and requires external monitoring. The external monitoring agent (EMA) was under the procurement process as of June 2020 but due to the low participation rate of bidders has required a rebidding of the consultancy services. Once the bid award is completed in October 2020, EMA is expected to report to the DOTr and verify RAP monitoring indicators and provide advice on safeguard compliance issues. B. Disbursement of Compensation and Assistance

1. Preparatory Works for the Issuance of Required Documents 22. In preparation for the issuance of the notice of taking (NoT), the DOTr has completed the creation of location maps for 1,712 affected lots in the Malolos-Clark Section. Subject to the NoT issuance are the (i) 77 lots owned by the central government, government-owned and controlled

corporations, and LGUs and (ii) 1,635 private lots. With reference to control numbers shared by the DOTr, the GCR`s Geographic Information System (GIS) specialist has generated the maps, which are now ready for the NoT issuance to landowners as presented in Table II-5.

Table II-5: Status of Location Map Preparation LGU Completion Date No. of Location Maps Generated for Affected

Lots

Government-owned Lots

Private Lots Total

Malolos 5 Mar 2020 5 124 129

Calumpit 11 Mar 2020 2 152 154

Apalit 11 Mar 2020 5 37 42

Minalin 22 Jun 2020 0 7 7

Sto. Tomas 5 Mar 2020 0 50 50

San Fernando 1 May 2020 60 983 1,043

Angeles 18 Mar 2020 5 282 287

Total 77 1,635 1,712 Source: DOTr and GCR.

23. As of September 2020, the DOTr has completed the revision and updating of 1,073 draft NoT for Malolos to Angeles as presented in Table II-6. In addition, the DOTr prepared location maps of structures and trees for APs in Mabalacat to be attached on the notice to compensate (NTC).

Table II-6: Status of NoT Revision and Updating LGU No. of Revised and Updated NoT

Malolos 98

Calumpit 89

Apalit 30

Minalin 4

Sto. Tomas 33

San Fernando 598

Angeles 221

Total 1,073 Source: DOTr and GCR.

24. Regarding the Solis-Blumentritt Section, the DOTr has completed the review of parcellary and as-built surveys conducted by the JDT during this reporting period. A total of 118 private lots in CP S-01 for acquisition are ready for the NoT issuance. Out of the 118 lots, 42 lots are ready for the issuance of the offer to buy (OTB) in 30 days after the NoT issuance equipped with necessary information and plans. The remaining 76 lots will require further research and additional information for the OTB issuance after the issuance of the NoT and the preparation of sub-division plans as presented in Table II-7. As a result of the review of as-built surveys, 195 private structures and one PNR structure will be affected in CP S-01. Among the private structures, 186 structures are ready for LBP appraisal, while the remaining nine structures are required to be updated for LBP appraisal due to the absence of basic plans as presented in Table II-8.

Table II-7: Results of Parcellary Survey Review

14

Contract Package

City/ Municipality

No. of Private Lots

to be Acquired

No. of Lots Ready for the

NoT Issuance

No. of Lots Ready for the

OTB Issuancea

No. of Lots for

Updatingb

CP S-01 Manila (PO Section)

118 118 42 76

a Lots ready for the OTB issuance refer to the lots whose plans are ready for signature of the JDT’s geodetic

engineer. b Lots for updating refer to the lots which require additional data and sub-division plans for completion.

Source: GCR.

Table II-8: Results of As-built Survey Review Contract Package

City/ Municipality

No. of PNR Structures

No. of Private

Structures

No. of Structures Ready for

LBP Appraisal

No. of Structures Requiring Updatinga

CP S-01 Manila (PO Section)

1 195 186 9

a Basic plans for affected private structures required for LBP appraisal were not submitted by the JDT.

Source: GCR.

2. Establishment of the Entitlement Distribution Mechanism

25. On 7 September 2020, the MOA was signed by the DOTr, PNR, and LBP to establish a RAP entitlements distribution mechanism for both sections which shall be effective until all eligible APs receive their respective cash entitlements and designate the LBP as the distribution agent. The DOTr, GCR, and LBP conducted several rounds of coordination meetings throughout September to discuss the procedure and timeline for the distribution of cash cards to compensate APs in Mabalacat for their asset losses. Mabalacat affected people are occupying the proposed location that has been identified as priority area for construction particularly the depot of the MCRP. The parties concerned agreed to proceed with the issuance and distribution of cash cards by batch. On 17 and 22 September 2020, the DOTr interviewed the first batch of 50 APs. They filled out the customer information sheets (CIS) required to create cash cards for compensation. The actual distribution of cash cards for the first batch of APs in Mabalacat is expected to be implemented in mid-October. C. Conducting Consultation, Participation, and Disclosure during the Pandemic 26. The DED stage second round of SCMs for non-landowners was originally scheduled from 11 to 26 March 2020 in the seven affected LGUs of Malolos, Calumpit, Apalit, Minalin, Sto. Tomas, San Fernando, and Angeles. With the COVID-19 pandemic, the DOTr was able to conduct the second round of SCMs in Apalit and Sto. Tomas LGUs on 11 March 2020 prior to the enforcement of movement restrictions on field activities due the Luzon-wide lockdown imposed by the Government of the Philippines (GOP) under the ECQ status. 27. In order to ensure that APs are informed on resettlement and relocation policies and fully consulted on relocation options, the DOTr adopted an alternative consultation mechanism during the ECQ status and the subsequent GCQ status. To strictly comply with the COVID-19 health and safety protocols of the LGUs in view of the respective community quarantine status and the DOTr`s precautionary measures, blended modalities were adopted as alternative to large-scale physical meetings. The following are the strategies employed: (i) small-scale meetings adherent

to the GOP-IATF’s guidelines for the implementation of community quarantine; (ii) distribution and collection of project information brochures (PIBs); (iii) consultations and interviews via call center/phone; (iv) virtual or online platforms (via Zoom and Skype, etc.); and (v) combination of onsite physical meetings and virtual/online platforms. 28. For physical meetings conducted under the GCQ, the number of attendees was limited. In all LGUs precautionary measures and response against possible infection were strictly observed in all meetings. These include: (i) thermal scanning of the participants; (ii) hands sanitizing; physical distancing through seating apart arrangement; (ii) wearing face masks or shields; and (iv) collecting attendees’ full address and contact details. 29. Information disclosed in the meetings were the following: (i) status and next steps of the project; (ii) compensation criteria for affected structures, improvements, and crops and trees; (iii) information on relocation sites; (iv) proposed housing unit design and mode of amortization payment; (v) relocation options for non-landowner APs; (vi) assistance of the livelihood restoration and improvement program to be provided for each category of APs; and (vii) information on the central hotline and local help desks. The APs had an opportunity during the open forum to express their concerns, issues, inquiries, suggestions, and opinions. Most of the inquiries revolved around the final schedule of the project implementation, final ROW alignment and impact on their properties, location of the relocation site, process of compensation payment, and other available project entitlements. The DOTr and consultants had the time to listen, clarify and respond immediately to all queries, issues and concerns of the APs. They were also advised to contact the DOTr’s GRM Hotlines should they have additional issues and concerns not fully addressed during the meeting. 30. As for LGUs not allowing the conduct of small-scale meetings under the GCQ status, PIBs were distributed to APs by the community facilitators (CFs). For example, the local officials of the Cities of San Fernando and Angeles did not allow the DOTr to conduct physical meetings. This is one of the measures of the local government for preventing the outbreak of additional confirmed COVID-19 cases in the area and ensuring community health and safety. Along with key informant interviews (KIIs) with community leaders including homeowner`s association, barangay officials, and community facilitators, the PIB distribution and collection were implemented in these two LGUs. The alternative method of engaging the affected communities enabled the project to gather feedback on relocation preferences of affected households (AHs) and APs. 31. As a supplementary or alternative consultation tool, the PIB consists of two sections. Similar to the information disclosed during the second round of SCMs, the first section of the PIB contains the following information: (i) project description; (ii) compensation criteria for affected structures, improvements, and trees; (iii) compensation procedure; (iv) relocation options provided for each category of APs; (v) stages of LRIP assistance provided; and (vi) description of the GRM Team and contact information of the central hotline including phone, email, and SMS. 32. The second section of the PIB was devised to collect the latest contact information and feedback from AHs. CFs appointed by Calumpit, San Fernando, and Angeles LGUs trained by the GCR conducted interviews with AHs and filled out this section consisting of fields for the full name of a household head, phone number, email address and Facebook name, municipality, and barangay. The section includes two important questions for AHs such as the willingness for relocation site visits and the preference for relocation options. As a result of PIB distribution and collection activities, a total of 1,706 non-landowner AHs included in the master list expressed their opinions and preferences for relocation. Table II-9 summarizes the results of second SCMs

16

conducted in each affected LGU of the Malolos-Clark Section during the reporting period. Table II-10 presents main issues and concerns raised from APs during the second SCMs.

Table II-9: Summary of Second SCMs Conducted for the Malolos-Clark Section LGU Result

Malolos • Held a physical meeting on 4 June 2020 at Malolos Sports and Convention Center with 37 APs (15 males and 22 females)

• After SCMs, surveyed 23 AHs for their preferences for relocation options and 15 employees and 13 business owners for their needs for skills training and other LRIP assistance

Calumpit • From 15 to 17 June 2020, held coordination meetings with barangay captains that were requested to recruit barangay-based community facilitators to assist the DOTr in the distribution and retrieval of project information brochures and feedback form. They were provided training to ensure that these community facilitators understand and carry out carry out tasks correctly observing health and safety measures against the spreading of the COVID 19.

• In response to the LGU`s preference, held barangay-level second SCMs from 22 to 26 June 2020 at multiple venues with a total of 259 AP attendees (104 males and 155 females)

• Through the combined means, collected feedback from a total of 294 AHs via PIBs on their preferences for relocation options and willingness for relocation site visits

Apalit • Conducted supplementary phone interviews from 23 to 26 June 2020 with 41 AHs to consult them on their preferences for relocation options and willingness for relocation site visits

Minalin • Conducted phone interviews on 11 and 17 June 2020 with three available AHs to figure out their preferences for relocation options and willingness for relocation site visits

• As a last-ditch effort, figured out the whereabouts of two remaining AHs and conducted face-to-face individual meetings on 8 July 2020 at their residence

Sto. Tomas • Conducted supplementary phone interviews from 23 to 26 June 2020 with 25 AHs to consult them on their preferences for relocation options and willingness for relocation site visits

San Fernando • Coordinated with barangay captains from 11 to 18 June2020, trained community facilitators from 15 to18 June 2020, and mobilized 28 community facilitators, two data encoders, and two LGU coordinators to distribute and retrieve PIBs from 15 to 19 June2020

• Collected feedback from a total of 838 AHs via PIBs on their preferences for relocation options and willingness for relocation site visits

Angeles • Coordinated with barangay captains and trained community facilitators on 16-17 June2020 and mobilized 18 community facilitators, four data encoders, and two LGU coordinators for PIB distribution and retrieval on 17-19 June 2020

• Collected feedback from a total of 480 AHs via PIBs on their preferences for relocation options and willingness for relocation site visits

Source: GCR.

Table II-10: Issues and Concerns Raised During Second SCMs of the DED Phase Issue and Concern Response

Alignment and Dimension of the Project Right-of-Way (PROW)

• Expressed concerns that APs might not have access during construction even if

• Several areas including City of San Fernando, Pampanga might face the similar issues. Such cases are subject to further study. The DOTr

Issue and Concern Response they are not currently affected by the project

will discuss the matter with the contractors and design team to work out a solution to retain accessibility. For those who would potentially lose access permanently, additional land may need to be acquired.

• Inquired if there will be an additional three meters from the current marking

• The current marking will be followed. If there is no measurement data accompanying the arrow marking, the area will not be extended. However, it is possible that during construction some may lose access to their homes or businesses. In such cases, the contractor will provide temporary entry. But in cases where APs become landlocked and their areas would become permanently inaccessible, additional land may be acquired. Such cases will be subject for further study by the DOTr and Project Team.

• Asked if the AP can be allowed to stay in her current residence in case her structure is partially affected

• Since the structure is located in the PNR right-of-way (ROW), it will be cleared since the PNR owns the land where her structure stands. All structures within the PNR ROW should be cleared for a future expansion project such as cargo train line.

• Asked whether the AP can still use the remaining part of her structure and lot out of the PROW

• The person can use the remaining part as long as the integrity of the structure remains unaffected after a part of her structure is dismantled due to the project. If it is a private property, she can move to the remaining land lot, provided that the concerned area is not a landlocked area of the project.

Project Timeline

• Inquired about the exact clearing date and expressed disappointment with the previously pronounced

• 31July 2020 is the target date for the contractor to enter the PNR ROW in Apalit. If a relocation site is not ready to accommodate people then rental subsidies will be given. The DOTr advised APs to consider only the dates officially given by the DOTr and not to transfer until they are told to do so.

• Asked when the project area will start to be cleared

• The indicative timeline for Calumpit is by November 2020. However, the exact schedule will depend on whether all AHs are fully paid in replacement cost in compliance with the project policy.

Ownership, Titles, and Other Legal Documents

• Inquired about the submission date for required documents

• The offer to compensate (OTC) will be issued upon the certification of the LBP on the appraisal value of all affected structures as well as the approval of ADB and JICA on the DED RAP.

• Asked how and when APs can know details about the submission of documentary requirements

• AHs will be advised upon the LGU`s approval on the DOTr`s mobilization for documentary requirements. All of the DOTr`s future activities are under preparation.

• Expressed concerns about how to provide proof of ownership for animals and banana plants which are the source of livelihood

• A PNR waiver has to be secured as one of the requirements to prove ownership since the said affected area is under the PNR ROW. This is a special case which should be studied for

18

Issue and Concern Response appropriate action/compensation by the Livelihood Team.

Affected Properties

• Inquired about affected people who were not interviewed and are not on the master list but their houses were tagged (i.e., duplex house with only one tag but with two households)

• The DOTr acknowledged that people could have been absent during the conduct of the validation. However, if their structures were tagged even if they were not interviewed, then they are considered affected. Those who are not on the list are probably not affected, which is the reason they were not interviewed. There is a cut-off date for the census and tagging activities. Those who were interviewed but are not on the list, their names will be validated, processed and subject to the approval by the National Housing Authority (NHA) for socialized housing.

• Inquired about people who were interviewed twice and have stickers but not on the master list from the barangay

• APs were allowed to check their names in the master list of the DOTr during consultations.

• Expressed concerns about the exclusion of other families (total of four in one structure) from the master list

• If the families were interviewed separately during the census and tagging then they should be on the master list.

• Expressed concerns about partially affected structures

• All properties including partially affected structures in the PNR ROW will be relocated as per project policy.

• Inquired if APs will be asked to relocate in case their houses are partially affected

• If a house in a private lot is partially affected, the corresponding compensation for house reconstruction will be given. As per project policy, if a house stands on public or government land, APs shall be relocated even though the structure is partially affected.

Compensation and Entitlements

• Inquired about entitlements of renters • Renters could avail of the NHA`s relocation package and other entitlements from the project. The structure owner will also be compensated.

• Inquired about entitlements of people who bought land on the PNR ROW

• The PNR`s management does not sell any of its property in any form including rental rights. The PNR`s general manager issued a memorandum preventing any individual of selling PNR properties.

• Inquired about compensation of filling used to elevate the area where an affected house was erected

• Only the structure will be compensated as per current project entitlement policy. It is difficult to show proof of ownership and how much filling was used to elevate the said area. However, the said issue will be elevated to the concerned committee for further verification.

• Inquired about entitlements of former housing beneficiaries who went back to the site and will again be affected by the project. The AP`s brother sold his house in the relocation site and went back to the PNR ROW.

• Former NHA beneficiaries are no longer qualified for the housing program. The case could be under the structure owner–returnee category. However, this will be subject to further investigation and will be deliberated by the RIMC (composed of several agencies). The person will also qualify upon the submission of required documents.

Issue and Concern Response

• AP shared what she heard from neighbors about other government projects which have been allegedly left idle even though project sites were cleared. Additionally, she expressed her concerns about a possibility that APs might not be compensated for affected lots.

• According to social safeguards of ADB and JICA, all affected properties shall be paid, and affected livelihood shall be compensated or restored. Also, the safeguards ensure that the lives of APs are at least equal or better off compared to their previous conditions. The project area will be fenced when there are already cargos but not immediately.

• Inquired if assistance other than a housing unit at a relocation site will be given

• APs will be compensated for the loss of livelihood and given food and transportation during actual transfer. Reconnection of electricity and water will be assisted in the relocation site.

• Asked who will be paid for trees with markings in the residence

• Only landowners will be paid for trees with markings unless they waive their entitlements in favor of structure and land occupants who cultivate their land. In his case, the land is owned by the PNR as the rightful owner and administrator

• Asked whether the labor cost for a structure will be included in the computation of the replacement cost and expressed concerns about belated compensation payment

• The labor cost is included in the computation of the replacement cost.

• All structures will be paid 100% before they are dismantled. If the person chooses to relocate himself, only the structure cost will be paid in replacement cost without depreciation from the current market value, so that he can use disbursed compensation for the construction of a new house.

• Asked how the AP can be compensated for the land on which his family has cultivated and occupied for almost one hundred years

• The land lot is owned by the government. So far, the government has allowed him to use its land as his residence and place of livelihood. For this project, the state-owned land will be acquired and used if necessary. He cannot receive any compensation for the land since it is owned by the government through its land administrators, the PNR and the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). However, his structure will be compensated in replacement cost.

Relocation and Resettlement

• Inquired if other children, with their own family, could be included in the relocation program of the NHA

• Only those who are on the master list could avail of the relocation package. Additional inclusion is no longer allowed and will not be accommodated.

• Inquired if a relocation site is located in Valenzuela and if APs need to pay for a housing unit in the relocation site

• AHs in Malolos will be relocated to Northville 8, Bancal, Malolos. The unit in the relocation site is not free. Amortizations will be paid by AHs at a very low price since the unit will be already subsidized by the government. The total housing and lot costs are estimated at PhP534,000.

• Inquired if there is an available internet connection in the relocation and how much rental assistance will be paid for APs who opt for self-relocation

• The LGU concerned provides information on an average rental price, the gauge for rental assistance. For example, the average rental price in Mabalacat is PhP5,000. The equivalent rate in Malolos will be informed to APs.

20

Issue and Concern Response

• Inquired the timing and process of self-relocation

• The target date for clearing in Malolos is September or October 2020. The list of requirements will be given for APs to prepare themselves earlier if self-relocation is implemented prior to the clearing date. All relevant assistance for self-relocation will be given according to the project policy.

• Asked whether APs have to pay for the NHA`s housing units

• The NHA`s housing unit is not free or grant. A qualified AH is required to pay the allotted housing unit for 30 years with the low amortization rate.

• Asked whether a possible relocation site is located in Calumpit

• As the in-municipality relocation site, the DOTr checked Northville 8. Unfortunately, the site turned out to be a flood-prone area. Instead, Plaridel Ville is the projected relocation site for Calumpit AHs as per the NHA

• Expressed concerns that the NHA`s housing design presented during the meeting might not be the same with the one which he will actually acquire if qualified

• Based on the punch list prepared for this project, the DOTr can assure that housing units will be turned over to AHs as agreed design and specifications.

• Asked when AHs can know whether they are qualified for relocation

• AHs are entitled to choose one of the relocation options, i.e., self-relocation and assisted relocation. For assisted relocation, the NHA will identify qualified AHs for relocation through its pre-qualification process. AHs will be notified if they are qualified for the NHA`s housings or not and also be informed on the schedule of relocation site visits.

Source: DOTr.

33. In updating the non-landowner DED RAP for the Manila PO Section, the DOTr and GCR have prepared the conduct of the second round of SCMs for non-landowners in close coordination with Manila LGU throughout August and September. The DOTr has drafted the PIB in Filipino which specifies project updates; compensation and entitlements; and feedback of APs for relocation options. DOTr held an orientation session on 16 September 2020 for community facilitators who will distribute the PIB to APs and retrieve the feedback form from APs. With a help of barangay captains and community facilitators, the DOTr and GCR have obtained the latest and valid contact details and information of AHs prior to consultations. Upon agreement of the Local Inter-Agency Committee (LIAC), the schedule of the conduct of the second SCMs for non-landowners in the Manila PO Section will be disseminated in October 2020. 34. DOTr adopted approaches to prevent the transmission of COVID-19 that are designed to observe protocol for conducting public consultations and face to face interaction which cannot be avoided to ensure meaningful consultations. The general approach include a conscious effort to establish a pandemic-free environment at the beginning of any scheduled activity by selecting a venue that provides good ventilation, Attendees are seated observing physical distance, routine temperature checking, sanitation of hands, and filling up of attendance sheets with contact tracing information. For participants with observe symptoms such as high temperature, they are advised not to attend the meeting and seek health check-up. At much as possible, number of field staff attending these activities are limited to the minimum to decrease the chance of getting the virus. Additionally, a regular rapid antibody tests have been conducted to obtain negative results from health authorities to make sure all staff are free from the virus.

35. Working in the context of the pandemic posed many challenges in undertaking consultation activities due to movement restrictions. It is difficult for the implementing staff to balance action of generating a huge turnout of people consulted in one venue, versus gathering them in smaller number, or individually calling through phones and virtual meeting through the web. Our experience showed opportunities that meaningful consultation in limited number is feasible although it takes longer time to achieve. In this regard, the conduct of physical public consultations had to be complied with using innovative ways of reaching out to the APs as well as complying with the government`s health and safety guidelines.

22

D. Grievance Redress Mechanism

1. Status of Central Hotline and Local Help Desks 36. Due to the government`s movement restrictions under the ECQ and GCQ, the operation of local help desks for the Malolos-Clark Section has been halted since March 2020. For the same reason, the establishment of a local help desk in Manila City slated for late April has been thus far postponed. Even though the operation of the existing local help desks was inevitably suspended altogether, the central hotline has been under operation all the way to accommodate grievances and inquiries of APs. During the second round of SCMs conducted in June 2020, APs were updated on the current status of local help desks and guided to contact the central hotline to raise their issues, concerns, and grievances. As of September 2020, the DOTr has planned to resume the operation of local help desks in the Malolos-Clark Section and establish a local help desk in Manila in the first quarter of 2021 in view of the current pandemic situation.

2. Launch of the Mobile Help Desk 37. To ensure and improve accessibility and effectiveness of the GRM, the Central GRM Team organized consultation meetings with the Local GRM Team. During the first consultation meeting on 27 May 2020, the situational analysis on the existing local help desks was conducted per affected LGU in Bulacan and Pampanga Provinces under the Modified Enhanced Community Quarantine (MECQ). During the second consultation meeting on 10 June 2020, the two teams agreed on the launch of the mobile or remote help desk, carried out resource mapping to identify available resources from LGUs and the DOTr, and finalize communication strategies for the mobile help desk. In preparation for the launch, the MCRP PMO prepared Pabatid, the notice announcing the suspended operation of local help desks due to the pandemic situation and instead promoting contact details of the around-the-clock central hotline. In July, the MCRP PMO also finalized frequently asked questions (FAQs) and a feedback webpage to enable APs who cannot address their issues through FAQs to file their issues and concerns through Google Forms. 38. The MCRP PMO finally rolled out the mobile help desk for the Malolos-Clark Section on 28 July and for the Solis-Blumentritt Section on 17 September with a view to complementing the suspended operation of existing local help desks and further improve accessibility, availability, and acceptability of the GRM to APs. Since the launch, online and/or offline strategies in each affected LGU of the Malolos-Clark Section have been implemented through consultations made by the Central GRM team with the local GR officers in 27 May and 10 June 2020. The teams tackled the work around expectations and commitments from the LGUs and resources that are available to operate the mobile help desk. As the online strategy, most LGUs in this section have posted Pabatid on their own official Facebook page on a weekly basis along with the link of Google Forms where APs can find FAQs and further file their inquiries and grievances. In parallel, the offline strategy of posting Pabatid and FAQs in LGU offices and barangay halls has been implemented in some LGUs. 39. In order to monitor the operation of the mobile help desk, in addition, the Central GRM Team has conducted bi-weekly online meetings with LGUs in the Malolos-Clark Section and followed up on issues and grievances received through the feedback webpage. The equivalent meetings with LGUs in the Solis-Blumentritt Section will be organized, starting from October 2020. The records of grievances received through the mobile help desk are incorporated into the central GRM database upon receipt. Figure II- 1 demonstrates Malolos LGU`s Facebook posting on the

mobile help desk, and Table II-11 describes the status of online and offline strategies adopted per affected LGU.

Figure II- 1: Example of the Online Strategy for the Mobile Help Desk

Source: Facebook page of the Malolos City Information Office.

Source: DOTr.

24

Table II-11: Status of Online and Offline Mobile Help Desk Strategies Adopted per Affected LGU

LGU Online Strategy Offline Strategy


Malolos • Adopted

Pabatid and Google Forms link for FAQs and feedback posted weekly through the Facebook page of “Malolos City Information Office”

• Adopted

Pabatid and FAQs to be printed and posted at barangay halls

Calumpit • Adopted

Pabatid and Google Forms link for FAQs and feedback posted weekly through the Facebook page of “Municipality of Calumpit, Bulacan”

• Adopted


Apalit • Under coordination with the LGU

• Adopted

Pabatid and FAQs printed and posted at barangay halls

Minalin • Not adopted due to minimal reach of APs

• Adopted

Pabatid and FAQs printed and posted at a barangay hall

Sto. Tomas • Adopted

Pabatid and Google Forms link for FAQs and feedback posted weekly through the Facebook page of “LGU Sto Tomas, Pampanga”

• Adopted


San Fernando • Adopted

Pabatid and Google Forms link for FAQs and feedback posted weekly through the Facebook page of “Local Housing CSFP”

• Adopted


Angeles • Adopted

Pabatid and Google Forms link for FAQs and feedback posted weekly through the Facebook page of “City Information Office Angeles City”

• Adopted


Mabalacat • Adopted

Pabatid and Google Forms link for FAQs and feedback posted weekly through the Facebook page of “Mabalacat City News COVID-19 Updates”

• Adopted



Manila • Under coordination with the LGU

• Under coordination with the LGU

Source: DOTr

3. Status of the GRM Team Composition and Capacity Building

40. In April 2020, one new central grievance (GR) officer joined the GRM Team to assist in following up on RAP-related inquiries and grievances raised from the Malolos-Clark Section. One additional GRM RAP team member was hired in July 2020 to assist in receiving queries received through hotline and manage the GRM database. As of September 2020, a total of eight central GR officers, i.e., five GR officers dedicated to the GRM operation and three GR officers from other departments of the MCRP PMO, comprise the Central GRM Team as presented in Table II-12. There are 16 LGU representatives, i.e., two representatives for each of the eight affected LGUs, are assigned as local GR officers for the Malolos-Clark Section while two LGU representatives for the Solis-Blumentritt Section serve as local GR officers once a local help desk is set up.

Table II-12: Composition of the Central GRM Team No. Name of

Staff/Position Affiliation Main Responsibility

1 Maria Armine Berdan (Community Development Officer (CDO) III)

GRM RAP Team

Follow up on inquiries and address grievances raised for both Malolos-Clark and South Commuter sections, communicate with team leads to address pending cases, and monitor the GRM database

2 Jennalyn Buising (CDO III)

GRM RAP Team

Follow up on RAP-related inquiries and address grievances raised for the Malolos-Clark Section

3 John Luis Arellano (CDO I, newly hired in July 2020)

GRM RAP Team

Follow up on RAP-related inquiries and address grievances received via hotline and generate report on grievance summary from the GRM database

4 Jenica Hosingco (CDO III)

GRM RAP Team

Follow up on RAP-related inquiries and address grievances received via hotline and helpdesk and lead pending RAP-related cases in the Solis-Calamba Section

5 Lusha Francesca Maderal (CDO II)

GRM Gender and Development (GAD) Team

Follow up cases and address grievances concerning gender-based violence (GBV) and manage the GRM database

6 Romaeca Pascual (CDO III)

GRM Environment Team

Assist the GRM Team every Tuesday and Thursday in following up on inquiries and grievances related to the environment and safety raised for the Malolos-Clark Section

7 Racil Atutubo (CDO III) GRM Environment Team

Assist the GRM Team every Tuesday and Thursday in following up on inquiries and grievances related to the environment and safety raised for the Solis-Calamba Section

8 Guelina Verduz (Project Development Officer III/Public Relations)

Communication Team

Assist the GRM Team in operating local help desks in the Malolos-Clark Section, consolidation of the GRM database, and preparation of the information, education, and communication (IEC) materials

Source: DOTr.

41. In this reporting period, two capacity building trainings were arranged for GR officers in the Malolos-Clark Section to guide the implementation of the mobile help desk. These were done on 27 May and 10 June 2020 attended by 12 local GR officers in each of the affected LGUs. The LGUs expressed their support in this help desk alternative, as such the Central GRM team was able to gather the commitment by making use of LGUs’ available resources, e.g. Facebook page, manpower and logistical support. Mobile help desk implementation strategies were rolled-out during the second meeting with the use of GRM tools – the Pabatid, FAQs and online platforms for lodging grievance. The conduct of a GR iteration workshop which aims at improving the capabilities of local GR officers to the extent that they can resolve inquiries and grievances raised from APs even without the help of central GR officers has been postponed since April 2020. The workshop will be rescheduled based on discussions during the GRM assessment and risk

26

communication workshop slated for the second week of October 2020. The GRM assessment and risk communication workshop will be conducted to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the GRM operation from last year to the third quarter this year. The direction of the mechanism might be changed based on the outcome of the workshop.

4. Grievances Recorded 42. From April 1 to September 30, 2020, a total of 107 grievances or inquiries (100 RAP-related, two environment-related, and five other issues) were received through the central hotline and mobile help desk, 103 cases of which were resolved as of 30 September within an average of 4.0 days upon receipt. The remaining four cases are RAP-related grievances or inquiries and will be followed-up on until their resolution. By type of grievances or inquiries, 32 out of 107 received cases were related to the project timeline, followed by legal consultation (25 cases), resettlement and relocation concerns (12 cases), and ownership validation (11 cases). Table II-13 shows the status of received grievances and inquiries raised from APs whose properties are located in the nine LGUs, and Table II-14 summarizes the type of received grievances and inquiries.

Table II-13: Status of Received Grievances and Inquiries LGU Received Grievances Resolved Grievances Unresolved Grievances

RAP-Related

Environment-

Related Others

RAP-Related

Environment-

Related Others

RAP-Related

Environment-

Related Others


Malolos 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calumpit 18 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0

Apalit 5 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0

Minalin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sto. Tomas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

San Fernando

47 0 1 47 0 1 0 0 0

Angeles 23 0 0 20 0 0 3 0 0

Mabalacat 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0

Sub-total 94 2 1 90 2 1 4 0 0


Manila 6 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0

Out of the project areas

0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0

Sub-total 6 0 4 6 0 4 0 0 0

Total 100 2 5 96 2 5 4 0 0 Note: The records of three grievances received through the remote help desk during this reporting period are incorporated into the central GRM database. Source: Analysis of GCR RAP Team based on the DOTr`s GRM database.

Table II-14: Type of Received Grievances and Inquiries Type of Grievances and Inquiries No. of Cases

Ownership validation 11

Request for technical outputs 2

Resettlement and relocation concerns 12

RAP compensation 6

Technical concerns 4

Type of Grievances and Inquiries No. of Cases

Inquiry on the timeline 32

Demolition-related concerns 1

Legal consultation 25

Inquiry on the operation of local help desks 8

Request for a meeting 1

Additional claimants for the RAP 1

Other inquiries 4

Total 107 Note: The records of three grievances received through the remote help desk during this reporting period are incorporated into the central GRM database.

Source: Analysis of GCR RAP Team based on the DOTr`s GRM database

In particular, three grievances or inquiries have been received through the remote help desk since its launch, one of which was resolved as of 30 September. The remaining two

cases will be followed up in the next months until they are fully addressed. All of the three cases are inquiries from landowners regarding the project status or the timeline for

compensation. 43. Table II-15 summarizes the status of grievances or inquiries received through the remote help desk.

Table II-15: Status of Cases Received Through the Remote Help Desk LGU Type of

APs Content of Grievance/Inquiry Status

(as of 30 Sep 2020)

Calumpit Landowner • Will the project be pushed through in spite of the pandemic?

Resolved

San Fernando Landowner • Will the project be pushed through in spite of the pandemic?

• When will compensation be made?

Ongoing

San Fernando Landowner • When will compensation be made?

Ongoing

Source: Analysis of the GCR RAP Team based on the DOTr`s database for the remote help desk.

44. Since LIAC and/or the RIMC, the second GRM level, has yet to be arranged in all of the affected LGUs, grievances or inquiries received through the central hotline or the mobile help desk until this reporting period have been handled by the Central GRM Team. When the lead GR official and the Central GRM Team could not answer inquiries or address grievances, the lead GR official brought the pending cases to the RAP team leads of the MCRP PMO. When the cases cannot be addressed at the level, they are reported back and handled by the project manager of the MCRP PMO. During this reporting period, all APs whose grievances or inquiries were addressed have been informed of the resolution through their preferred channels indicated on the grievance action form (GAF), e.g., telephone, email, letter, text/SMS, or social media.

5. Resources Devoted to the GRM

45. For the overall operation of the GRM, the LGUs concerned have yet to allocate dedicated operational funds for the GRM but have committed to provide office spaces for local help desks, office furniture and supplies, printing and photocopying services, and internet service, if available. The required funds will be allocated by means of a MOA with the DOTr through the RIMC that will

28

be established soon. Concerning the mobile help desk launched in this reporting period, however, the Central GRM Team has already obtained resources from the LGUs concerned required for its operation such as printing of Pabatid or posters and FAQs and posting of announcements on the LGU’s Facebook page. Also, specifically for the Solis-Blumentritt Section, the Central GRM Team has secured commitments of the Social Housing Finance Corporation (SHFC) for its support in the reproduction of information, education, and communication (IEC) materials prior to the opening of a local help desk in Manila next year. Last but not least, the Central GRM Team has prepared the establishment of the integrated GRM database in close collaboration with a communication firm hired by ADB. Once the central database is launched by January 2021, all grievances and concerns received from APs pertaining to RAP, environment, and gender issues will be recorded and followed up in lieu of the current online-based database.

E. Institutional Arrangements for Land Acquisition and Resettlement

1. MCRP Project Management Office

46. As of September 2020, the MCRP PMO under the DOTr has filled a total of 77 positions including 26 positions specifically for the implementation of resettlement and land acquisition and has planned to keep recruiting new staff in the following months. The current 26 staff dedicated for the implementation of resettlement and land acquisition are tasked with land acquisition, resettlement, livelihood, or the GRM. 47. As shown in Table II-16, nine people have been newly hired by the DOTr during this reporting period, four of whom were assigned for the project`s land acquisition implementation. All of the new recruits hold a relevant bachelor`s degree and have at least two years of relevant experience. In the recruitment process, their applications were screened, and subsequently they underwent a written exam which was designed to test their knowledge and capabilities, and three rounds of interviews with the human resources department, the team lead, and the project manager of the MCRP PMO in sequence.

Table II-16: Personnel Status of the MCRP PMO No. Position No. of Staff

(as of Mar 2020)

(a)

No. of Staff (as of Sep

2020) (b)

Change (b-a)

(%)

1 Management 2 2 - 0.0

2 Administration and Support 3 3 - 0.0

3 Public Relations 1 1 - 0.0

4 Civil Works 6 7 1 14.3

5 Environment 6 7 1 14.3

6 Operations and Maintenance (O&M)

4 4 - 0.0

7 Procurement 6 9 3 33.3

8 RAP 21 21 - 0.0

9 Land Acquisition 1 5 4 80.0

9 Rolling Stock 9 9 - 0.0

10 Stations 4 4 - 0.0

11 Utilities 4 4 - 0.0

12 Legal Affairs 1 1 - 0.0

Total 68 77 9 11.7 Source: DOTr.

48. As part of capacity building, in addition, four online training sessions were held in this period to improve required skills and knowledge of the MCRP PMO`s staff in charge of resettlement and land acquisition as follows: (i) training for managing geospatial data in ArcGIS on 27-28 July, (ii) training for sharing GIS content using ArcGIS on 29-30 July, (iii) training for field data collection and management using ArcGIS on 4-5 August, and (iv) training for ArcGIS enterprise: configuring a base deployment on 6-7 August.

2. Partner Institutions 49. Project Inter-agency Committee and Technical Working Group. Due to the pandemic, a meeting of PIAC or the Technical Working Group (TWG) has not been held during this period. The DOTr has had online coordination meetings with KSAs or other national government agencies (NGAs) to discuss RAP-related issues. In the following months, the convening of a PIAC or TWG meeting will be discussed if the needs arise in tandem with the full-fledged RAP implementation in the Malolos-Clark Section. 50. Partner Key Shelter Agencies. As stated in the MOA signed on 3 September 2019 by the DOTr, PNR, the National Housing Authority (NHA), and the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC), and the Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD) have been coordinating with one another to prepare the community-driven resettlement of informal settler families (ISFs) in the Malolos-Clark Section. On the other hand, the MOA amended and signed in December 2018 for the Solis-Blumentritt Section by the DOTr, PNR, SHFC, and HUDCC/DHSUD has spurred discussions regarding community-driven resettlement of ISFs. SHFC and DOTr got guidance from the Manila city government, that they do not want an off-city relocation for the APs of Solis- Blumentritt. DOTr agreed on this proposal and SHFC will initiate a dialogue with the city develop an alternative approach of providing an in-city relocation site. 51. In September 2020, the NHA has finally submitted to the DOTr all required documents to download funds for six-month expenditures, and thereby the DOTr’s fund transfer to the NHA will be implemented in the following month. As of 20 February 2018, the first tranche of funds for resettlement activities was downloaded by the DOTr to SHFC. The transfer of the second tranche of funds will be examined once SHFC disburses 50% of the first tranche and requests for additional funds for its undertakings. 52. Site-Specific Partner Institutions. As a site-specific partner, the RIMC has yet to be created in the project-affected LGUs during this reporting period. The MOA for the RIMC creation was officially transmitted to Malolos-Clark section LGUs in August and Manila LGU in September 2020. The Mabalacat and Sto. Tomas LGUs have completed their review on the draft MOA for the RIMC creation while the MOA has been under review by the remaining seven LGUs. Upon written comments and inputs of each LGU, the DOTr will have completed the legal pass and signing of all signatories by the end of this year. As far as LIAC is concerned, all of the LGUs concerned except Apalit, Minalin, and Sto. Tomas LGUs have completed the LIAC creation based on executive orders signed by each mayor. In case of Apalit, Minalin, and Sto. Tomas LGUs, the reactivation of each LGU’s Local Housing Board (LHB) will be facilitated in close coordination with the NHA. In the following months, the DOTr will also discuss with each LGU whether the LGU-level relocation and resettlement action plan (RRAP) will be formulated. The approved DED RAP sets out the project policy that will be used as the guidance at the LGU level in formulating their mechanism of support for the project affected people through the RRAP. Key involvement of the LGUs and other agencies are defined in the approved DD RAP. The RRAP on the other hand provides context of LGUs participation particularly in the dispatch of their duties and

30

responsibilities mandated of them by the UDHA Table II-17 demonstrates the status of agreed institutional requirements as of September 2020.

Table II-17: Status of Agreed Institutional Requirements LGU RIMC Creation LIAC Creation Formulation of RRAP


Malolos Ongoing (draft MOA transmitted to the LGU in August and under the LGU`s review)

Complete (the executive order signed by the mayor)

Not yet started

Calumpit Ongoing (draft MOA transmitted to the LGU in August and under review)


Not yet started

Apalit Ongoing (draft MOA transmitted to the LGU in August and under the LGU`s review)

Not applicable (LHB to be re-activated by a resolution approved by the mayor)

Not yet started

Minalin Ongoing (draft MOA transmitted to the LGU in August and under the LGU`s review)


Not yet started

Sto. Tomas Ongoing (draft MOA accepted by the LGU and waiting for a written approval)


Not yet started

San Fernando Ongoing (draft MOA transmitted to the LGU in August and under the LGU`s review)


Not yet started

Angeles Ongoing (draft MOA transmitted to the LGU in August and under the LGU`s review)


Not yet started

Mabalacat Ongoing (draft MOA reviewed by the LGU and waiting for the DOTr`s legal pass and the signing by signatories)


Not yet started


Manila Ongoing (draft MOA transmitted in September)

Complete Not yet started

Category of status: not yet started; complete; ongoing; incomplete; not applicable (i.e., LIAC will not be created, or RRAP will not be formulated). Source: DOTr and GCR.

3. General Consultant

53. As of September 2020, the GCR RAP Team assisting the DOTr in the RAP updating and implementation is composed of 33 staff and eight additional staff were recruited to provide assistance to DOTr in the implementation of the RAP. The team comprises Land acquisition and right of way experts, relocation and livelihood restoration experts, GRM specialist and monitoring specialists 16 Pro-B experts and engineers, and 12 Pro-C RAP assistants, as listed in Table II-18. The GCR RAP Team is scheduled to recruit more experts for the full-fledged RAP implementation in the Malolos-Clark Section.

Table II-18: Composition of the GCR RAP Team No. Position

1 A023: Chief Social & Resettlement Expert (N2/SC)

2 A024: Social & Resettlement Expert (N2)

3 A101(1): Social & Resettlement Expert (N2/SC)

4 A102: Social & Resettlement Expert (SC)

5 A104: Social & Resettlement Expert (SC)

6 B060: Social Environment Engineer (Resettlement) 2

7 B079: Social Environment Expert (Land Acquisition) 3















22 C103: Social Environment Assistant 3











33 C355: Social Environment Assistant 6 Source: GCR (as of September 2020).

F. Livelihood Restoration and Improvement Program

54. Mabalacat LGUs involvement in the livelihood restoration and in the relocation process was formalized through a local resolution passed by the Sangguniang Panlungsod in February 2020. The spirit of the city resolution is to authorize the city mayor to sign an agreement with DOTr to efficiently manage livelihood-related activities and effectively carry out the relocation process mandated by law on the LGUs. The resolution authorized the city mayor to allocate funds to

32

support the APs of the project. The funds shall be used by the LGU to intensify its partnership with the government and non-government offices (NGOs) that can provide assistance in restoring and or improving livelihood of the APs. In the meantime, the DOTr has prepared a supplemental MOA to transfer funds to the LGU for the conduct of the financial management training and vocational training with livelihood starter kits and the provision of transportation allowances to trainees.

55. The Mabalacat LGU and the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) concluded a MOA in June 2020 which stipulates the fund transfer from the DOLE to the LGU to undertake the Nego-Kart (Negosyo sa Kariton), the DOLE`s LRIP program. The DOLE has transferred funds to the LGU to procure the production of carts and equipment required for the implementation of the LRIP program. A total of 21 APs in Mabalacat LGU are expected to benefit from the LRIP program.

56. In this reporting period, the DOTr has also prepared a financial literacy training session for all APs who are micro-business owners and SAMANAKA cooperative members. The session will be supported by the LBP Mabalacat Branch. The LBP will provide a venue for the training and resource persons to discuss financial management and investment at this time of the pandemic particularly APs who intend to set up a micro-business by means of compensation for trees and crops. The training session is scheduled to be held in the second week of October 2020.

57. In the following months, for Mabalacat LGU, the priority project area in the section, the DOTr plans to accelerate the implementation of the following main LRIP activities: (i) the conduct of the said LRIP training programs in collaboration with the LGU, (ii) the presentation of project-related jobs available for APs to the LGU after coordination with contractors, and (iii) the completion of the procurement process for Nego-Kart.

58. In preparation of the non-landowner DED RAP for CP N-01 to N-03, the DOTr and GCR have conducted focus group discussions (FGDs) with the business sector in June 2020 to collect the information on business owners` current businesses and employees and figure out (i) whether they are willing to continue current businesses, (ii) whether their businesses are operated in their residence, (iii) whether their family members also engage in their businesses, and (iv) what is their plan for current employees. As presented in Table II-19, 24 business owners in the six affected LGUs attended FGD sessions in the form of phone interviews due to the government`s movement restrictions under the GCQ.

Table II-19: Summary of Second FGDs with Affected Business Owners LGU Date No. of Interviewed Business Owners

Male Female Total

Malolos 11 June 2020 0 1 1

Calumpit 10-19 June 2020 5 8 13

Apalit 10 June 2020 0 1 1

Sto. Tomas 11 June 2020 2 0 2

San Fernando 10 June 2020 2 2 4

Angeles 10-11 June 2020 2 1 3

Total 11 13 24 Note: The two out of 24 interviewed business owners did not provide the information on their employees. Source: GCR.

59. The over-the-phone FGDs revealed that 19 out of 26 businesses (two business owners running two businesses) are operated in business owners` own residence and that 14 out of 26 businesses involve business owners` family members as employees. Most of the interviewed business owners expressed their willingness to continue their businesses and fully or partially retain their employees in the future. Table II-20 presents main findings discovered during phone interviews with business owners.

Table II-20: Main Findings Discovered During Second FGDs with Affected Business Owners

LGU Willingness to continue current businesses

Future plan for current employees

Yes No Undecided Retain Partially Retain

Not Retain

Undecided No Employee

Malolos 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Calumpit 11 2 1 13 0 1 0 0

Apalit 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Sto. Tomas 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0

San Fernando 4 0 0 1 1 1 0 1

Angeles 3 1 0 1 0 1 2 0

Total 21 3 2 16 1 3 4 2 Note: Two out of 24 interviewed business owners own two businesses, so their answer for each business was

counted separately.

Source: DOTr.

60. For the Solis-Blumentritt Section, the DOTr has prepared and submitted to SHFC an improved validation tool for the socio-economic profile of affected ISFs, which will be a basis for the design of the LRIP. Through the tool originally devised by SHFC, the following socio-economic information of ISFs is expected to be collected: (i) highest educational attainment, (ii) occupation for the last six months, (iii) reasons for not working, (iv) employment status, (v) monthly income, (vi) other income sources, (vii) skills, (viii) vulnerability, (ix) location of primary income source, (x) type of income loss, (xi) estimated income loss, (xii) willingness for the participation in the LRIP, (xiii) membership in financial institutions, and (xix) benefits from government programs. In the following months, the DOTr will try to conduct a livelihood workshop with SHFC to harmonize the DOTr`s LRIP and SHFC`s livelihood development program (LDP) and proceed with coordination meetings with the LGU concerned to discuss the LRIP planning.

34

III. SAFEGUARDS PERFORMANCE MONITORING

A. Summary of Compliance to RAP Requirements

61. Issues identified in the previous SMR were: (i) finalization of DD RAPs has been delayed due to concerns pertaining to the contractual arrangement between JICA and JDT, (ii) traditional face-to-face gatherings for consultations are not allowed during community quarantine, and (iii) challenges on GRM and institutional arrangement.

62. Adequacy of resettlement planning. The DOTr has made significant achievements in obtaining ADB approval on three DED RAPs covering CP N-01 to N-05 which specifies the validated socio-economic profile of APs and clearly state entitlements for APs. In spite of challenges encountered due to the pandemic situation, the DOTr has accelerated site appraisal activities in close collaboration with the LBP, PNR, and GCR to verify the RCS and assessed the project`s potential impacts on access roads through desk review and site inspection in compliance with the social guidelines of ADB and JICA. In preparation for the full-fledged RAP implementation, the DOTr also has developed its internal monitoring system and submitted three quarterly social monitoring reports to JICA and the first semi-annual social monitoring report to ADB.

63. Consultation, participation, and disclosure. The COVID-19 situation has prompted the DOTr to intensify its efforts to ensure that APs are updated on the project timeline and fully informed and consulted on resettlement and relocation policies. For the second SCMs for non-landowners and FGD with the business sector—the DOTr adopted blended modalities for consultations such as PIB distribution and retrieval, phone interviews, and small-scale meetings while strictly observing health and safety protocols to minimize physical contacts and prevent infection. During the SCMs and FGD, APs were provided with information on entitlements and PIBs written in Filipino.

64. Grievances redress mechanism. In order to fill the void of the suspended local help desk and improve accessibility and effectiveness of the GRM, the DOTr has launched the mobile help desk. The notice announcing the suspended operation of local help desks due to the COVID-19, promoting contact details of the central hotline has been posted in barangay halls (offline) and Facebook page of the LGUs concerned (online) along with FAQs. All of the grievances and inquiries raised from APs have been resolved within four days on average upon receipt and the resolution has been delivered to APs through their preferred channel.

65. Institutional arrangement. The DOTr has made noticeable outcomes in institutional arrangements for land acquisition and resettlement. The MCRP PMO has reinforced its human resources by hiring four people with adequate knowledge and experience for the RAP implementation and providing capacity building training which is aimed at the improvement of practical skills required for land acquisition and resettlement. Even though no PIAC meeting was convened due to the pandemic, the DOTr has had multiple coordination meetings with KSAs, LGUs, and other NGAs to discuss RAP issues. The DOTr made progress in the establishment of site-specific partner institutions. The draft MOA for the RIMC creation was transferred to all of the nine LGUs concerned in August or September and is being under review by the LGUs. The LIAC has been set up in all of the LGUs except Apalit, Minalin, and Sto. Tomas LGUs which are soon to reactivate the existing LHB. The longstanding issue related to the DOTr`s fund transfer to the NHA has been addressed in this reporting period. The NHA has submitted all required documents to the DOTr, which is the prerequisite for the fund transfer. The DOTr is expected to download funds to the NHA, a month after the submission of the required documents.

B. Issues Identified in this Reporting Period

66. The following are the identified issues and challenges in compliance with the RAP requirements. Table III-1 describes the key issues, mitigating measures undertaken by the project and proposed resolution of issues to further improve the social safeguard monitoring activities.

Table III-2: Key Issues, Mitigating Measures, and Resolution of Issues Area Concerned Key Issue and Challenge Mitigating Measures Resolution of Issues

Finalization of DED RAPs

• COVID-19 has caused substantial impacts on the preparation and updating of DED RAPs which require site activities, i.e. RAP surveys, relocation site selection, validation of DED master list of APs, public consultations, and LBP appraisal.

• The DOTr has closely coordinated with LGUs and KSAs, i.e., DHSUD and SHFC to facilitate the conduct of required site activities as scheduled in compliance with health and safety protocols.

• Due to the government`s movement restrictions, the DOTr conducted phone interviews to reach the APs whose SES data was never collected.

• DOTr will coordinate with project stakeholders and convene a LIAC or PIAC meeting if required to finalize the remaining DED RAPs in a timely manner.

• DOTr to contact and consult with APs in cooperation with the LGUs concerned.

Disbursement of compensation and assistance

• As per the review results of parcellary and as-built surveys conducted by the JDT, some affected lots in both sections require the updating of parcellary surveys to prepare the OTB issuance for land acquisition. Also, it was found that some affected structures in both sections lack basic plans which are required for the conduct of LBP appraisal.

• The DOTr prepared location maps and NoT. The documents are ready for transmittal to all landowners included in the master list.

• DOTr will take actions to complete the updating of two surveys in preparation of land acquisition and compensation.

• DOTr will issue and deliver the notices in October 2020 through the GCR by means of blended modes of the NoT transmittal. One mode is the usage of courier services, and the other mode is face-to-face delivery to property owners whose addresses are incorrect or locations are unknown. The composition of a team to handle the NoT delivery has been agreed between the DOTr and GCR.

36

Area Concerned Key Issue and Challenge Mitigating Measures Resolution of Issues

Consultation, participation, and disclosure

• In the course of the second SCMs for non-landowners in Malolos to Angeles LGUs, many APs could not be reached or found, some of whom already changed their contact information or left their houses temporarily or permanently during the pandemic.

• For unreachable APs, the DOTr has sought cooperation of affected barangays to figure out their whereabouts and valid contact information and will keep endeavoring to reach them for consultations.

• DOTr will continue to reach the APs through the LGUs concerned, the RIMC, and LIAC.

• The delay in the selection of relocation sites for APs in the Solis-Blumentritt Section has hampered the facilitation of consultations with non-landowner APs aimed at the disclosure of detailed information on available relocation sites and collection of feedback of APs.

• The DOTr has been coordinating with the LGU, barangays, and KSAs and facilitate the decision-making process in the site selection committee of Manila LIAC pertaining to the information of relocation sites to be disclosed and the conduct of second SCMs for non-landowners through the distribution and collection of PIBs.

• MCRP PMO has series of meetings directly with Manila LGU officers and discussed the location of an in-city relocation site for APs in this section of the project.

Grievance redress mechanism

• The operation of local help desks has been suspended due to the government`s movement restrictions amid ongoing pandemic crisis.

• The Central GRM Team has proactively analyzed the pandemic situation in each LGU in close consultation with the Local GRM Team and prepared and launched the mobile help desk.

•

• The MCRP PMO will closely monitor the operation of the mobile help desk and the existing central hotline with LGUs and the GCR. Also, it will review and revise the operational direction by conducting the GRM assessment and risk communication workshop in October 2020.

• The resources for the GRM operation are not sufficient. The LGUs concerned have yet to allocate dedicated operational funds for the GRM.

• The DOTr will request the LGUs again to allocate required funds for the GRM operation once the RIMC is created.

• For the launch of the mobile help desk, the DOTr has secured resources from the LGUs concerned required for its operation such as

• The DOTr will continue to provide guidance and support to LGUs in fulfilling the requirements of the GRM. This concern will need to be included in the agenda with the RIMC upon its establishment.

Area Concerned Key Issue and Challenge Mitigating Measures Resolution of Issues printing and posting of posters and FAQs in barangay halls and posting of announcements on the LGU`s Facebook page.

• For the Solis-Blumentritt Section, the Central GRM Team also secured commitments of SHFC (for a local help desk to be established in Manila) and the GCR (for the second SCMs for non-landowners) for their support in the reproduction if IEC materials.

• The efficient and reliable GRM database management is much needed as the contractor will soon need to establish its own GRM on the site and expect to receive various grievances and inquiries from the community pertaining to RAP, environment, and gender issues.

• The DOTr has monitored the existing online-based GRM database with the GCR for quality control.

•

• In close collaboration with a communication firm hired by ADB, the Central GRM Team will develop and launch an integrated database by January 2021.

Institutional arrangements for land acquisition and resettlement

• The government`s restriction on new hiring during the pandemic situation has deterred the recruitment plan of the MCRP PMO staff.

• Upon the DOTr`s request for the exemption from the restriction, it has got an approval to resume recruitment since September 2020.

• In preparation for the full-scale RAP implementation in the near future, the MCRP PMO will reinforce its human resources by hiring new staff and keep arranging capacity building training for the existing staff.

• The RIMC creation has been delayed.

• The DOTr has transmitted the draft MOA for the RIMC creation to all of the LGUs concerned in August and September 2020.

•

• To complete the RIMC creation by the end of this year, the DOTr will facilitate the review process of each LGU by responding to comments and inquiries and expedite the legal pass and signing of signatories.

• Albeit the MOA concluded in Sep 2019,

• The DOTr had several coordination

• Upon final review, the DOTr will

38

Area Concerned Key Issue and Challenge Mitigating Measures Resolution of Issues the fund transfer to the NHA has been postponed due to delayed submission of additional on top of the previously submitted documents.

meetings with the NHA to clarify the requirements. In September 2020, the NHA has completed the submission of all required documents.

accelerate the fund transfer to the NHA in the following month for tasks delegated to the NHA as per MOA.

Livelihood restoration and improvement program

• Due to the pandemic situation, the discussions concerning the LRIP planning have been stagnated in some LGUs.

• The DOTr/GCR employed an alternative means (e.g. phone interviews) to conduct the FGD with the business sector in coordination with the LGUs concerned.

• The DOTr will resume discussions with relevant LGUs, NGAs, and KSAs to harmonize LRIP programs and validate APs eligible for the LRIP assistance.

IV. PROPOSED MAJOR ITEMS OF FOCUS FOR THE NEXT REPORT

67. The next semi-annual social monitoring report will be focused on the progress of the implementation of social safeguard activities stated below:

(i) Updated DED RAPs that are compliant with ADB and JICA Safeguards Policies

• Clearly stated entitlement provisions in the DED RAPs based on the valuation reports of the LBP as the GFI

• Final master list based on the SES or supplementary SES database prepared for the DED RAPs

• Verification of the RCS based on the LBP’s methodology

• Establishment of internal monitoring reports to ensure its adequacy, availability, and accessibility

(ii) Institutional Arrangements for Land Acquisition and Resettlement

• Recruitment by the MCRP PMO of its staff with adequate knowledge and experience for the RAP implementation

• Effectiveness of capacity building measures undertaken

• Progress and update of discussions through the PIAC

• Update on the establishment of the RIMC

• Availability of required funds with the DOTr

• Funds allocated to KSAs according to schedule

(iii) Delivery of Entitlements

• Compensation disbursed according to the entitlement matrix

• Entitlements disbursed on time and before displacement to temporary accommodations

• Entitlements disbursed on time and before displacement of APs for self-relocation and/or transfer to new locations

• Adequate time given for self-relocation

• Availability/access and referral of social housings with lots provided

• Tenure instruments issued such as land titles, contracts, and agreements

• ISFs provided with adequate information to avail of social housing

• Participation of ISFs in the design and selection of social housing locations and options

• Satisfaction of AHs on the quality of social housing awarded

• Availability of social infrastructure at social housing sites

• Availability of transitional rental assistance until permanent housing is ready for occupancy

• Project assistance for APs who opt for self-relocation

• Project assistance for APs who opt for assisted relocation

• Timely disbursement of assistance to APs

• Special assistance to vulnerable APs during resettlement

(iv) Grievance Redress Mechanism

• Availability of information on grievance resolution

• Timing of grievances redressed

• Proper communication of grievance resolution to APs

40

(v) Livelihood Restoration and Improvement Program

• Inclusion of APs in rehabilitation programs (women, men, and vulnerable groups)

• Availability of vocational/entrepreneurial training

• Availability of soft loans for APs

• Adequacy of vocational/entrepreneurial training

• Availability of employment activities

• Degree of satisfaction with livelihood programs

• Successful enterprises launched

• Improved income for displaced persons

• Improved standard of living for displaced persons

• Availability of alternative livelihood for land-based APs