Toward Building Collaborative Capacity:

ABSTRACT. Š‹• •–—†› ƒ••‡••‡† –Š‡ •‡”˜‹…‡ †‡Ž‹˜‡”› ‹ ƒƒ–‹

‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ ȋȌǡ ƒŽƒ—ƒ ‹ ƒ‰—ƒǡ Š‹Ž‹’’‹‡•Ǥ ’‡…‹ϐ‹…ƒŽŽ›ǡ ‹–

analyzed the perceived strength of the collaborative capacity of the

ƒƒ–‹ ‘…‹ƒŽ ‡Žˆƒ”‡ ƒ† ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–Ǧš–‡•‹‘ ˆϐ‹…‡ ȋǦȌ in the areas of accountability, outcomes, delivery and alignment, and proposed mechanisms by which service delivery can be scaled up to

‡•—”‡•—•–ƒ‹ƒ„‹Ž‹–›ǤŠ‡‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‡ƒ†‹–‡†ƒ–‹‘•‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–

”‘‰”ƒ‡ǯ• ‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ”ƒ‡™‘” ™ƒ• ƒ†‘’–‡† –‘

‡šƒ‹‡‡›ƒ”‡ƒ•‘ˆ’—„Ž‹…•‡”˜‹…‡†‡Ž‹˜‡”›™Š‡”‡…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹‘…‘—Ž†

„‡•–”‡‰–Š‡‡†–‘‡•—”‡„‡––‡”‘—–…‘‡•ǤŠ‡’‡”…‡‹˜‡†•–”‡‰–Š™ƒ•

‡ƒ•—”‡† „› …‘’—–‹‰ –Š‡ ‡ƒ •…‘”‡• ‘ˆ ”‡•’‘†‡–•ǯ —‡”‹…ƒŽ

”ƒ–‹‰ˆ‘”‡ƒ…Š•–ƒ–‡‡–ǤŠ‡†ƒ–ƒˆ”‘“—ƒŽ‹–ƒ–‹˜‡•‘—”…‡•™‡”‡—•‡†–‘

˜ƒŽ‹†ƒ–‡—‡”‹…ƒŽ†ƒ–ƒƒ†–”ƒ…–Š‡Š‹•–‘”‹…ƒŽ†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–‘ˆǤ–™ƒ•

”‡˜‡ƒŽ‡†–Šƒ–†‡•’‹–‡–Š‡…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡‹‹–‹ƒ–‹˜‡•–ƒ‹‰’Žƒ…‡‹ǡ•‘‡

basic services needed improvement, particularly access to livelihood,

‡Ž‡…–”‹…‹–›ǡ ƒ† ’‘–ƒ„Ž‡ ™ƒ–‡”Ǥ Š‡ ’‡”…‡‹˜‡† •–”‡‰–Š ‘ˆ Ǧǯ•

…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡…ƒ’ƒ…‹–›™ƒ•Dz•–”‘‰dzƒ…”‘••‡›ƒ”‡ƒ•‘ˆ•‡”˜‹…‡†‡Ž‹˜‡”›Ǥ …Ž‘•‡”‡šƒ‹ƒ–‹‘‘ˆ“—ƒŽ‹–ƒ–‹˜‡†ƒ–ƒǡŠ‘™‡˜‡”ǡ”‡˜‡ƒŽ‡†•‘‡™‡ƒ

ƒ”‡ƒ•‹–Š‡†‡•‹‰ȋ‘—–…‘‡•Ȍǡ”‹•ȋƒŽ‹‰‡–Ȍǡ‹‘˜ƒ–‹‘ȋ†‡Ž‹˜‡”›Ȍǡ

ƒ† –”ƒ•’ƒ”‡…› ȋƒ……‘—–ƒ„‹Ž‹–›ȌǤ —––‹‰ …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ ˆ”ƒ‡™‘” ƒ–

™‘” ™‘—Ž† ”‡“—‹”‡ ‘„‹Ž‹œ‹‰ •—„•–ƒ–‹ƒŽ ”‡•‘—”…‡• ƒ† ‘˜‡”…‘‹‰

…‘•–”ƒ‹–• ‹ ’”‘Œ‡…– ƒƒ‰‡‡–Ǥ – ‹• ‡…‡••ƒ”› –Šƒ– ƒ ˆ”ƒ‡™‘”

for inter-local government relations governing off-city resettlement is formulated, approval of House Bill 5144 is secured, and a memorandum

‘ˆƒ‰”‡‡‡–„‡•‹‰‡†„‡–™‡‡ƒƒ–‹ƒ†ƒŽƒ—ƒ‘…ƒŽ‘˜‡”‡–

Units.

‡›™‘”†•ǣ collaborative capacity, service delivery, collaborative capacity framework

________________________

1••‹•–ƒ–”‘ˆ‡••‘”ƒ†‡ƒ†ǡ‡–‡”ˆ‘”–—†‡–†˜‹•‹‰ǡˆϔ‹…‡ˆ‘”–—†‡–‡”˜‹…‡•ǡ Malayan Colleges Laguna, Cabuyao, Laguna, Philippines

2Professor, College of Public Affairs and Development, University of the Philippines Los Baños ȋȌǢ‹”‡…–‘”ǡ—ƒ‡•‘—”…‡‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–ˆϔ‹…‡ǡǡƒ‰—ƒǡŠ‹Ž‹’’‹‡•

*Corresponding author: (+63 49) 832-4000 local 5301, ccamores30@gmail.com

Toward Building Collaborative Capacity:

Assessment of Service Delivery in Makati Homeville, Laguna, Philippines

CHRISTIE C. AMORES^1* and NELSON JOSE VINCENT B. QUERIJERO²

INTRODUCTION

Š‡ ”ƒ’‹† ‰”‘™–Š ‘ˆ —”„ƒ ’‘’—Žƒ–‹‘ ‡šƒ…‡”„ƒ–‡† „› –Š‡

‹•—ˆϐ‹…‹‡– …ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ‘ˆ –Š‡ ‰‘˜‡”‡– –‘ ’”‘˜‹†‡ ‡ˆˆ‡…–‹˜‡ •‘…‹ƒŽ ƒ†

economic infrastructures has brought forth a number of development concerns in the Philippines. One of the most evident outcomes is the mushrooming growth of slums or informal settlements in urban areas ȋƒ‰ƒǡ ʹͲͳͳǢ ƒ˜ƒ””‘ǡ ʹͲͳͶǢ ‘‹ Ƭ Š—ƒǡ ʹͲͲ͹Ǣ ƒ–‹•ǡ ʹͲͳ͵ȌǤ Approximately 51 percent of the total number of informal settler-families

‹–Š‡…‘—–”›ƒ”‡•…ƒ––‡”‡†‹‡–”‘ƒ‹ŽƒǤŠ‡•‡ˆƒ‹Ž‹‡••‡––Ž‡‹ƒ”‡ƒ•

‘ˆ–‡…Žƒ••‹ϐ‹‡†ƒ•†ƒ‰‡”œ‘‡•ǡ•—…Šƒ•”‹˜‡”„ƒ•ǡ”ƒ‹Ž”‘ƒ†–”ƒ…•ǡ„ƒ›

…‘ƒ•–ǡƒ†—†‡”–Š‡„”‹†‰‡•ǤŠ‡‹”Žƒ…‘ˆŽ‡‰ƒŽ…Žƒ‹‘˜‡”–Š‡Žƒ†–Šƒ–

they occupy expose them to deplorable conditions given the unsanitary environment, congestion, poor access to basic services, and inadequate urban infrastructures (Gilles, 2012; National Economic Development Authority; UN Habitat III, 2015).

In an attempt to manage urban population and ensure the safety of informal settlers, the Philippine government has largely concentrated on relocation measures within and outside the central cities (Choe &

Laquian, 2008; Laquian, 2008; Peña, 2014)ⁱ. Numerous policies have been enacted to ensure that socialized resettlement programs are carried out in observance of the standard conditions set forth by the international human rights law. It is, for instance, stipulated in the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act [RA] 7160) that the local government units shall provide “low cost housing and other mass dwelling” for homeless families.

Š‡ ‘—•‹‰ ƒ† ”„ƒ ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– …– ȋ ͹ʹ͹ͻȌ ƒ†

Comprehensive and Integrated Shelter Finance Act (RA 7835) set forth the mechanism for comprehensive housing program and urban development as well as regular increase of annual appropriation for national shelter

’”‘‰”ƒǡ”‡•’‡…–‹˜‡Ž›ǤŠ‡•‡’‘Ž‹…‹‡•ƒŽ•‘•–”‘‰Ž›”‡…‘‰‹œ‡–Š‡”‘Ž‡‘ˆ

civil society, communities, and private sectors in securing the delivery of basic services by collaborating with the government for short-term and long-term development projects. However, there have been no

________________________

iAdministrative and economic measures to manage or counter urban population growth vary across Asian countries. As part of the City Cluster Development Strategy in China and Vietnam, for instance, they follow an internal household registration system called DzŠ—‘—dz–Šƒ–”‡•–”‹…–•‹‰”ƒ–‹‘‘ˆ”—”ƒŽ†™‡ŽŽ‡”•–‘…‹–‹‡•ǤŠ‡”‡ƒ”‡ƒŽ•‘…‡”–ƒ‹•‘…‹ƒŽƒ†

‡…‘‘‹…•‡”˜‹…‡•–Šƒ–ƒ”‡Ž‹‹–‡†–‘„‘ƒϐ‹†‡—”„ƒ”‡•‹†‡–•ȋŠ‘‡Ƭƒ“—‹ƒǡʹͲͲͺȌǤ

‹‹Žƒ”–‘†‹ƒǡƒ‹•–ƒǡƒ†Šƒ‹Žƒ†ǡ–Š‡Š‹Ž‹’’‹‡‰‘˜‡”‡–ˆ‘…—•‡•‘”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‹‰

informal settlers to other areas, often suburban.

clear stipulations as to the roles of implementing and receiving local government units (LGUs) in case of near-city or off-city resettlement.

Š‡ Š‹Ž‹’’‹‡ ‘‰”‡•• ‹• ›‡– –‘ ƒ’’”‘˜‡ ƒ‡†‡–• –‘ ͹ʹ͹ͻ requiring “the local government unit that implements the relocation or resettlement and the concerned national government agencies…provide the other basic services and facilitiesⁱⁱ… to the recipient local government unit where relocation or resettlement is located” (p.9).

ƒŽŽ‡•–‡”‘•ƒ†‰ƒƒǯ•ȋʹͲͳʹȌ”‡˜‹‡™‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ–‹‘ƒŽ‘—•‹‰

Authority (NHA) resettlement program (2007-2011), they noted that on the average, NHA had allotted 79 percent of its annual budget for the resettlement of informal settlers in Greater Manila Area (94%) and

‘—–Ž›‹‰’”‘˜‹…‡•ȋ͸ΨȌǤŠ‹•…Ž‡ƒ”Ž›•—‰‰‡•–•–Šƒ–‘ƒ’‡”’”‘‰”ƒ

„ƒ•‹•ǡ ”‡•‡––Ž‡‡– Šƒ† „‡‡ ƒ ’”‹‘”‹–› ‘˜‡” ‘–Š‡” ǯ• Š‘—•‹‰

programs, such as slum upgrading, sites and services, completed/

core housing, and medium rise housing. Resettlement expenditure is mainly divided into project development (including housing support), land acquisition, and other project-related capital outlay. By providing decent and affordable housing, adequate social services and livelihood opportunities, it is expected that the overall conditions of families in resettlement areas would be improved (Ballesteros & Egana, 2012).

However, from the review of news articles and development studies published online, contrary evidence emerged undermining service delivery in government-owned relocation sites.

Š‡ ‡š‹•–‹‰ ’‘Ž‹…‹‡• •‡‡‡† –‘ „‡ ˆ—–‹Ž‡ ƒ• ƒ› ”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•

within or outside metropolitan areas complained about: a) forced eviction from original abode to resettlement areas without proper transition; b)

Žƒ… ‘ˆ …‘•—Ž–ƒ–‹‘ ™‹–Š ƒˆˆ‡…–‡† ˆƒ‹Ž‹‡• ’”‹‘” –‘ ”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‹‘Ǣ …Ȍ ’‘‘”

facilities in relocation sites; d) poor access to livelihood opportunities; e)

‹•—ˆϐ‹…‹‡–•‘…‹ƒŽ•‡”˜‹…‡•ǢˆȌŽ‹‹–‡†ϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡–‘ƒ‹–ƒ‹ƒ†

improve housing projects; and g) environment-related concerns such as

‹ˆ‡…–‹‘—• †‹•‡ƒ•‡•ǡ ϐŽ‘‘†‹‰ǡ ƒ† —•ƒˆ‡ ƒ† —•ƒ‹–ƒ”› ‡˜‹”‘‡–

(Condeza, 2014; Brown, 2009; Dominguez & Ito, 2014; Ellao, 2013;

‘œƒŽ‡•ǡʹͲͳ͵Ǣƒ‰‹Žƒ–ǡʹͲͳͶǢ‘†”‹‰—‡œǡʹͲͳͷǢ—‹œǡʹͲͳͷǢƒ„‹–ƒ–ǡ

________________________

iiŠ‡ ‘–Š‡” „ƒ•‹… •‡”˜‹…‡• ƒ† ˆƒ…‹Ž‹–‹‡• ‹…Ž—†‡ DzŠ‡ƒŽ–Šǡ ‡†—…ƒ–‹‘ǡ …‘—‹…ƒ–‹‘•ǡ security, recreation, relief and welfare”.

ʹͲͲ͹ȌǤŠ‡•‡’”‘„Ž‡•™‡”‡—•—ƒŽŽ›ƒ––”‹„—–‡†–‘–Š‡Ž‹‹–‡†…ƒ’ƒ„‹Ž‹–›

‘ˆ –Š‡ ‰‘˜‡”‡– –‘ ˆ—Žϐ‹ŽŽ ‹–• Ž‡‰ƒŽ ‘„Ž‹‰ƒ–‹‘•ǡ …”‡ƒ–‡ Ž‘‰Ǧ–‡”

solution to poverty, and provide necessary facilities for the integration of

”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•‹–Š‡‹”‡™…‘—‹–›ǤŠ‡Ž‘…ƒŽ‰‘˜‡”‡–ǡ‘–Š‡‘–Š‡”

Šƒ†ǡ‘ˆ–‡…‘’Žƒ‹‡†ƒ„‘—–ϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽ…‘•–”ƒ‹–•ƒ‹‰–Š‡’”‘˜‹•‹‘

‘ˆƒ†‡“—ƒ–‡•‘…‹ƒŽƒ†‡…‘‘‹…•‡”˜‹…‡•ƒ‡Ž—•‹˜‡™‘”’ŽƒǤ‡ˆˆ‡…–ǡ some relocatees opted to return to their original settlements where they …‘—Ž†ϐ‹†„‡––‡”Ž‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘†‘’’‘”–—‹–‹‡•ˆ‘”–Š‡‹”ˆƒ‹Ž‹‡•Ǥ

Š‹• •–—†› ‰‡‡”ƒŽŽ› •‘—‰Š– –‘ ƒ••‡•• –Š‡ “—ƒŽ‹–› ‘ˆ •‡”˜‹…‡

†‡Ž‹˜‡”›‹–Š‡…‘–‡š–‘ˆƒ”‡•‡––Ž‡‡–ƒ”‡ƒ‹ƒŽƒ—ƒǡƒ‰—ƒǤƒƒ–‹

Homeville (MH) is a 40-hectare property owned and operated by the City

‘˜‡”‡–‘ˆƒƒ–‹ǤŠ‡ƒƒ–‹‘…‹ƒŽ‡Žˆƒ”‡‡’ƒ”–‡–Ǧš–‡•‹‘

ˆϐ‹…‡ȋǦȌ•‡”˜‡•ƒ•–Š‡’”‹ƒ”›†‡Ž‹˜‡”›…Šƒ‡Ž‘ˆ‰‘˜‡”‡–

’”‘‰”ƒ•ƒ†•‡”˜‹…‡•‹–Š‡ƒ”‡ƒǤŠ‡’‡”…‡‹˜‡†•–”‡‰–Š‘ˆǦǯ•

collaborative capacity in service delivery was analyzed particularly in

–Š‡ƒ”‡ƒ•‘ˆƒ……‘—–ƒ„‹Ž‹–›ǡ‘—–…‘‡•ǡ†‡Ž‹˜‡”›ǡƒ†ƒŽ‹‰‡–ǤŠ‡‡‡†

to scale up its collaborative capacity in each of these four areas was also examined based on the data gathered from quantitative and qualitative sources.

With reference to the testimony of Calauan Mayor Buenafrido

‡””‹•†—”‹‰–Š‡‡ƒ–‡Š‡ƒ”‹‰†ƒ–‡†ͷƒ›ʹͲͳͷǡ‹•…Žƒ••‹ϐ‹‡†ƒ•

ƒǦ‘™‡†’”‘’‡”–›™‹–Š‹ƒ‘–Š‡”ǤŠ‡”‡‹•‘‡‘”ƒ†—

‘ˆƒ‰”‡‡‡–ȋȌ•‹‰‡†„‡–™‡‡–Š‡‹–›‘˜‡”‡–‘ˆƒƒ–‹ƒ†

the Municipal Government of Calauan as to the role of each unit in the development of MH and its residents. Yet, despite the confusion over jurisdiction of MH, Mayor Berris claimed that they assume responsibility

‘˜‡”ƒŽŽ”‡•‹†‡–••‡‡‹‰ƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡ˆ”‘–Š‡Ž‘…ƒŽ‰‘˜‡”‡–ȋ™Š‡–Š‡”

”‡‰‹•–‡”‡†˜‘–‡”•‘”‘–ȌǤŠ‡›ƒŽ•‘…‘†—…–…‘’Ž‹ƒ…‡‘‹–‘”‹‰‹

MH with reference to the development plan submitted to them by the

ƒƒ–‹‹–›‰‘˜‡”‡–Ǥ

Presently, MH shelters a total of 1,031 families evicted from danger zones (waterways) and illegal settlements in different areas of

ƒƒ–‹ ‹ ʹͲͲͻ ȋǦǡ ʹͲͳ͵ȌǤ ’ƒ”– ˆ”‘ –Š‡ Š‘—•‹‰ —‹–•ǡ –Š‡

entire compound has two-storey elementary school building, two-storey

Š‹‰Š•…Š‘‘Ž„—‹Ž†‹‰ǡ…‘—ƒŽ”‡•–”‘‘•ǡ…Šƒ’‡Žǡ‰‘˜‡”‡–‘ˆϐ‹…‡ǡ and a covered court for recreational purposes. It also has an ample

—ϐ‹ŽŽ‡†•’ƒ…‡•—‹–ƒ„Ž‡ˆ‘”ˆƒ”‹‰ƒ†…‘—‹–›‰ƒ”†‡‹‰Ǥ

Almost 60 percent of the total number of households in MH were

Ž‹˜‹‰™‹–Šƒ‘–ŠŽ›‹…‘‡‘ˆŠ͵ǡͲͲͲǤͲͲƒ†„‡Ž‘™Ǥ‘Š‡Ž’ƒ—‰‡–

–Š‡‹” ‹…‘‡ǡ Ǧ ’”‘˜‹†‡† Ž‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘† ’”‘Œ‡…–• ƒ† ϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽ

ƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡ ‹…Ž—†‹‰ ‘‘† ˆ‘” ‘”ǡ ƒ•Š ˆ‘” ‘”ǡ ‹…‡ ˆ‘” ‘”ǡ health insurance programs, cash gifts for senior citizens, medical/dental missions, burial assistance, and annual Pamaskong Handog (Christmas

‰‹ˆ– ’ƒ…ƒ‰‡ȌǤ – ƒŽ•‘ ˆ‘”‰‡† ’ƒ”–‡”•Š‹’ ™‹–Š ‘–Š‡” ‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•

offering assistance that is aligned with its own development agenda.

Š—•ǡƒ’ƒ”–ˆ”‘Ǧ‹‹–‹ƒ–‡†’”‘‰”ƒ•ǡ–Š‡”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•™‡”‡ƒŽ•‘

receiving assistance from its service partners in public and business

•‡…–‘”•ƒ†‘Ǧ’”‘ϐ‹–‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•ȋǦǡʹͲͳ͵ȌǤ‡–•–‹ŽŽǡ–Š‡”‡

are multiple and complex issues in the community that necessitate forging wider cross-sectoral collaboration. More than one-third was compelled to leave their houses unoccupied and rent a small space in

ƒ‹Žƒ•‘–Š‡›…‘—Ž†„‡…Ž‘•‡”–‘™‘”ƒ†‘–Š‡”’‘–‡–‹ƒŽ•‘—”…‡•‘ˆ

Ž‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘†ȋǦǡʹͲͳ͵ȌǤ‘‡‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ”‡…ƒŽŽ‡†–Š‡Dz™‡‡‡†‡”•dz

ƒ•–Š‡›‘Ž›‰‘Š‘‡–‘†—”‹‰™‡‡‡†•ƒˆ–‡”ƒͷǦ†ƒ›™‘”‹‡–”‘

ƒ‹ŽƒǤŠ‹•’‡”•‹•–•†‡•’‹–‡–Š‡—„‡”‘ˆ‘Ǧ‰‘‹‰Ž‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘†’”‘Œ‡…–•ǡ

•‘…‹ƒŽ•‡”˜‹…‡•ǡƒ†ϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡’”‘˜‹†‡†„›–Š‡Ǧƒ†

its partner organizations. Even more alarming is the alleged incidence of prostitution (sex for food), drugs and other criminal activities (e.g.,

•–‡ƒŽ‹‰Ȍ‹˜‘Ž˜‹‰…Š‹Ž†”‡‹–Š‡ƒ”‡ƒ†—‡–‘’‘˜‡”–›ȋ‹…‘ǡʹͲͳͷȌǤŠ‡

residents also demand for a more reliable source of potable water and electric supply.

MSWD-EO would not be able to measure up to the demands of

”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•™‹–Š‘—–‡ˆˆ‡…–‹˜‡Ž›‡‰ƒ‰‹‰•–ƒ‡Š‘Ž†‡”•ǡ‹‘˜ƒ–‹‰†‹ˆˆ‡”‡–

ƒ”‡ƒ• ‘ˆ •‡”˜‹…‡ †‡Ž‹˜‡”› ƒ† ˆ‘”‰‹‰ •–”‘‰ …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ ‡–™‘”•Ǥ A systematic assessment of MSWD-EO service delivery in line with its collaborative capacity could lead to an understanding of its strengths

ƒ•™‡ŽŽƒ•–Š‡ƒ”‡ƒ•–Šƒ–…ƒ„‡•…ƒŽ‡†—’–‘‡•—”‡•—•–ƒ‹ƒ„‹Ž‹–›ǤŠ‹•

study was premised on Collaborate and United Nations Development

”‘‰”ƒ‡ǯ• ȋȌ ”‡…‡–Ž› Žƒ—…Š‡† ˆ”ƒ‡™‘” ‹ ’—„Ž‹… •‡”˜‹…‡

†‡Ž‹˜‡”›ǡ ™Š‹…Š –ƒ‡• …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹‘ ƒ– –Š‡ …‘”‡ ‘ˆ ”‡ˆ‘” ‹‹–‹ƒ–‹˜‡•ǡ particularly in the areas of “accountability, outcomes, delivery, and alignment” (Kippin, 2015, pp.2-3).

‘•‹†‡”‹‰ –Š‡ ƒ–—”‡ ‘ˆ ‹••—‡• …‘ˆ”‘–‹‰ –Š‡ ƒƒ–‹

‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ ’”‘Œ‡…–ǡ –Š‡ ˆ”ƒ‡™‘”ǯ• ‡’Šƒ•‡• ‘ ’”‘‘–‹‰

accountability, engaging the citizens throughout the cycle of service delivery, ensuring congruence of values among partner agencies, and prioritizing the needs and aspirations of the citizens were applicable in assessing the current state of public service delivery in the area. A comprehensive account of forces that either thwart or accelerate service

†‡Ž‹˜‡”›™‘—Ž†•‹‰‹ϐ‹…ƒ–Ž›ƒ‹†‹ƒŽ‹‰‹‰–Š‡‹”ƒ…–‹‘•–‘ƒ’ƒ–Š…Ž‘•‡”–‘

…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹‘ǤŠ‡•–”ƒ–‡‰‹…Ž‡••‘•†‡”‹˜‡†ˆ”‘‘Ǧ‰‘‹‰‹–‡”˜‡–‹‘•

…‘—Ž†„‡‹•–”—‡–ƒŽ‹ƒ‹‰‡…‡••ƒ”›ƒ…–‹‘•–‘‡ˆˆ‡…–‹˜‡Ž›•‡…—”‡

–Š‡‡‡†‡†•‘…‹ƒŽƒ†‡…‘‘‹…‹ˆ”ƒ•–”—…–—”‡•‹–Š‡…‘—‹–›ǤŠ‡•‡

…‘—Ž† ƒŽ•‘ Š‡Ž’ Žƒ› †‘™ –Š‡ ‰”‘—†™‘” ˆ‘” •—•–ƒ‹‹‰ –‘™ƒ”†

becoming a strong and resilient resettlement community.

Theoretical Framework

Š‹• •–—†› ƒ†‘’–‡† ‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‡ ƒ† ǯ• ‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡

ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ”ƒ‡™‘”‹ƒ••‡••‹‰–Š‡’—„Ž‹…•‡”˜‹…‡†‡Ž‹˜‡”›‹ƒƒ–‹

Homeville. A well-functioning public sector that advocates strong collaboration and delivers adequate services aligned with the needs of

–Š‡…‘—‹–›‹•ƒ––Š‡…‘”‡‘ˆ–Š‹•†‡Ž‹˜‡”›ˆ”ƒ‡™‘”ǤŠ‹•‹•’”‡‹•‡†

on the assumption that the public sector cannot deal with the variety of community issues on its own. From the consolidated cases of collaboration

ƒ‘‰ –Š‡ ‰‘˜‡”‡–ǡ ’”‹˜ƒ–‡ •‡…–‘”•ǡ ‘Ǧ’”‘ϐ‹– ‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•

and local communities in United Kingdom, Collaborate is able to map out crucial areas of public service delivery where collaboration has to

–ƒ‡ ’Žƒ…‡ ƒ† ‹†‡–‹ˆ› •‡–• ‘ˆ ˆƒ…–‘”• ȋ…ƒŽŽ‡† ‡ƒ„Ž‡”•Ȍ •—’’‘”–‹‰ ‹–Ǥ

Š‡ˆ”ƒ‡™‘”‹••’‡…‹ϐ‹…ƒŽŽ›†‡•‹‰‡†–‘‘’–‹‹œ‡–Š‡†‡Ž‹˜‡”›‘ˆ

—•–ƒ‹ƒ„Ž‡ ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ‘ƒŽ• ȋ•Ȍǡ ’ƒ”–‹…—Žƒ”Ž› –Š‘•‡ ™‘”‹‰ ‹

the local level. Kippin (2015) noted that this “can be discussed, adapted, and applied internationally” and can be further tailored by “those who

™ƒ– –‘ ƒ‡ ‹– Šƒ’’‡ ‘ –Š‡ ‰”‘—†dz ȋ’ǤͶȌǤ – ‹•ǡ –Š‡”‡ˆ‘”‡ǡ Š‹‰ŠŽ›

ƒ†ƒ’–‹˜‡–‘ƒ–…ŠŽ‘…ƒŽ…‘†‹–‹‘•‹…‘—–”‹‡•Ž‹‡–Š‡Š‹Ž‹’’‹‡•™Š‡”‡

…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡—†‡”–ƒ‹‰Šƒ•ƒŽ”‡ƒ†›•–ƒ”–‡†‹–•…‘—”•‡ǤǦŠƒ†

to deal with a range of complex issues in MH such as shifting government leadership, budget constraint, and increasing demand for services by the relocatees, which may have detrimental effects on the development

’”‘…‡••Ǥ Š‡ ‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ”ƒ‡™‘” …‘—Ž† „‡ •–”ƒ–‡‰‹…ƒŽŽ›

‘’‡”ƒ–‹‘ƒŽ‹œ‡†–‘”‡•’‘†–‘–Š‡•‡‡‡”‰‹‰…‘’Ž‡š‹–‹‡•„›™‘”‹‰

through the enablers in each of the four cyclical areas of service delivery (i.e. outcomes, alignment, delivery, and accountability).

Š‡–‡”Dz‘—–…‘‡•dz’‡”–ƒ‹•–‘–Š‡‡š–‡–„›™Š‹…Š–Š‡‡†

targets are co-developed by citizens putting their needs and aspirations

ƒŠ‡ƒ†‘ˆ‘–Š‡”…‘…‡”•Ǥ–•’‡…‹ϐ‹…ƒŽŽ›ˆ‘…—•‡•‘‰‡‡”ƒ–‹‰ ‹•‹‰Š–•ǡ

„”‘‡”‹‰”‡Žƒ–‹‘•Š‹’•ǡƒ††‡•‹‰‹‰‹–‡”˜‡–‹‘•–‘ƒ…Š‹‡˜‡–Š‡•‡–

‡†–ƒ”‰‡–ǤŽ‹‰‡–ǡ‘–Š‡‘–Š‡”Šƒ†ǡŽ‘‘•‹–‘Š‘™•‡”˜‹…‡’”‘˜‹†‡”•

‹‘˜ƒ–‡™ƒ›•‘ˆ™‘”‹‰–‘‰‡–Š‡”™‹–Š‘–Š‡”•‡”˜‹…‡’ƒ”–‡”•ƒ…”‘••

•‡…–‘”•Ǥ–…‘˜‡”•–Š‡”‘Ž‡–Šƒ–‡™’‡”•’‡…–‹˜‡•‘Dz”‹•ǡ‹…‡–‹˜‡•ǡƒ†

resources play in building effective delivery partnerships” (Kippin, 2015,

Figure 1. Collaborative capacity in public service delivery framework ȋƒ†‘’–‡†ˆ”‘‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ”ƒ‡™‘”ˆ‘”—„Ž‹…‡”˜‹…‡š…‡ŽŽ‡…‡

by Kippin, 2015)

p.7). Delivery focuses on the extent by which public services are delivered while ensuring that the actual process is aligned with the service goals.

Š‡ˆ”ƒ‡™‘”ƒ‹–ƒ‹‡†–Šƒ–Dz‹‘˜ƒ–‹‘ǡƒ‰‹Ž‹–›ǡƒ†‰”‡ƒ–Ž‡ƒ†‡”•Š‹’

characterize the best and most sustainable delivery partnerships” (p.7).

Lastly, accountability pertains to the ability of the service provider to share power with the citizens, disclose vital information and account for its own actions. It explores how collaboration in public service delivery can be sustained by evidence, engagement, and transparency. Kippin (2015) argued that effective collaboration could be cultivated in these four areas to secure better service delivery outcomes.

In examining the perceived strength of collaborative capacity,

‡’Šƒ•‹•™ƒ•‰‹˜‡‘Ǧǯ•…‘”‡ƒ†•—’’‘”–•‡”˜‹…‡•ǤŠ‡…‘”‡

services were further divided into two: a) legal intervention service for criminal cases involving children and minor community disputes; and

„Ȍ ‹•–‹–—–‹‘ƒŽ •‘…‹ƒŽ ™‡Žˆƒ”‡ ƒ† †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– •‡”˜‹…‡•Ǥ Š‡ •—’’‘”–

services were those initiated by service partners within and outside MH requiring assistance (i.e., manpower, monitoring) from MSWD-EO.

Š‹Ž‡‹–…ƒ‘–„‡ƒ”‰—‡†–Šƒ–…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹‘™ƒ•ƒŽ”‡ƒ†›–ƒ‹‰

place, there was a need to examine the quality and extent to which it was observed within and across different areas of service delivery.

Š‡ •–—†› ‡š’Ž‘”‡† Š‘™ Ǧ ƒƒ‰‡† –‘ •—•–ƒ‹ ’ƒ”–‡”•Š‹’•

with different organizations from the government, business, and civil

•‘…‹‡–› ȋ…‘—‹–› ƒ† ‘Ǧ’”‘ϐ‹– ‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•ȌǤ › •–‹—Žƒ–‹‰ ƒ†

sustaining its collaborative capacity, it was assumed that MSWD-EO would be able to further multiply its lever in service delivery leading

–‘ ‹’”‘˜‡† ‘—–…‘‡•Ǥ Š‹• ™‘—Ž† ƒŽ•‘ ”‡•—Ž– –‘ ƒ ‘”‡ ‡’‘™‡”‡†

community, as relocatees are no longer considered mere recipients but active participants of service delivery.

METHODOLOGY

Location of the Study

Š‹• •–—†› ™ƒ• …‘†—…–‡† ‹ ƒƒ–‹ ‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ ȋȌǡ ƒ 40-hectare relocation site located in Barangay Dayap, Calauan (72.5

 ƒ™ƒ› ˆ”‘ ƒƒ–‹Ȍ ‹ ƒ‰—ƒǡ Š‹Ž‹’’‹‡•Ǥ Š‡ •‹–‡ ‹• †‹˜‹†‡† ‹–‘

–Š”‡‡’Šƒ•‡•™‹–Šƒ–‘–ƒŽ—„‡”‘ˆͷ͸„Ž‘…•Ǥƒ…Š‡Ž‹•–‡†‹ˆ‘”ƒŽ

settler-family was awarded a lot covering an area of 40-60 m². A total of 263,305.90 m² has been allotted for residential structures, which can

ƒ……‘‘†ƒ–‡‘”‡–Šƒ͸ǡͲͲͲˆƒ‹Ž‹‡•ǤŠ‡Ǧ™ƒ•‡•–ƒ„Ž‹•Š‡†

at Phase III near the elementary and high school buildings. It serves as the center for community activities in the site.

Data Collection

Data were collected through documentation review, interviews,

ˆ‘…—• ‰”‘—’ †‹•…—••‹‘ ȋ Ȍǡ ƒ† •‡ŽˆǦƒ†‹‹•–‡”‡† •—”˜‡›Ǥ ™‘ •‡–•

‘ˆ•‡ŽˆǦƒ†‹‹•–‡”‡†“—‡•–‹‘ƒ‹”‡•™‡”‡—•‡†ǤŠ‡ϐ‹”•–“—‡•–‹‘ƒ‹”‡

was designed for MSWD-EO, while the second questionnaire was for

–Š‡͵Ͳ‘‡™‡”•ǯ••‘…‹ƒ–‹‘ȋȌ‘ˆϐ‹…‡”•ǡ„Ž‘…Ž‡ƒ†‡”•ǡƒ†

members. For the collaborative capacity scale, each of the four areas of

•‡”˜‹…‡†‡Ž‹˜‡”›Šƒ†ͳͷƒ…–‹˜‹–›•–ƒ–‡‡–•‘”ƒ–‘–ƒŽ‘ˆ͸Ͳȋϐ‹˜‡ˆ‘”‡ƒ…Š of the three enablers per area) statements. Each statement corresponded

–‘–Š‡†‡•…”‹’–‹‘‘ˆ–Š‡•’‡…‹ϐ‹…‡ƒ„Ž‡”‹–Š‡‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ƒ’ƒ…‹–›

”ƒ‡™‘”Ǥ Š‡ ”‡•’‘†‡–• ™‡”‡ ƒ•‡† –‘ ’—– ƒ …Š‡… —†‡” –Š‡

number that corresponded to how frequent the MSWD-EO performs the given activity statement (i.e., 5 - always; 4 - often; 3 - sometimes;

Figure 2. Community Map of Makati Homeville (Ladon, 2014)

ʹǦ”ƒ”‡Ž›ǢͳǦ‡˜‡”Ǣƒ†ͲǦ†‘‘–‘™ȌǤŠ‡†‘…—‡–ƒ–‹‘”‡˜‹‡™ǡ interview, and FGD were used to generate in-depth data and validate information obtained from the self-administered survey.

Data Analysis

Š‡’‡”…‡‹˜‡†•–”‡‰–Š‘ˆ…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡…ƒ’ƒ…‹–›™ƒ•ƒƒŽ›œ‡†

based on the computed average score of all activity statements …‘””‡•’‘†‹‰–‘–Š‡‡ƒ„Ž‡”•‘ˆ‡ƒ…Š‡›•‡”˜‹…‡†‡Ž‹˜‡”›ƒ”‡ƒǤ˜‡”ƒ‰‡

•…‘”‡•™‡”‡‹–‡”’”‡–‡†ƒ•ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™•ǣͳǣͲͲǦͳǣͺͲα˜‡”›™‡ƒǡͳǣͺͳǦʹǣ͸Ͳα

™‡ƒǡʹǣ͸ͳǦ͵ǣͶͲᏑ†‡”ƒ–‡ǡ͵ǣͶͳǦͶǣʹͲα•–”‘‰ǡƒ†ͶǣʹͳǦͷǣͲͲα˜‡”›

strong. A higher score suggests stronger collaborative capacity.

Š‡†ƒ–ƒ…‘ŽŽ‡…–‡†ˆ”‘†‹ˆˆ‡”‡–•‘—”…‡•™‡”‡…”‘••Ǧ‡šƒ‹‡†

–‘˜ƒŽ‹†ƒ–‡–Š‡ƒ……—”ƒ…›‘ˆϐ‹†‹‰•ǤŠ‡’‡”…‡‹˜‡†•–”‡‰–Š‘ˆǦ ǯ• …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ …ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ™ƒ• ˜ƒŽ‹†ƒ–‡† „› …‘’ƒ”‹‰ –Š‡ ”‡•—Ž–• ‘ˆ

„‘–Š•—”˜‡›•™‹–Š–Š‡†ƒ–ƒ†‡”‹˜‡†ˆ”‘ •ƒ†‹–‡”˜‹‡™•ǤŠ‡Žƒ––‡”

allowed for a more interactive inquiry and discussion unfolding complex issues in the community that were not adequately covered, if not hidden,

‹•—”˜‡›ϐ‹†‹‰•Ǥƒ–ƒ–”‹ƒ‰—Žƒ–‹‘™ƒ•ƒŽ•‘†‘‡–‘•–”‡‰–Š‡–Š‡

”‡•‡ƒ”…Šϐ‹†‹‰•ƒ†ƒ‡†‹ƒ†‡“—ƒ…‹‡•‹‘‡•‘—”…‡Ǥ

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Historical Development of Makati Homeville

ƒƒ–‹‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ǡ’‘’—Žƒ”Ž›‘™ƒ•Dz‹ƒ›‘’‘—†ǡdz‹•ƒ

”‡•‡––Ž‡‡–’”‘Œ‡…–ˆ‘”–Š‡‹ˆ‘”ƒŽ•‡––Ž‡”Ǧˆƒ‹Ž‹‡•Ž‹˜‹‰‹Š‹‰Š”‹•

ƒ†‰‘˜‡”‡–Ǧ‘™‡†ƒ”‡ƒ•‹ƒƒ–‹…‹–›ǤŠ‡‡–‹”‡ƒ”‡ƒ‹•‡•–‹ƒ–‡†

to accommodate more than 6,000 families (Cinco, 2015; Frialde, 2015).

Š‡”‡ƒ”‡ͷ͸„Ž‘…•ˆ”‘’Šƒ•‡•‘‡–‘–Š”‡‡„—–‘Ž›ͳʹ„Ž‘…•Šƒ˜‡

been occupied up to date. Included in the functional amenities that can be found in the area are MSWD-EO building, covered court, chapel, a building with eight communal comfort rooms and eight communal bathrooms, day care center, and school buildings both for elementary and high school levels (MSWD-EO, 2013).

Construction of the relocation site. ʹͲͲ͹ǡ–Š‡ƒƒ–‹‹–›

government procured parcels of land in Barrio Santol, Barangay Dayap

ˆ‘” –Š‡ †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ‘ˆ ‹–• •‘…‹ƒŽ‹œ‡† Š‘—•‹‰ ’”‘‰”ƒǤ Š‡ –‘–ƒŽ …‘•–

of site development was estimated at PhP140 M. Informal settler-

families began to transfer to the area in 2009 but most of them had to

„—‹Ž† –Š‡‹” ‘™ ƒ‡•Š‹ˆ– Š‘—•‡• ƒ• –Š‡ …‘•–”—…–‹‘ ‘ˆ Š‘—•‡• ™ƒ•

‘–’ƒ”–‘ˆ–Š‡…‹–›‰‘˜‡”‡–ǯ•‹‹–‹ƒŽ’Žƒȋ ”‹ƒŽ†‡ǡʹͲͳͷȌǤ”‡˜‹‡™

of existing documents revealed that development (i.e., physical, social,

‡…‘‘‹…Ȍ™ƒ••Ž‘™‹–Š‡ƒ”‡ƒˆ‘”–Š‡ϐ‹”•–ˆ‘—”›‡ƒ”•‘ˆ‘’‡”ƒ–‹‘ǤŠ‡›

Žƒ…‡† „ƒ•‹… •‡”˜‹…‡• ‹…Ž—†‹‰ ™ƒ–‡” ƒ† ‡Ž‡…–”‹…‹–›Ǥ Š‡› Šƒ† –‘ ”‡Ž›

‘ƒŽ–‡”ƒ–‹˜‡•‘—”…‡•Ž‹‡„—‹Ž†‹‰™ƒ–‡”’—’ƒ†–ƒ’’‹‰‡Ž‡…–”‹…‹–›

ˆ”‘ƒ‘—–•‹†‡•‘—”…‡ǤŠ‡•‹–‡™ƒ•ƒŽ•‘ˆƒ”ˆ”‘–Š‡’—„Ž‹…ƒ”‡–ƒ†

Š‡ƒŽ–Š…‡–‡”ǤŠ‡ϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡’”‘˜‹†‡†„›Ǧ™ƒ•‘–

enough to sustain the needs of the relocatees and their families forcing

‘”‡–Šƒ͵Ͳ’‡”…‡–‘ˆ–Š‡–‘Ž‹˜‡‘ˆˆǦ•‹–‡ǤŠ‡‹–›‘˜‡”‡–‘ˆ

ƒƒ–‹…‘•–”—…–‡†͵ͻͷ—‹–•‘ˆŠ‘—•‡•—’–‘ʹͲͳ͵Ǥ”‘—†ʹ͵ͷˆƒ‹Ž‹‡•ǡ

Š‘™‡˜‡”ǡ ƒ”‡ •–‹ŽŽ Ž‹˜‹‰ ‹ ƒ‡•Š‹ˆ– Š‘—•‡• ƒ• Š‘—•‡ …‘•–”—…–‹‘ ‹

Phases 1 and 2 are not yet completed (Abad et al., 2014; Cinco, 2015).

Partnership and community building. In 2012, MSWD- EO started implementing livelihood trainings but these did not really

Ž‡ƒ†–‘–Š‡…”‡ƒ–‹‘‘ˆ•—•–ƒ‹ƒ„Ž‡Ž‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘†‡–‡”’”‹•‡•†—‡–‘Žƒ…‘ˆ

•–”‘‰ ƒ”‡– ’ƒ”–‡”• ƒ† ‹•—ˆϐ‹…‹‡– •–ƒ”–Ǧ—’ …ƒ’‹–ƒŽ ȋ„ƒ†ǡ ʹͲͳͶȌǤ

‘ „”‘ƒ†‡ –Š‡‹” ”‡•‘—”…‡ „ƒ•‡ ƒ† ‹’”‘˜‡ •‡”˜‹…‡ †‡Ž‹˜‡”›ǡ Ǧ EO further forged partnership with different organizations in Laguna

ƒ†ƒƒ–‹ǤŠ‡…‘—‹–›ǡ‘–Š‡‘–Š‡”Šƒ†ǡ–‘‘ƒƒ…–‹˜‡–—”„›

organizing “traditional” events including the celebration of the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Simbang Gabi (Evening Mass), Christmas Party,

ƒ†‘—–Šƒ’ǤŠ‡•‡‡˜‡–•Šƒ˜‡„‡…‘‡–Š‡—…ŠǦƒ™ƒ‹–‡†ƒ—ƒŽ

festivities in the community up to this date.

–™ƒ•‘–—–‹ŽʹͲͳͶ™Š‡–Š‡Ǧ‹–‡•‹ϐ‹‡†‹–•…ƒ’ƒ‹‰

–‘‡…‘—”ƒ‰‡”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•–‘ϐ‹Ž‡‘ˆϐ‹…‹ƒŽ”‡•‹†‡…›‹ƒŽƒ—ƒǡƒ‰—ƒ•‘

they may avail the social services provided by the government in both municipal and provincial levels (Cinco, 2015). Ms. Maribel Lumang,

ˆ‘”‡”ƒƒ–‹‹–›‘…‹ƒŽ‡Žˆƒ”‡‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–‘ˆϐ‹…‡”ǡ‡š’Žƒ‹‡†‹ƒ

interview with Philippine Daily Inquirer correspondent, Ms. Maricar

‹…‘ǡ –Šƒ– ‹– –‘‘ ƒ …‘—’Ž‡ ‘ˆ ›‡ƒ”• ˆ‘” •‘‡ ”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡• –‘ ”‡‰‹•–‡” ‹

Calauan, because they probably did not want to cut their residential ties

™‹–Šƒƒ–‹Ǥ

Issues on inter-local governmental relations. Š‡ ƒ•‡†

who has the jurisdiction over MH, Area Coordinator Rommel Ducay

•ƒ‹† ‘’‡Ž›ǡ DzŠ‹• ‹• ‘™ —†‡” –Š‡ Œ—”‹•†‹…–‹‘ ‘ˆ ƒŽƒ—ƒ „—– –Š‡›

•–‹ŽŽ „‡‡ϐ‹– ˆ”‘ –Š‡ •‡”˜‹…‡• ‘ˆ ƒƒ–‹Ǥdz Š‡”‡ Šƒ† „‡‡ ‘ …Ž‡ƒ”

ƒ‰”‡‡‡–ƒ•–‘–Š‡Œ‘‹–Ž‡‰ƒŽ”‡•’‘•‹„‹Ž‹–›‘ˆƒƒ–‹ƒ†ƒŽƒ—ƒ‘…ƒŽ

‘˜‡”‡–‹–•ȋ•Ȍ‹–Š‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–‘ˆǤŠ‡‹’Ž‡‡–‹‰

”—Ž‡•ƒ†”‡‰—Žƒ–‹‘•‘ˆ͹ʹ͹ͻŠƒ•‘•’‡…‹ϐ‹…’”‘˜‹•‹‘•‘–Š‡Ž‡‰ƒŽ

procedures involved in off-city or near-city relocation. Calauan Mayor Berris, during the Senate hearing last May 2015, expressed his confusion over inter-local government relations and requested the legislators to clarify standard rules to follow when an LGU has a property in another Ǥ ‡ ”‡’‘”–‡† –Šƒ– ƒƒ–‹ ‹‰‘”‡† –Š‡ ‘”ƒ–‘”‹— –Šƒ– –Š‡›

issued on MH in 2011 due to poor compliance to the development plan (i.e., supply of water and electricity) and still opted to send relocatees in

–Š‡ƒ”‡ƒǤŠ‡”‡™ƒ•‡˜‡ƒ‹•–ƒ…‡™Š‡Š‡™ƒ•‘–ƒŽŽ‘™‡†–‘‡–‡”

’”‡‹•‡•™‹–Š‘—–…Ž‡ƒ”ƒ…‡ˆ”‘ƒƒ–‹Ǥ

Provision of basic services. Š‡ƒƒ–‹‹–›•‡…—”‡†–Š‡

‡‡†‡† ’‡”‹–• ˆ‘” –Š‡ ‡Ž‡…–”‹ϐ‹…ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ ƒƒ–‹ ‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ †—”‹‰ –Š‡

last quarter of 2014. All areas covered by Phase 3 had ready access to electricity. Street lights had also been established replacing the solar

•–”‡‡–Ž‹‰Š–•’”‘˜‹†‡†„›ƒŽƒ›ƒ‘ŽŽ‡‰‡•ƒ‰—ƒ‹ʹͲͳ͵ǤŠ‡ƒƒ–‹

‰‹‡‡”‹‰ˆϐ‹…‡ƒŽ”‡ƒ†›…‘†—…–‡†ƒ’”‡Ǧ‡˜ƒŽ—ƒ–‹‘‘ˆŠ‘—•‹‰—‹–•

in Phases 1 and 2 for the power supply installation. A water line system design had also been installed in two housing units but was still subject

–‘–Š‡ƒ’’”‘˜ƒŽ‘ˆ–Š‡ƒƒ–‹‹–›‡‰‹‡‡”Ǥ

In response to the allegations that MH relocatees were severely

‡‰Ž‡…–‡†„›ƒƒ–‹ǡˆ‘”‡”ˆϐ‹…‡”Ǧ‹ǦŠƒ”‰‡›ƒƒ”…‡Ž‘

claimed that they strictly adhere to the provisions of Urban Development

ƒ† ‘—•‹‰ …– ȋ ͹ʹ͹ͻȌǤ ‡ ‡š’Žƒ‹‡† ‹ ƒ ‹–‡”˜‹‡™ ™‹–Š Š‡

Š‹Ž‹’’‹‡ –ƒ” …‘””‡•’‘†‡– ‹‡ ”‹ƒŽ†‡ –Šƒ– –Š‡ …‹–› ‰‘˜‡”‡–

Šƒ•„‡‡’”‘˜‹†‹‰–Š‡Ž‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘†•‹ŽŽ•–”ƒ‹‹‰ǡϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡ǡ leadership, values formation seminars, and other social welfare and development programs since they transferred in 2009 (Frialde, 2015).

Š‡ –Š‡ ‹…—„‡– ‹…‡ ”‡•‹†‡– ‡Œ‘ƒ” ‹ƒ›ǡ ‘ –Š‡ ‘–Š‡” Šƒ†ǡ

™‡– ‡˜‡ ˆ—”–Š‡”ǡ ƒ••‡”–‹‰ –Šƒ– –Š‡ ƒƒ–‹ ‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ ’”‘Œ‡…– ‹• ƒ Dz‘†‡Ž ‹ –Š‡ Š‘—•‹‰ •‡…–‘”dz ȋƒ…ƒ•ǡ ʹͲͳͷȌǤ Š‡ Ž‘‰ †‡Žƒ› ‹ –Š‡

‡Ž‡…–”‹ϐ‹…ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ ƒ”‡ƒǡ ƒ……‘”†‹‰ –‘ Š‹ǡ ™ƒ• †—‡ –‘ –Š‡ ‡‰Ž‹‰‡…‡ ‘ˆ

™‹ ‡ƒˆ ”‘—’ …Ǥǡ –Š‡ ’”‘Œ‡…–ǯ• …‘–”ƒ…–‘” ƒŽŽ‡‰‡†Ž› ‘™‡† „› –Š‡

ˆ‘”‡” ƒƒ–‹ ‹…‡ ƒ›‘” ”‡•–‘ ‡”…ƒ†‘Ǥ ƒŽƒ—ƒ ƒ›‘” ‡””‹•

…Žƒ‹‡† –Šƒ– –Š‡ ™‹ ‡ƒˆ ”‘—’ †‹† ‘– …‘‘”†‹ƒ–‡ ™‹–Š –Š‡ Ž‘…ƒŽ

‰‘˜‡”‡– ‘ˆ ƒŽƒ—ƒ ’”‘’‡”Ž› ‹ –Š‡ ƒ…–—ƒŽ †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ‘ˆ ƒƒ–‹

‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡Ǥ ‘•‡“—‡–Ž›ǡ ™‹ ‡ƒˆ ”‘—’ǡ …Ǥ ˜‹‘Žƒ–‡† …‡”–ƒ‹ ”—Ž‡•

and regulations in the construction of functional amenities in the site. It

ƒŽ•‘ˆƒ‹Ž‡†–‘’ƒ›ͺͲǦ’‡”…‡–…‘–”ƒ…–‘”ǯ•–ƒšƒ•ƒ†ƒ–‡†„›–Š‡‘…ƒŽ

Government Code (Frialde, 2015).

A total of 3,476 persons (630 families) were living in the area as

‘ˆʹͲͳ͵ǤŠ‡ƒ˜‡”ƒ‰‡Š‘—•‡Š‘Ž†•‹œ‡™ƒ••‹šǤƒŒ‘”‹–›‘ˆ–Š‡”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•

had low educational attainment and relied on low paying jobs. Ninety

’‡”…‡– ‘ˆ –Š‡ ™‘”‡† ƒ• †”‹˜‡”•ǡ …‘•–”—…–‹‘ ™‘”‡”•ǡ ˜‡†‘”•ǡ and house painters, while the remaining 10 percent was employed in government and private companies in Metro Manila, if not overseas (MSWD-EO, 2013). Other problems indicated in MH Comprehensive Plan that the community had been facing include: a) non-operational high

•…Š‘‘Ž„—‹Ž†‹‰ǡ„ȌŽƒ…‘ˆŠ‘—•‡Š‘Ž†™ƒ–‡”…‘‡…–‹‘ǡ…Ȍ‘—–Ǧ‘ˆǦ•…Š‘‘Ž

youth, d) frequent incidence of theft, and e) gaps in security measures.

‘‡ ˆƒ‹Ž‹‡• ™‡”‡ •–‹ŽŽ Ž‹˜‹‰ ‹ ƒ‡•Š‹ˆ– Š‘—•‡• ™ƒ‹–‹‰ ˆ‘” –Š‡‹”

opportunity to be provided with cemented housing units by the local government.

While these issues remained unresolved, there had also been

‘–ƒ„Ž‡ …Šƒ‰‡• –ƒ‹‰ ’Žƒ…‡ ‹ –Š‡ …‘—‹–› –Š”‘—‰Š –‹‡ ȋʹͲͳʹǦ ʹͲͳͷȌǤ Š‡•‡ ™‡”‡ǣ ƒȌ ‡•–ƒ„Ž‹•Š‡– ‘ˆ ‘‡‘™‡”•ǯ ••‘…‹ƒ–‹‘

ȋȌ ƒ† „Ž‘… ‘ˆϐ‹…‡”•Ǣ „Ȍ •–”‡‰–Š‡‹‰ ‘ˆ ƒ …‘‘’‡”ƒ–‹˜‡Ǣ …Ȍ establishment of functional day care and elementary school; d) formation of tagapamayapa ‘” ’‡ƒ…‡ ‘ˆϐ‹…‡”•Ǣ ƒ† ‡Ȍ ‹’Ž‡‡–ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ ˜ƒ”‹‘—•

social, health, family, and livelihood services by MSWD-EO and partner

‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•ǤŠ‡”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•„‡Ž‹‡˜‡†–Šƒ––Š‡’ƒ”–‹…‹’ƒ–‹‘‘ˆ„—•‹‡••

ƒ†’—„Ž‹…•‡…–‘”•ƒ†‘Ǧ’”‘ϐ‹–‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•‘—–•‹†‡’”‡•‡–‡†

ample opportunities for community development (MSWD-EO, 2013).

‹‰—”‡͵•Š‘™•–Š‡ƒ—–Š‘”•ǯƒƒŽ›•‹•‘ˆ†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–•†‘‡‹

ǤŠ‡’Šƒ•‡•‘ˆ†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–‹™ƒ•‹ϐŽ—‡…‡†„›–Š‡”‡•‘—”…‡•

ƒŽŽ‘––‡† „› –Š‡ Ǧ ƒ† ‹–• ’ƒ”–‡” ‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•Ǥ Š‡”‡ ™ƒ•

ƒ ‡‡† –‘ …Žƒ”‹ˆ› –Š‡ ‹–‡”ǦŽ‘…ƒŽ ‰‘˜‡”‡– ”‡Žƒ–‹‘• ‘ˆ ƒƒ–‹ ƒ†

Calauan to ensure proper coordination of delivery of public services.

Despite the changes that had occurred through time in different aspects of community life, MSWD-EO had to continuously meet the complex demands of the relocatees and solve problems as they arise. Poor access to viable employment and livelihood opportunities undermined other development services that MSWD-EO and its partner organizations were providing for the community. Almost 60 percent of the total number of households were still earning below PhP 3,000.00 every month. Any

ƒ––‡’––‘ƒ‡ƒ•—•–ƒ‹ƒ„Ž‡…‘—‹–›™‘—Ž†„‡ˆ—–‹Ž‡™‹–Š‘—–

generating adequate sources of livelihood and improving the living conditions in the area. As a local social welfare and development agency, it was the primary role of MSWD-EO to formulate measures that would provide livelihood opportunities and improve living conditions of poor families in MH.

”‘ϐ‹Ž‡‘ˆƒƒ–‹‘…‹ƒŽ‡Žˆƒ”‡ƒ†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–

š–‡•‹‘ˆϐ‹…‡ƒ†‹–•ƒ”–‡””‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•

Š‡ ƒƒ–‹ ‘…‹ƒŽ ‡Žˆƒ”‡ ƒ† ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– š–‡•‹‘ ˆϐ‹…‡ (MSWD-EO) was established in 2008 primarily to provide the needed

ƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡ ƒ† ˆƒ…‹Ž‹–ƒ–‡ †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ’”‘…‡•• ‹ ƒƒ–‹ ‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡Ǥ –

‹•–ƒ•‡†–‘…ƒ””›‘—–•‘…‹ƒŽƒ††‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–•‡”˜‹…‡•—–‹Ž•—…Š–‹‡

that the relocatees and their community are capable of meeting their

‘™‡‡†•ǤǦ‹•—†‡”–Š‡ˆ‘”ƒŽ‡––Ž‡”•ǯ‡…–‹‘‘ˆǤ As mentioned earlier, the services provided by MSWD can be generally …Žƒ••‹ϐ‹‡†‹–‘–™‘ǣ…‘”‡•‡”˜‹…‡•ƒ†•—’’‘”–•‡”˜‹…‡•ǤŠ‡…‘”‡•‡”˜‹…‡•

pertain to institutional services initiated and managed by MSWD-EO for

–Š‡„‡‡ϐ‹–‘ˆ–Š‡”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•™‹–Š–Š‡Š‡Ž’‘ˆ’ƒ”–‡”‹•–‹–—–‹‘•ǤŠ‡•‡

services can be further divided into social and development services and legal intervention.

Figure 3. Timeline of On-site and Community Development in Makati Homeville (Source: Authors’ Analysis)

Social and development services pertain to those that are regularly offered to the relocatees to help them meet their needs

ƒ†—’Ž‹ˆ––Š‡‹”Ž‹˜‹‰…‘†‹–‹‘•ǤŠ‡•‡‹…Ž—†‡ƒ›ƒ”‡‡–‡”ǡƒ•Š

ˆ‘” ‘”ǡ ‡ŽŽ‘™ ƒ”† ȋŠ‡ƒŽ–Š …ƒ”†Ȍⁱⁱⁱ, Blue Card (for senior citizens)^iv, Damayan (mutual aid), and Pamaskong Handog ȋŠ”‹•–ƒ•‰‹ˆ–’ƒ…ƒ‰‡ȌǤ

Š‡˜ƒŽ—‡•ˆ‘”ƒ–‹‘ǡ•‹ŽŽ•–”ƒ‹‹‰ǡƒ†Ž‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘†•‡‹ƒ”•‹‹–‹ƒ–‡†

„›Ǧƒ”‡ƒŽ•‘‹…Ž—†‡†‹–Š‹•…ƒ–‡‰‘”›ǤŠ‡Ž‡‰ƒŽ‹–‡”˜‡–‹‘

service, on the other hand, points to their authority to mediate and settle disputes and problems involving children, their families, and the …‘—‹–› ƒ– Žƒ”‰‡ ȋ‡Ǥ‰Ǥǡ Œ—˜‡‹Ž‡ †‡Ž‹“—‡…›ǡ ˆƒ‹Ž› …‘ϐŽ‹…–•ǡ Ž‘ƒ

disputes).

Š‡•—’’‘”–•‡”˜‹…‡•’‡”–ƒ‹–‘–Š‘•‡–Šƒ–ƒ”‡‹‹–‹ƒ–‡†„›–Š‡

’ƒ”–‡”Ǧ‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘• ™Š‹…Š ”‡“—‹”‡ –Š‡ ƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡ ‘ˆ ǦǤ Š‡

decision of the MSWD-EO to approve the proposed services primarily depend on the required manpower to carry them out and, more

‹’‘”–ƒ–Ž›ǡ–‘–Š‡‡š–‡–„›™Š‹…Š–Š‡•‡ƒ”‡ƒŽ‹‰‡†™‹–Š–Š‡‹†‡–‹ϐ‹‡†

priority concerns of the community.

In 2013, MSWD-EO formulated seven pillars of community

†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ȋƒ„Ž‡ ͳȌ –Šƒ– •‡”˜‡† ƒ• •’‡…‹ϐ‹… ‰—‹†‡Ž‹‡• ‹ –Š‡‹”

†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ™‘” ‹ ƒƒ–‹ ‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡Ǥ ƒ…Š ‰—‹†‡Ž‹‡ ‹• …ƒ””‹‡† ‘—–

through a number of institutional services catering to all relocatees in the area.

Š‡ƒ•Šˆ‘”‘”‹•‘ˆˆ‡”‡†–‘ƒƒš‹—‘ˆ͵ͲͲˆƒ‹Ž‹‡•‡˜‡”›

›‡ƒ”ǤŠ‡„‡‡ϐ‹…‹ƒ”‹‡•”‡…‡‹˜‡…ƒ•Šƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡‹‡š…Šƒ‰‡ˆ‘”–Š‡™‘”

that they render for the community. Some of these include cleaning up the streets and school, construction of community centers, and planting crops and ornamental garden plants. In 2014, MSWD-EO decided not

–‘‘ˆˆ‡”‹…‡ˆ‘”‘”ƒ† ‘‘†ˆ‘”‘”ǡƒ†ˆ‘…—•‘ƒ•Šˆ‘”‘”

‹•–‡ƒ†•‹…‡–Š‡”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•’”‡ˆ‡””‡††‹”‡…–ϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡Ǥ ‘‘†

’”‘…—”‡‡–ƒ†”‡’ƒ…‹‰ƒŽ•‘‘”ƒŽŽ›–‘‘Ž‘‰‡”–‹‡…‘•‹†‡”‹‰

the required governmental process that had to be followed. Apart from

–Š‡ ƒ„‘˜‡Ǧ…‹–‡† •‡”˜‹…‡•ǡ –Š‡ ”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡• ƒŽ•‘ „‡‡ϐ‹– ˆ”‘ ƒ› ƒ”‡

Center, Yellow Card, Blue Card, Damayan, and Pamaskong Handog. Yet Mr.

—…ƒ›‘–‡†–Šƒ––Š‡›‡‡†ϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡ˆ”‘‘–Š‡”‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•

to sustain these activities, especially those related to livelihood, health, values formation, and capability building.

________________________

iii‡ŽŽ‘™ƒ”†‰‹˜‡•ƒƒ–‹”‡•‹†‡–•ƒ……‡••–‘ˆ”‡‡Š‘•’‹–ƒŽ‹œƒ–‹‘‹ƒƒ–‹ǤŠ‡›ƒ”‡‘Ž›

required to give PhP200 as donation if hospital bill exceeds PhP5,000.00.

ivŽ—‡ƒ”†Š‘Ž†‡”‹”‡…‡‹˜‡•…ƒ•Š‰‹ˆ––™‹…‡ƒ›‡ƒ”ˆ”‘–Š‡‹–›‘˜‡”‡–‘ˆƒƒ–‹Ǥ

Table 1. MSWD-EO seven pillars of community development and the corresponding institutional services

PILLAR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

INSTITUTIONAL SERVICES

1. Strong community organizing ᵣ‘‹–‘”‹‰‘ˆƒƒ–‹‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡

‘‡‘™‡”•ǯ••‘…‹ƒ–‹‘ƒ†

„Ž‘…‘ˆϐ‹…‡”•ǯ‰‡‡”ƒŽ‘–ŠŽ›

meeting

2. Participatory governance ᵣƒ•Šˆ‘”™‘”

ᵣ ‘‘†ˆ‘”™‘”

ᵣ‹…‡ˆ‘”‘”

͵Ǥ‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘†ƒ†ƒ……‡••–‘ƒ”‡– ᵣ‹˜‡Ž‹Š‘‘†–”ƒ‹‹‰•ȋ‡Ǥ‰Ǥǡ–”ƒ‹‹‰•

on beauty care, wellness massage,

’ƒ’‡”„”‹“—‡––‡ƒ‹‰ǡ”—‰

ƒ‹‰ǡ•–”ƒ™„ƒ‰ƒ‹‰ǡƒ†

’‹‡ƒ’’Ž‡Œƒƒ‹‰Ȍ ᵣ•–ƒ„Ž‹•Š‡–‘ˆ…‘‘’‡”ƒ–‹˜‡

4. Gender sensitivity ᵣ‡•’‘•‹„Ž‡’ƒ”‡–‹‰•‡‹ƒ”

5. Ecological sustainability ᵣ’Ž‡‡–ƒ–‹‘‘ˆ‡”‘Žƒ•–‹…

Policy

ᵣ•–ƒ„Ž‹•Š‡–‘ˆƒ–‡”‹ƒŽ•

recovery facility (MRF) ᵣ–”‡‡–„‡ƒ—–‹ϐ‹…ƒ–‹‘

6. Food security ᵣ”‰ƒ‹…ˆƒ”‹‰

7. Health (hygiene and sanitation) ᵣ ‡‡†‹‰’”‘‰”ƒ

‘” ‡‹‰Š– ›‡ƒ”•ǡ Ǧ Šƒ• ™‘”‡† –‘‰‡–Š‡” ™‹–Š –‡

‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•Ȁ‹•–‹–—–‹‘• ™‹–Š‹ ƒ† ‘—–•‹†‡ ƒƒ–‹ ‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡Ǥ Š‡

‡› ’Žƒ›‡”• ˆ‘” ‹–‡”Ǧ•‡…–‘”ƒŽ …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹‘ ’”‡•…”‹„‡† „› ‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‡

ƒ† ǯ• ‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ”ƒ‡™‘” ƒ”‡ ƒŽŽ ”‡’”‡•‡–‡† ‹

Ǧǯ•Ž‹•–‘ˆ’ƒ”–‡”‹•–‹–—–‹‘•ǣƒȌ–™‘…‘—‹–›‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•ǡ

„Ȍ‘‡ˆ”‘–Š‡’”‹˜ƒ–‡•‡…–‘”ǡ…Ȍ–™‘ˆ”‘–Š‡’—„Ž‹…•‡…–‘”ǡƒ††Ȍϐ‹˜‡

‘Ǧ’”‘ϐ‹–‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•Ǥ

Forging collaboration with organizations within and outside

ƒƒ–‹ ‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ ‹• ‘– ™‹–Š‘—– ’”‘„Ž‡•Ǥ ••—‡• ‡…‘—–‡”‡† ƒ”‡

often due to unclear agreements when it comes to project monitoring and reporting in which, if not properly addressed, lead to strained relationships among partners or even termination of joint projects. In

ˆƒ…–ǡ‘ˆ–Š‡•‡ͳͲ’ƒ”–‡”•ǡ‘Ž›•‹šŠƒ˜‡”‡ƒ‹‡†ƒ…–‹˜‡ƒ•‘ˆƒ—ƒ”›

2016.

Perceived Strength of MSWD-EO Collaborative Capacity

 –Š‡ •‡ŽˆǦƒ†‹‹•–‡”‡† •—”˜‡›ǡ –Š‡ ”‡•’‘†‡–• ™‡”‡ ƒ•‡†

–‘ …Š‡… –Š‡ —„‡” –Šƒ– …‘””‡•’‘†• –‘ Š‘™ ˆ”‡“—‡– –Š‡› –Š‹

Ǧ’‡”ˆ‘”•–Š‡‰‹˜‡ƒ…–‹˜‹–›•–ƒ–‡‡–•ǤŠ‹•’ƒ”–™ƒ•ˆ—”–Š‡”

divided into four thematic areas with three enablers each. Five activity statements for each enabler were given, adding to a total of 60 statements.

Š‡ ”‡•—Ž–• ™‡”‡ ƒƒŽ›œ‡† „ƒ•‡† ‘ –Š‡ …‘’—–‡† ƒ˜‡”ƒ‰‡ •…‘”‡ ‘ˆ

each activity statement. A higher score was an indication of stronger …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡…ƒ’ƒ…‹–›ǤŠ‡•‡™‡”‡˜ƒŽ‹†ƒ–‡†–Š”‘—‰Š–Š‡†ƒ–ƒ‘„–ƒ‹‡†

ˆ”‘‹–‡”˜‹‡™•ƒ† ǤŠ‡†‹•…—••‹‘„‡Ž‘™ƒ†ƒ„Ž‡ʹ’”‡•‡––Š‡

strength of collaborative capacity for each thematic area as perceived by

‘ˆϐ‹…‡”•ǡ„Ž‘…Ž‡ƒ†‡”•ǡƒ†Ǧ”‡ƒ‘‘”†‹ƒ–‘”Ǥ

Table 2. Perceived strength of MSWD-EO’s collaborative capacity in the four areas of service delivery

THEMATIC AREA ENABLER AVERAGE SCORE INTERPRETATION

Outcomes Insight 4.04 Strong

Design 3.88 Strong

”‘‡”ƒ‰‡ 4.35 Very Strong

General average 4.09 Strong

Alignment ‹• 3.54 Strong

Incentive 3.87 Strong

Resources 3.68 Strong

General average 3.71 Strong

Delivery Agility 4.06 Strong

Innovation 3.91 Strong

Leadership 3.76 Strong

General average 3.91 Strong

Accountability Evidence 3.71 Strong

Engagement 3.95 Strong

”ƒ•’ƒ”‡…› 3.61 Strong

General average 3.75 Strong

Outcomes. Š‡”‡•’‘†‡–•ǯ’‡”…‡‹˜‡†•–”‡‰–Š‘ˆǦ collaborative capacity in promoting outcomes was “strong” (4.09). All the three enablers fell within the “strong” interval scale.

ˆ –Š‡ –Š”‡‡ ‡ƒ„Ž‡”•ǡ Dz„”‘‡”ƒ‰‡dz ™ƒ• ’‡”…‡‹˜‡† –‘ „‡ –Š‡

enabler where MSWD-EO demonstrated the strongest collaborative …ƒ’ƒ…‹–›ȋͶǤ͵ͷȌǤŠ‹•™ƒ•…‘•‹•–‡–™‹–Š†ƒ–ƒ‘„–ƒ‹‡†ˆ”‘‹–‡”˜‹‡™•

ƒ† ǤŠ‡Ǧ‘”‰ƒ‹œ‡”•ǡ„ƒ•‡†‘–Š‡‹”‡š–‡•‹˜‡‘™Ž‡†‰‡

‘ˆ–Š‡…‘—‹–›ǡ‡šƒ‹‡†ϐ‹”•–™Š‡–Š‡”‘”‘––Š‡’‡‘’Ž‡™‡”‡™‹ŽŽ‹‰

ƒ†ƒ„Ž‡–‘’ƒ”–‹…‹’ƒ–‡‹–Š‡’”‘’‘•‡†’”‘Œ‡…–„‡ˆ‘”‡‡„ƒ”‹‰‹–‘

collaborative partnership. Mr. Ducay, for instance, declined the proposed

ˆ‡‡†‹‰’”‘‰”ƒ‘ˆƒ‘Ǧ’”‘ϐ‹–‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘‘™‹‰–Šƒ––Š‡…‘—‹–›

‘ˆϐ‹…‡”•…‘—Ž†‘–‡‡–‹–•†‡ƒ†•ǤŠ‡…‘—‹–›‘ˆϐ‹…‡”•™‡”‡‹˜‹–‡†

to participate whenever partner-institutions presented their proposed projects and detailed out the process involved in the implementation.

Š‡› ™‡”‡ ƒŽ•‘ ‰‹˜‡ ‘’’‘”–—‹–› –‘ ’”‘˜‹†‡ ƒŽ–‡”ƒ–‹˜‡ ‡ƒ•—”‡• ‹ˆ

they were not amenable to the established plan. An informant from the private sector-partner, for instance, recalled that they had to change the initial layout of solar street lights installation because the community volunteers could not understand the blue print that the engineering

•–—†‡–• ’”‡’ƒ”‡† ˆ‘” –Š‡Ǥ Š‡ ˜‘Ž—–‡‡” …ƒ”’‡–‡”• ’”‡ˆ‡””‡† –Š‡

traditional way of setting up structures, which they were accustomed to do.

Ǧ ‘”‰ƒ‹œ‡”• ƒŽ•‘ …‘–‹—‘—•Ž› Ž‘‘‡† ˆ‘” ’ƒ”–‡”

institutions or individual donors to help them improve the delivery of

‡š‹•–‹‰ •‡”˜‹…‡•Ǥ Š‡› …”‡ƒ–‡† ‘’’‘”–—‹–‹‡• ™Š‡”‡‹ –Š‡ ”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•

…‘—Ž† ™‘” –‘‰‡–Š‡” ™‹–Š –Š‘•‡ ˆ”‘ –Š‡ ‘–Š‡” „Ž‘…• ‹ …‘—‹–›

activities (e.g., organic farming, sports events).

“Insight” got the second highest average score (4.04) in this

–Š‡ƒ–‹…ƒ”‡ƒǤ–„ƒ•‹…ƒŽŽ›Ž‘‘‡†‹–‘–Š‡…ƒ’ƒ…‹–›‘ˆǦ–‘‡š’Ž‘”‡

†‡‡’Ž›‹–‘–Š‡‡‡†•ƒ†ƒ•’‹”ƒ–‹‘•‘ˆ–Š‡’‡‘’Ž‡ǤŠ‡”‡•—Ž–…ƒƒŽ•‘

be considered consistent with the data obtained from other sources.

Š‡ˆϐ‹…‡™ƒ•”‡“—‹”‡†–‘’”‡’ƒ”‡…‡•—•ƒ†‡‡†•ƒ••‡••‡–”‡’‘”–

ˆ‘”•—„‹••‹‘–‘Ǧƒƒ–‹„‡ˆ‘”‡Žƒ—…Š‹‰‹•–‹–—–‹‘ƒŽ•‡”˜‹…‡•Ǥ

‹…‡”Ǥ—…ƒ›™ƒ•ƒ„‡‡ϐ‹…‹ƒ”›‘ˆ–Š‡’”‘‰”ƒƒ†Ž‹˜‡•™‹–Š‹–Š‡

…‘—‹–›ǡ‹–™ƒ•”‡Žƒ–‹˜‡Ž›‡ƒ•›ˆ‘”Š‹–‘‘™–Š‡’‡”•‘ƒŽ‡‡†•ǡ wants, and aspirations of his fellow relocatees. He can go into the minute details of their personal lives even those that are already beyond the realm of public service. When he learned about what happened to the three victims of illegal recruitment, for instance, he immediately acted upon it even if it is no longer the responsibility of social welfare service.

MSWD-EO also conducted asset and resource mapping which they used in building the community further.

Although “design” got the lowest average score (3.88) in

–Š‹• ƒ”‡ƒǡ ‹– ™ƒ• •–‹ŽŽ ”ƒ–‡† Dz•–”‘‰dz „› –Š‡ ”‡•’‘†‡–•Ǥ Š‡ ”‡•—Ž–•ǡ however, were not consistent with the data obtained from interviews with MSWD-EO and partner institutions. In reality, MSWD-EO and partner-institutions did not conduct pilot-testing of the programs and

•‡”˜‹…‡•ǤŠ‡ƒ•‡†–‘†‹•…—••–Š‡…‘‘’”‘…‡••–Š‡›‘„•‡”˜‡†‹

conceptualizing and implementing their services, Mr. Ducay made no

‡–‹‘’—––‹‰–Š‡ϐ‹”•–‹–‘•ƒŽŽǦ•…ƒŽ‡–”‹ƒŽǤŠ‡•ƒ‡‘„•‡”˜ƒ–‹‘

can be derived from interviews with representatives of its private and …‘—‹–›‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘’ƒ”–‡”•ǤŠ‡”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡•Šƒ†‘’ƒ”–‹…‹’ƒ–‹‘

in the initial design of programs and services launched by MSWD-EO and their partner institutions.

Š‡ †‡•‹‰ ‘ˆ ‹•–‹–—–‹‘ƒŽ ’”‘‰”ƒ• ƒ† •‡”˜‹…‡• ‘ˆˆ‡”‡† „›

Ǧ‘”ƒŽŽ›…ƒ‡ˆ”‘–Š‡ƒ‹‘ˆϐ‹…‡‹ƒƒ–‹ǤŠ‡’ƒ”–‡”Ǧ institutions usually come to the community with a concrete design

’Žƒ ˆ‘” –Š‡‹” ’”‘’‘•‡† ’”‘Œ‡…–•Ǥ Š‡ ’ƒ”–‹…‹’ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ –Š‡ …‘—‹–›

™ƒ•Ž‹‹–‡†‘–Š‡ϐ‹ƒŽ’”‡•‡–ƒ–‹‘ƒ†…‘•—Ž–ƒ–‹‘Ǥ–‹•ǡ–Š‡”‡ˆ‘”‡ǡ

•—”’”‹•‹‰–Šƒ––Š‡„‡‡ϐ‹…‹ƒ”‹‡•”ƒ–‡†Ǧ•–”‘‰‹–Š‹•‡ƒ„Ž‡”Ǥ

Š‡ ”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡• ƒ› Šƒ˜‡ ‡“—ƒ–‡† ’ƒ”–‹…‹’ƒ–‹‘ ‹ ’—„Ž‹… …‘•—Ž–ƒ–‹‘

with involvement in project design.

Alignment. Similar to “outcomes,” the respondents believed that MSWD-EO had shown “strong” (3.71) collaborative capacity in

‹‘˜ƒ–‹‰™ƒ›•–‘™‘”–‘‰‡–Š‡”™‹–Š•‡”˜‹…‡’ƒ”–‡”•ƒ…”‘•••‡…–‘”•Ǥ Each of the three enablers also fell within the “strong” interval scale.

Š‡ˆϐ‹…‡™ƒ•’‡”…‡‹˜‡†–‘„‡•–”‘‰‡•–‹…”‡ƒ–‹‰‹…‡–‹˜‡•

ˆ‘”…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹‘ȋ͵Ǥͺ͹ȌǤŠ‡”‡•—Ž–™ƒ•…‘•‹•–‡–™‹–Š–Š‡‹ˆ‘”ƒ–‹‘

obtained through qualitative sources. MSWD-EO ensured that …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡’ƒ”–‡”•Š‹’•™‘—Ž†„‡„‡‡ϐ‹…‹ƒŽ–‘–Š‡…‘—‹–›Ǥ–™ƒ•

also important for them that the core values of the partner organizations were aligned with their own and that they were moving toward the same

‰‘ƒŽǤ Š‡ ƒ ‘Ǧ’”‘ϐ‹– ‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘Ǧ’ƒ”–‡”ǡ ˆ‘” ‡šƒ’Ž‡ǡ †‡…‹†‡† –‘

limit the number of their relief goods to 300 partner-families, Mr. Ducay

•–”‘‰Ž› ‘„Œ‡…–‡† ‘™‹‰ –Šƒ– –Š‡”‡ ™‡”‡ ‘”‡ –Šƒ ͸ͲͲ ƒˆˆ‡…–‡†

families in the area (based on his survey after the typhoon). After a series of discussions, Mr. Ducay was able to convince the partner-organization

–‘ ’”‘˜‹†‡ ”‡Ž‹‡ˆ ‰‘‘†• –‘ ƒŽŽ ƒˆˆ‡…–‡† ˆƒ‹Ž‹‡•Ǥ Š‡ Ǧ ƒŽ•‘

’”‘˜‹†‡†’ƒ”–‡”Ǧ‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘•‡“—ƒŽ‘’’‘”–—‹–›–‘ƒ‡†‡…‹•‹‘•‘

how projects must be carried out. Upon closer scrutiny, however, it was revealed that MSWD-EO still has no clear incentive schemes for service partners. Community volunteers were usually just given food and gifts for assisting in the implementation of projects. For service partners outside MH, what they could offer mainly were technical and manpower support in implementing their proposed project.

– ™ƒ• ‹ ‰‡‡”ƒ–‹‰ ”‡•‘—”…‡• –Šƒ– –Š‡ ˆϐ‹…‡ ‰‘– –Š‡ •‡…‘†

highest score in building collaborative capacity. Based on interviews, FGDs, and review of existing sources, it can be said that the results for

–Š‹• ‡ƒ„Ž‡” …ƒ–‡‰‘”› ™‡”‡ ‡‡Ž› ‘„•‡”˜‡† „› Ǧ ‹ ’”ƒ…–‹…‡Ǥ

Š‡‘”‰ƒ‹œ‡”•ƒ…–‹˜‡Ž›Ž‘‘‡†ˆ‘”•‡”˜‹…‡’ƒ”–‡”•ƒ†‡š’Ž‘”‡†˜ƒ”‹‘—•

means to get the people involved in community projects. In cases where

–Š‡ ‡‡”‰‡– ‡‡† ™ƒ• ‘– •—’’‘”–‡† „› –Š‡ ƒ‹ ‘ˆϐ‹…‡ǡ ”Ǥ —…ƒ›

ƒ† •‘‡ ˜‘Ž—–‡‡”• ™‘—Ž† ϐ‹† ‘–Š‡” •‘—”…‡• ‘ˆ ˆ—†• ‘ –Š‡‹” ‘™Ǥ

‘ ‡…‘—”ƒ‰‡ ˜‘Ž—–‡‡”‹• ƒ† ƒ…–‹˜‡ ’ƒ”–‹…‹’ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ ”‡Ž‘…ƒ–‡‡• ‹

…‘—‹–›ƒ…–‹˜‹–‹‡•ȋ‡Ǥ‰Ǥǡ—„ƒǡ‘”‰ƒ‹…ˆƒ”‹‰ǡˆ‘”ƒ–‹‘•‡‹ƒ”•Ȍǡ

–Š‡›‰—ƒ”ƒ–‡‡†–Šƒ–†‘‹‰•‘™‘—Ž†„‡‰”‡ƒ–Ž›„‡‡ϐ‹…‹ƒŽ–‘–Š‡ƒ†

their families.

‹•‰‘––Š‡Ž‘™‡•–ƒ˜‡”ƒ‰‡•…‘”‡‹–Š‹•ƒ”‡ƒǤŠ‡”‡•’‘†‡–•ǡ nonetheless, rated MSWD-EO “strong” (3.54) in terms of promoting …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹‘‹ƒƒ‰‹‰”‹•Ǥ’‘…Ž‘•‡”•…”—–‹›ǡ–Š‹•—ˆ‘”–—ƒ–‡Ž›

can be considered the most neglected enabler of alignment in terms of collaborative practice. An informant from its private sector-partner, for

‹•–ƒ…‡ǡƒ†‹––‡†–Šƒ––Š‡›†‹†‘–†‹•…Ž‘•‡ƒ†‡šƒ‹‡’‘–‡–‹ƒŽ”‹•‘ˆ

partnership with MSWD-EO (or vice versa) before entering an agreement

™‹–Š–Š‡ǤŠ‡‡˜‡”‡š’‡…–‡†–Šƒ––Š‡‹–›‘˜‡”‡–‘ˆƒƒ–‹™‘—Ž†

go through such a political crisis affecting the implementation of some of

–Š‡‹”’”‘Œ‡…–•ǤŠ‡‹•–ƒŽŽƒ–‹‘‘ˆ•‘Žƒ”Ǧ’‘™‡”‡†™ƒ–‡”’—’†‡•‹‰‡†„›

engineering students, for example, had been put into a halt while waiting

ˆ‘”–Š‡ƒ’’”‘˜ƒŽ‘ˆ–Š‡ƒƒ–‹‹–›‰‹‡‡”‹‰ˆϐ‹…‡Ǥ˜‡–Š‡Ǧ

‘‘”†‹ƒ–‘”ƒ†‹––‡†–Šƒ–’‘–‡–‹ƒŽ”‹••‘ˆ…‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹‘™‡”‡‘–

brought up in their meetings/discussions with the service partners.

Delivery. With a general average of 3.91, MSWD-EO was perceived to have “strong” collaborative capacity in service delivery.

None of the enablers got an average score below 3.91; thus, all were rated “strong”.

ˆ–Š‡–Š”‡‡‡ƒ„Ž‡”•‹–Š‹•ƒ”‡ƒǡ–Š‡ˆϐ‹…‡‰‘––Š‡Š‹‰Š‡•–•…‘”‡

in “agility” (4.06). As mentioned earlier, the organizer usually conducted

‡–™‘”ƒ’’‹‰‹ƒƒ––‡’––‘„”‘ƒ†‡–Š‡‹””‡•‘—”…‡„ƒ•‡ˆ‘”–Š‡

community. With the political crisis in the city government, shifting leadership, and security of tenure in the balance, there was a strong pressure for Mr. Ducay to cope with the changes in policies. He had to

”‡’‘”––‘ƒƒ–‹ˆ‘”‘”‡–Šƒƒ™‡‡ˆ‘”ƒ†‡„”‹‡ϐ‹‰‹‡†‹ƒ–‡Ž›ƒˆ–‡”

the unanticipated relief of his supervisor. Yet, he managed to continue

–Š‡‘’‡”ƒ–‹‘ƒ††‡Ž‹˜‡”›‘ˆ•‡”˜‹…‡•‹ƒƒ–‹‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡‡˜‡‹–Š‡

absence of a support staff. MSWD-EO and service partners also explored innovative ways in improving public service delivery in MH. However,

–Š‡•‡™‡”‡Žƒ”‰‡Ž›Ž‹‹–‡†„›–Š‡•—’’‘”–’”‘˜‹†‡†„›–Š‡ƒ‹‘ˆϐ‹…‡Ǥ Even if the priority areas of concern were clearly stipulated in MSWD-EO reports, the decision on what project to prioritize was determined by the administrators of MSWD. For instance, although water and electricity

•—’’Ž›™ƒ•‹†‡–‹ϐ‹‡†ƒ•ƒ’”‹‘”‹–›…‘…‡”ǡ‹–…‘—Ž†‘–„‡…‘•‹†‡”‡†ƒ

’”‹‘”‹–›’”‘‰”ƒ™‹–Š‘—––Š‡ƒ’’”‘˜ƒŽ‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ‹‘ˆϐ‹…‡Ǥ

For innovation, MSWD-EO was still rated “strong” by the respondents in terms of its capacity to collaborate. Data gathered

–Š”‘—‰Š“—ƒŽ‹–ƒ–‹˜‡•‘—”…‡•ǡŠ‘™‡˜‡”ǡ’”‘˜‡†‘–Š‡”™‹•‡ǤŠ‡’”‘‰”ƒ•

and services currently offered by MSWD-EO were largely the same as those they were providing three years ago. As earlier noted, the line of services provided for MH largely depended on the approval of MSWD

ƒ†‹‹•–”ƒ–‘”•Ǥ Š‹• ‹‡˜‹–ƒ„Ž› Ž‹‹–‡† –Š‡ …ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ‘ˆ –Š‡ …‘—‹–›

‘”‰ƒ‹œ‡”•–‘…‘…‡’–—ƒŽ‹œ‡‹‘˜ƒ–‹˜‡•‡”˜‹…‡•–Š‡›†‡‡‡†ϐ‹–ˆ‘”–Š‡

relocatees. Moreover, their desire to challenge the old and established ways of service delivery was also largely constrained with what was …‘•‹†‡”‡†ƒ’’”‘’”‹ƒ–‡„›–Š‡ƒ‹‘ˆϐ‹…‡Ǥ

Š‡DzŽ‡ƒ†‡”•Š‹’dz‡ƒ„Ž‡”‰‘–ƒ”ƒ–‹‰‘ˆ͵Ǥ͹͸‹–Š‹•ƒ”‡ƒǤŠ‡

perceived strength of collaborative capacity in all activity statements

™‡”‡…‘•‹•–‡–™‹–Š–Š‡ƒ…–—ƒŽ‡˜‡–•‹–Š‡ϐ‹‡Ž†ǤŽ–Š‘—‰Š‘‹–‘”‡†ǡ MSWD-EO gave the community organizations ample opportunity to

™‘”‘–Š‡‹”‘™’”‘Œ‡…–•Ǥ‡”‰‹‰…‘—‹–›ƒ†’‡”•‘ƒŽ‹••—‡•

…‘—Ž†‘–„‡•‡––Ž‡†™‹–Š‘—–„”‹‰‹‰–Š‡ϐ‹”•––‘–Š‡ƒ––‡–‹‘‘ˆ’‡‘’Ž‡

concerned. In case of theft involving youth, MSWD-EO gathered both parties and acted as mediator to help them arrive at a common decision.

Accountability. Similar to the three thematic areas mentioned earlier, the respondents believed that the MSWD-EO demonstrated

“strong” (3.75) collaborative capacity in promoting accountability. All three enablers were also rated “strong” with average scores ranging from 3.61 to 3.95.

It was in “engagement” where MSWD-EO demonstrated the strongest collaborative capacity in this area. Only the response from one

•–ƒ–‡‡– Ǧ –Š‡› ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™ ƒ •’‡…‹ϐ‹… ’”‘…‡†—”‡ ‹ ˆ‘”‰‹‰ ’—„Ž‹…Ǧ’”‹˜ƒ–‡

partnership in public service delivery - seemed to be inconsistent with

–Š‡ ƒ…–—ƒŽ …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ ’”ƒ…–‹…‡• ‘„•‡”˜‡† „› ǦǤ Š‡ ˆϐ‹…‡ had not yet established a standard system in forging strong “public- private partnership”. MSWD-EO collaborated with other organizations

„ƒ•‡†‘–Š‡’‡”•‘ƒŽ‘™Ž‡†‰‡ƒ†ƒ…“—‹”‡†‡š’‡”‹‡…‡•‘ˆ•–ƒˆˆ‹

†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–™‘”Ǥ—”’”‹•‹‰Ž›ǡ–Š‹••–ƒ–‡‡–™ƒ•”ƒ–‡†•–”‘‰„›–Š‡

respondents.

Mr. Ducay managed to maintain close relationship with the residents and mobilized them to participate in community activities.

Š‡”‡™‡”‡ƒŽ•‘‡Ž‡…–‡†…‘—‹–›‘ˆϐ‹…‹ƒŽ•™Š‘Š‡Ž’‡†Š‹Ž‡ƒ†‹–Š‡

delivery of public service. When issues arose, MSWD-EO normally settled

–Š‡’”‘„Ž‡„›‰ƒ–Š‡”‹‰–Š‡…‘…‡”‡†’‡‘’Ž‡–‘‰‡–Š‡”–‘‘™‘”‡

about their needs and aspirations. Not all people, however, would say

–Š‡•ƒ‡–Š‹‰ƒ„‘—–ǦǤ‘‡…Žƒ‹‡†–Šƒ––Š‡ˆϐ‹…‡ˆƒ˜‘”‡†

‘‡‰”‘—’‘ˆ’‡‘’Ž‡‘˜‡”–Š‡‘–Š‡”ǤŠ‹•™ƒ•‘‡„‹‰…ŠƒŽŽ‡‰‡–Šƒ–ƒŽ•‘

appeared in another sub-section of this research warranting proper attention.

Š‡ Dz‡˜‹†‡…‡dz ‰‘– –Š‡ •‡…‘† Š‹‰Š‡•– ƒ˜‡”ƒ‰‡ •…‘”‡ ȋ͵Ǥ͹ͳȌ

‹ –Š‹• ƒ”‡ƒǤ Š‡ ’‡”…‡‹˜‡† •–”‡‰–Š ‘ˆ …‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ …ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ‹ ‘•–

activity statements was consistent with the information derived from qualitative sources. Upon examination of how project assessments were conducted by the MSWD-EO and its partner-organizations, it can be said that they did not practice collaborative assessments during and after project implementation.

Ž› –Š‡ –™‘ ‘Ǧ’”‘ϐ‹– ‘”‰ƒ‹œƒ–‹‘Ǧ’ƒ”–‡”• –Šƒ– ’”‘˜‹†‡†

ˆ‡‡†‹‰’”‘‰”ƒ•ƒ†‡†—…ƒ–‹‘ƒŽƒ••‹•–ƒ…‡‹˜‘Ž˜‡†–Š‡„‡‡ϐ‹…‹ƒ”‹‡•

in assessing the outcomes of the intervention. Most organizations performed mid and post assessments on their own without engaging the

„‡‡ϐ‹…‹ƒ”‹‡•Ǥ

Of the three enablers, it was “transparency” that got the lowest score (3.61) in this thematic area. While MSWD-EO clearly announced

–Š‡‹” Ž‹‹–• ‹ †‡…‹•‹‘Ǧƒ‹‰ ƒ† ‡š’Žƒ‹‡† –‘ –Š‡ …‘—‹–› –Š‡

primary considerations in the decision that they made, the public had

‘”‡ƒ†›ƒ……‡••–‘’‡”–‹‡–†‘…—‡–•…‘…‡”‹‰–Š‡’”‘‰”‡••–ƒ‹‰

’Žƒ…‡ ‹ ƒƒ–‹ ‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ ȋ‡Ǥ‰Ǥǡ ‡Ž‡…–”‹ϐ‹…ƒ–‹‘ǡ ™ƒ–‡” •—’’Ž›ȌǤ Š‡”‡

™ƒ•‘‘ˆϐ‹…‹ƒŽƒ”‡ƒ™Š‡”‡’‡‘’Ž‡…ƒŠƒ˜‡ƒ……‡••–‘ϐ‹ƒ…‹ƒŽ”‡’‘”–•ǡ summary of accomplishments, development plans, and other documents

•Š‘™‹‰–Š‡…—””‡–…‘†‹–‹‘‹ƒƒ–‹‘‡˜‹ŽŽ‡ƒ†™Šƒ––Š‡ƒƒ–‹

LGU through MSWD-EO was doing about it.

From the consolidated information obtained from survey, interviews, documentary reviews, and focus group discussion, it can be said that MSWD-EO collaborative capacity was strongest in “outcomes”

ƒ†™‡ƒ‡•–‹DzƒŽ‹‰‡–ǤdzƒŽŽ–Š‡ƒ–‹…ƒ”‡ƒ•ǡŠ‘™‡˜‡”ǡ–Š‡”‡™‡”‡

ƒŽ•‘•’‡…‹ϐ‹…‡ƒ„Ž‡”•–Šƒ–”‡“—‹”‡‹‡†‹ƒ–‡ƒ––‡–‹‘„›–Š‡Ǧ

•—…Šƒ•†‡•‹‰ȋ‘—–…‘‡•Ȍǡ”‹•ȋƒŽ‹‰‡–Ȍǡ‹‘˜ƒ–‹‘ȋ†‡Ž‹˜‡”›Ȍǡƒ†

transparency (accountability).

Applying Collaborative Capacity Approach in Scaling-Up MSWD-EO’s Public Service Delivery

Š‡ ‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‡ ƒ† ǯ• ‘ŽŽƒ„‘”ƒ–‹˜‡ ƒ’ƒ…‹–› ’’”‘ƒ…Š was developed to improve public service delivery based on rising consumer demand. For this subsection, emphasis is given on how MSWD- EO public service delivery can be strengthened by building collaborative …ƒ’ƒ…‹–›‹ƒŽŽ–Š‡‹†‡–‹ϐ‹‡†ˆ‘—”‡Ž‡‡–•ƒ†–Š‡‹”‡ƒ„Ž‡”•Ǥ

Outcomes

•‹‰Š–ǤMSWD-EO has to respond immediately to emerging suspicions that they are not giving equal treatment to all. It can be done by

•…Š‡†—Ž‹‰ˆ”‡“—‡–˜‹•‹–•–‘‡ƒ…Š„Ž‘…ƒ†Ž‹•–‡‹‰–‘–Š‡‹”˜‹‡™’‘‹–•

and concerns. Due to resource constraint, MSWD-EO cannot deliver services to all relocatees. Hence, they have to involve the community

Ž‡ƒ†‡”•‹…”‡ƒ–‹‰…”‹–‡”‹ƒˆ‘”•‡Ž‡…–‹‘‘ˆ„‡‡ϐ‹…‹ƒ”‹‡•ǤŠ‡ƒ’’”‘˜‡†

…”‹–‡”‹ƒ—•–„‡’”‘’‡”Ž›…‘—‹…ƒ–‡†–‘ƒŽŽǤŠ‡ˆ‘”—Žƒ–‡†•–”ƒ–‡‰‹‡•

for service delivery must produce outcomes that are meaningful to the relocatees and their community.