CASE STUDY ON THE MOVEMENTS IN THE

DEVELOPMENT LEVELS OF ALBAPA ARC

IN VALLADOLID, NEGROS OCCIDENTAL:
THE SAMPLE ARC THAT HAS REGRESSED
FROM LEVEL 5 TO 3

DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM

Policy and Strategic Research Service
Economic and Socio-Cultural Research Division
January 2009

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

CASE STUDY ON THE MOVEMENTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT

LEVELS OF ALBAPA ARC IN VALLADOLID, NEGROS
OCCIDENTAL: THE SAMPLE ARC THAT HAS REGRESSED FROM
LEVEL 5 TO 3
A. Introduction
ALBAPA was launched as an agrarian reform community (ARC) in 2000 and has an
ARC classification of low semi-prime. It covers three barangays namely: Alijis,
Bayabas and Pacol in the municipality of Valladolid, Negros Occidental.
The total land area of ALBAPA ARC is 1,222.2550 hectares. Of this total land area,
869.7350 hectares or 71.16 percent are agricultural. The scope of land acquisition
and distribution (LAD) is 606.7089 hectares or 70 percent of the total agricultural
land area.
Of this total scope for LAD, about 384.2612 hectares or 63.34 percent were already
distributed to 192 agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs). Under leasehold operation,
two agrarian reform beneficiaries are covered by leasehold contracts with a total
area of 2.2 hectares.
Based on the 2007 Census of Population, the three barangays covered by ALBAPA
ARC has a total population of 5,243 of which, 2,630 or 50.2 percent are females and
2,613 or 49.8 percent are males. Its ARB population composed of EP and CLOA
holders, lessees and potential ARBs constitute a total of 301 or only 5.7 percent of
the total ARC population.

B. Analysis of the Movements in the Development Levels of ALBAPA ARC

The ALDA ratings of ALBAPA ARC in Valladolid, Negros Occidental fluctuate between
the years 2001 to 2007 (Table 1). Its ALDA ratings gradually improved from 2001 to
2003 i.e., getting Level 2 in 2001, Level 3 in 2002 and Level 4 in 2003 which was
maintained until 2004. Its high level of development slid down to Level 2 in 2005 but
reached the highest Level of 5 in 2006. However, it was not able to maintain its
highest level and again slid down to Level 3 in 2007.
When ALBAPA ARC was first subjected to ALDA in 2001, it got a Level 2 rating which
was attributed to the low rating on FPI registering only 24.27 percent and on GAD
with a rating of 39.31 percent. The OM component also registered a low rating of
52.20 percent.
In 2002, the ALDA rating
improvement in the ALDA
under FPI (41.91%). In
maintained until 2004. Its

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

of ALBAPA ARC had increased to Level 3.

rating can be attributed to the increase in
2003, its ALDA rating increased to Level
further improvement in the ALDA rating is

The slight
index level
4 which it
due to the

improvement in the index level under LTI, ECOPISS, and FPI. There was also a slight
increase in OM ratings.
Table 1. ALDA Rating of ALBAPA ARC by Key Result Area (KRA) from 2001 to 2007
Year

Key Results Area

LTI

OM

ECO

FPI

Index
BSS

Level

GAD

2001

84.35

52.20

78.12

24.27

85.53

39.31

61.92

2002

76.87

49.08

78.61

41.91

85.52

35.64

63.07

2003

92.17

56.17

91.43

48.38

85.52

38.96

70.40

2004

89.83

56.19

91.43

53.60

84.83

38.96

70.93

2005

85.47

29.82

85.89

38.34

84.64

34.48

60.99

2006

72.19

53.52

92.32

81.23

90.88

47.44

75.72

2007

82.17

47.40

80.38

42.58

94.09

47.62

66.78

I n 2 0 0 5 , its ALDA rating abruptly decreased to Level 2. Although all KRAs

contributed to the decrease in the level of ALDA rating, the contributions of OM and
FPI were greater. FPI posted low ratings from 2001 to 2005 due to ARBs low farm
production resulting from insufficient source of water supply and the occurrence of
pest infestation. Likewise, the decrease in the rating under FPI can be attributed to
the decrease in the number of ARBs who were provided with production technology
training programs and the number of ARBs who used organic fertilizer.
In 2006, the ALDA rating of ALBAPA ARC significantly progressed to its highest level
of 5. By KRA, FPI with a rating of 81.23 percent mainly contributed to the
attainment of its highest level of ALDA rating. According to a DAR key informant
(Provincial ALDA Point Person), FPI registered higher rating because of increased
rice production coupled with an increase in its price which resulted to their higher
household income. The increase in yield was brought about by improvement in
irrigation through the provision of shallow tube wells to the farmers, good weather
conditions and the use of quality seeds.
Likewise, OM contributed to its highest ALDA rating of ALBAPA ARC in 2006.
Notably, there is a significant increase in its rating from 29.82 percent in 2005 to
53.42 percent in 2006. The increase in its ALDA rating can be attributed to the
contribution of the Valladolid Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (VARB) MPC. ECOPISS
also contributed to its highest rating because of the completion of a farm-to-market
road and a bridge with the help of the barangay council, local government units and
other line agencies. BSS consistently posted an increase in its rating brought about
by the availability of health services, and the increasing number of households with
access to health services, potable water, electricity and education. This was
confirmed by the FGD participants from the barangay officials. According to them,
the LGU has regularly provided them the basic social services needed by the
community particularly health services.
DAR-PSRS, January 2009

In 2007, the ALDA rating of ALBAPA ARC plunged to Level 3 which can be attributed
to FPI as its rating under this area fell from 81.23 percent in 2006 to as low as 42.58
percent in 2007. The low rating of FPI can be attributed to low production because
of the ARBs problem on insufficient supply of irrigation water to their farms due to
the ongoing rehabilitation at that time of the Bago River Irrigation System covering
four districts of Negros Occidental including the municipality of Valladolid and the
non-functionality of shallow tube wells that were provided to the farmers. Based on
the FGD with ARBs and interview with DAR key informants, the decrease in FPI
rating can also be attributed to the typhoon that hit the area, the non-adoption of
organic fertilizer by the ARBs, and the decrease in the non-farm income of the ARBs.
Likewise, ECOPISS contributed to the regressed level of development of ALBAPA
ARC from 2006 to 2007. In 2006, it obtained a high rating because of the
construction of an additional farm-to-market road and a bridge with the help of the
barangay council, local government units and other line agencies. However, its
ratings declined from 92.32 percent in 2006 to 80.32 in 2007 because of the ARBs
insufficient access to irrigation water due to the aforecited two contributory factors
of ongoing rehabilitation of the Bago River Irrigation System and the shallow tube
wells that were already non-functional and which concomitantly decreased the total
hectares serviced by the irrigation system. Moreover, ARBs lacked access to credit
services and on some pre- and post-harvest facilities such as thresher and solar
dryer.
Notably, OM has continuously affected the level of development of ALBAPA ARC
from 2001 to 2007 because of the weak and non-functional cooperatives. There are
five existing cooperatives in the ARC, four of which have been non-functional for
about six to 10 years. In lieu of these four non-functional cooperatives, DAR
organized the VARB MPC. However, despite its organization, OM did not obtain a
high rating because the progress of development of this cooperative has been very
slow.
Moreover, GAD has also negatively affected the level of development of ALBAPA ARC
due to its low ALDA ratings from 2001 to 2007 which were brought about by the low
ratings obtained on women ARBs, membership in organization and women holding
key positions in the organization. Likewise, these specific indicators were also cited
by the DAR key informants as factors for the low ratings.
An in depth analysis of specific KRA rating by year of ALBAPA ARC shows the
following findings:
1. Land Tenure Improvement (LTI)
There is a fluctuating trend in the ALDA ratings on LTI from 2001 to 2007 (Table 1).
Based on secondary data on ALDA obtained from the Bureau of Agrarian Reform
Beneficiaries Development (BARBD), the LTI ratings of ALBAPA ARC had decreased
from 84.35 percent in 2001 to 76.87 percent in 2002 due to the decrease in the
DAR-PSRS, January 2009

percentage of land distributed a n d t h e percentage of actual ARBs (Table 2).

However, in 2003, there was a significant increase in the LTI rating by 15.3 percent
(i.e., 92.17%) because of the increase in percentage of land distributed and a
significant increase in percentage of actual ARBs. Again, the LTI ratings plunged to
89.83 percent in 2004 and continued with its downward trend until 2006 with a
rating of 72.19 percent. The decrease in the ratings was due to the additional scope
as a result of the CARP scope validation. In 2007, the LTI rating significantly
increased to 82.17 percent. The increase in the LTI rating in 2007 was attributed to
the slight increase of land distributed i.e., from 61.69 percent to 63.34 percent or
an increase by 1.65 percent as compared to the 2006 rating. The accomplishments
on land distribution increased from 374.2985 hectares in 2006 to 384.2612 hectares
in 2007 which benefited 194 agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs). The leasehold
accomplishments and the percent of ARBs regularly paying land amortization also
contributed to the increase in LTI rating. Overall, the fluctuating trend on LTI
ratings was brought about by the changes in total working scope on LAD over the
years.
Table 2. ALDA Rating of Specific Indicators under Land Tenure Improvement (LTI) from
2001 to 2007

Year

% of Land
Distributed

% of
Actual
ARBs

% of ARB
Regularly
Paying
Amortization

% of ARB
Cultivating
Land

% of ARB
Maintaining
Land
Ownership

% of
Hectares
Covered by
Leasehold
Contracts

% of ARBs
w/ Reg.
Leasehold
Contracts

2001

80.00

76.61

100.00

95.81

100.00

2002
2003

61.80
67.48

38.61
100.00

100.00
100.00

100.00
100.00

100.00
100.00

100.00
100.00

100.00
100.00

2004

58.81

98.89

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

2005

60.76

100.00

100.00

98.89

98.89

2006

61.69326

61.20401

100

97.26776

97.26776

2007

63.34

64.21

100.00

92.71

92.71

100.00

100.00

2. Organizational Maturity (OM)

The organizational maturity levels of the four non-functional cooperatives remain low
(Level 1) from 2001 to 2007. According to the DAR key informants, two of the four
non-functional cooperatives were already recommended for delisting but they were
not approved by the National Agrarian Reform Community Task Force (NARCTF) due
to non-compliance with several requirements. Since these cooperatives did not
meet the conditions and requirements for delisting of organizations, they were
continuously covered by the ALDA which negatively affected the ALDA ratings of
ALBAPA ARC. On the other hand, the DAR key informants cited that although there
is another cooperative organized by the DAR to replace these non-functional
cooperatives, its level of maturity is still low because of lack of organizational

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

development activities and projects for its members due to the cooperatives lack of
resources.
3. Economic and Physical Infrastructure Support Services (ECOPISS)
From 2001 to 2007, the ratings of ALBAPA ARC under ECOPISS were relatively high,
ranging from 78.12 to 92.32 percent (Table 1). Based on secondary data on ALDA
obtained from the BARBD, these high ratings can be attributed to the infrastructure
interventions provided under the CARP, specifically the construction of a farm-tomarket road (FMR) and a bridge (Table 3). According to the FGD participants from
the barangay officials and ARBs, the provision of farm-to-market road and a bridge
were of great help not only to the farmers but to the whole community because the
marketing of farm produce were facilitated and the transportation and hauling costs
were lessened. However, they need the full completion of the FMR as there are still
a few kilometers that are yet to be completed. In 2 0 0 5 , the ECOPISS rating
decreased. This was attributed to the decrease in hectarage of service areas
actually irrigated due to the ongoing rehabilitation of the Bago River Irrigation
System. In 2006, there is a significant increase in the ECOPISS rating at 92.32
percent due to the completion of additional kilometers of farm-to-farm road and a
bridge funded by the LGU. In 2007, there was a slight decrease in the rating
because of the declining hectarage of service areas actually irrigated brought about
by the ongoing rehabilitation of the Bago River Irrigation System and the nonfunctionality of the shallow tube wells. Likewise, the ARBs have no access to credit
particularly the production loans due to the non-functionality of the cooperatives in
the ARC. With regard to the pre-and post-harvest facilities (PPHF), these are mostly
available within the ARC but not all ARBs have access to these. According to the
ARB participants in the FGD, some of them still use their feet to thresh palay grains
out of rice straws rather than rent thresher, for purposes of cost saving.
Table 3. ALDA Rating of Specific Indicators under Economic and Physical Infrastructure Support
Services (ECOPISS) from 2001 to 2007

Bridges

Irrigation

PPHF

ARBs w/
access to
Irrigation

ARBs w/
access to
PPHF

ARBs w/
access to
Credit

Marketing
Services
Established

Year

FMR

2001

100.00

90.00

100.00

89.82

74.85

11.04

50.00

2002
2003

100.00
100.00

90.00
100.00

80.00
100.00

89.82
100.00

78.13
89.02

33.33
66.67

50.00
50.00

2004

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

89.02

66.67

50.00

2005

70.99

62.50

90.95

100.00

100.00

98.89

80.90

50.00

2006

84.87654

100.00

90.94567

100.00

100.00

100.00

84.26966

50.00

2007

83.73

100.00

48.29

100.00

100.00

94.33

50.00

50.00

PPHF = pre- and post-harvest facilities

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

4. Farm Productivity and Income (FPI)

In 2006, the FPI rating posted its highest rating of 81.23 percent which is a
significant increase compared to 38.34 percent rating in 2005 (Table 1). Based on
secondary data on ALDA obtained from the BARBD, the increase in FPI rating in
2006 can be attributed to the increase in farm productivity coupled with the increase
in the price of palay resulting to increase in farm and household income of the ARBs
(Table 4). Increased farm production was brought about by the improvement in
irrigation because of the provision of shallow tube wells to the farmers, good
weather conditions, and the use of quality seeds.
According to the DAR key informants, from 2001 to 2005, FPI posted low ratings
because of the ARBs low farm production due to insufficient supply of irrigation
water and the occurrence of pest infestation. This is also confirmed by the ARB
participants in the FGD. The non-adoption of organic fertilizer by the ARBs also
contributed to the low ratings under FPI. There is also a decline in the number of
ARBs who attended training programs on farming technologies. Based on the FGD
with the ARB participants, although some ARBs attended some training programs on
modern farming technologies, they were unable to adopt these modern practices
because they entail higher production cost.
Table 4. ALDA Rating of Specific Indicators under Farm Productivity and Income (FPI) from 2001 to 2007

Year

Adoption of
Appropriate
Farming
Technology

Average Yield
of Major
Crops

Increase in
Yield of
Major Crops

Annual HH
Income

Increase in Farm
Income

2001

13.69

25.00

25.00

25.00

25.00

2002
2003

14.38
22.55

37.50
75.00

31.25
62.50

75.00
25.00

50.00
25.00

2004

22.55

75.00

62.50

75.00

25.00

2005

17.56

66.67

25.00

50.00

25.00

2006

17.48634

75.00

75.00

100.00

100.00

2007

10.31

37.50

25.00

100.00

50.00

Notably, there is a significant drop in FPI rating to 42.58 in 2007. The sudden
decline in the FPI rating was caused by the decrease in the farm productivity due to
insufficient supply of irrigation water to the ARBs farms brought about by the
ongoing rehabilitation of the irrigation system in the municipality of Valladolid and
the non-functionality of shallow tube wells that were provided to the farmers.
According to the DAR key informants, farm production dropped due to typhoons that
damaged the area which resulted to a decrease in yield both in irrigated and nonirrigated areas. The decrease in FPI was also attributed to the non-adoption of
organic fertilizer because of its high cost.

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

5. Basic Social Services (BSS)

From 2001 to 2007, BSS posted the highest ratings among the key result areas
(Table 1). Based on secondary data on ALDA obtained from the BARBD, the
consistent high ratings on BSS can be attributed to the establishment of health
centers in every barangay which contributed to the increase of households availing
health services (Table 5). Likewise, health workers are mandated to deliver best
possible services that cater to the needs of the community. According to the key
informant (Municipal Doctor) they even go to barangay once in a while to provide
medical services to ensure the health condition of the community. However, the
insufficient medical facilities and supply of medicines in health centers hinders the
overall wellness of the people.
As regards the source of potable water, most of the households have access to Level
1 and 2 potable water systems. Level 1 water systems are stand-alone water points
i.e., source from handpumps/artesian and shallow wells while Level 2 are piped
water with a communal water point i.e., spring system. Moreover, most households
have access to electricity. Meanwhile, through the increase of household income,
they were able to send their children in school which resulted in the increase in the
number of school aged children enrolled in elementary and secondary education.
Table 5. ALDA Rating of Specific Indicators under Basic Social Services (BSS) from 2001 to 2007

Year

Availment of
Health
Services

Access to
Health
Services

Access to
Potable
Water
Supply

Access to
Power Supply

Elementary
Enrollment
Ratio

High School
Enrollment
Ratio

2001

100.00

100.00

81.47

85.00

55.91

75.00

2002
2003

75.00
75.00

100.00
100.00

100.00
100.00

81.47
81.47

85.00
85.00

55.91
55.91

2004

75.00

100.00

100.00

80.82

84.59

50.95

2005

75.00

100.00

100.00

80.84

84.55

49.33

2006

75.00

100.00

100.00

98.91304

84.49477

84.91803

2007

75.00

100.00

100.00

98.91

99.36

98.06

6. Gender and Development (GAD)

A low performance on GAD is indicated in the 2001 to 2007 ALDA ratings. GAD got
the lowest rating of 34.48 percent in 2005 and the highest rating of 47.62 percent in
2007 (Table 1). Among the six KRAs, GAD obtained the lowest rating because of the
low rating obtained in the specific indicators on the percentage of women ARBs,
percentage of women membership in the organization and percentage of women
holding key positions in the organizations based on the secondary data on ALDA
obtained from the BARBD (Table 6) and which were likewise cited by the DAR key

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

informants as contributory factors to the low ratings on GAD. Meanwhile, the

specific indicator on percentage of women ARBs able to access credit services has
declined from its 100 percent rating in 2001 to only 26.42 percent rating in 2007
because of the dearth of credit facilities/windows in the ARC.
Table 6. ALDA Rating of Specific Indicators under Gender and Development (GAD) from 2001 to 2007

Year

% Women
ARBs

% Women
Membership in
Organization

% Women
Holding Key
Positions in
Organization

No. of Project
for Women

Women ARBs
able to access
credit services

2001

10.42

38.38

23.08

75.00

100.00

2002
2003

20.31
20.18

22.69
27.41

20.93
34.62

75.00
100.00

100.00
59.60

2004

20.18

27.41

34.62

100.00

59.60

2005

28.89

38.41

50.70

25.00

0.00

2006

28.96175

45.16129

52.05479

100

26.41509

2007

29.90

45.16

52.05

100.00

26.42

C. Situationer on the Cooperatives in ALBAPA ARC

1. Profile of the Cooperatives
Based on DARs official list of organizations, there are five cooperatives in ALBAPA
ARC, namely: Alijis MPC, Sitio Pacol MPC, Bayabas MPC, Pacol MPC, and Valladolid
Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (VARB) MPC. Four of these cooperatives were
organized by the Department of Agriculture (DA) and Land Bank of the Philippines
(LBP) prior to the launching of the ARC. Only one ARC was organized by the
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) after the ARC was launched i.e., Valladolid
Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (VARB) MPC.
Specifically, the DA and the LBP organized the Alijis MPC and Pacol MPC in 1989 and
both were registered with the CDA on the same year. These cooperatives were
organized into cooperatives to avail of production loans from the LBP. Most of the
members of these cooperatives are ARBs (i.e., 100 ARBs out of 106 members in
Alijis MPC and 25 ARBs out of 46 members in Pacol MPC). Prior to the organization
of these cooperatives, they were already organized as Samahang Nayon
organizations. The CDA registration of Alijis MPC was already cancelled in 2005
however, i t w a s not delisted because of its inability to comply with several
requirements for delisting of organizations by the National Agrarian Reform
Community Task Force (NARCTF). On the other hand, to revive the Pacol MPC, its
officers and DAR initiated the holding of the cooperatives election in 2005. However,
since majority of the members were no longer interested, the election did not
materialize.

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

In 1991, DA organized Sitio Pacol MPC and Bayabas MPC and both were registered
with the CDA on the same year. Majority of the members of these cooperatives are
also ARBs (i.e., 34 ARBs out of 47 members in Sitio Pacol MPC while 65 ARBs out of
100 members in Bayabas MPC). These cooperatives were also organized for the
purpose of availing production loans from LBP.
VARB MPC was organized by DAR in 2005 and registered with the CDA on the same
year. Majority of the members of VARB MPC are ARBs (i.e., 28 ARBs out of 38
members) from the three ARC barangays covered by ALBAPA ARC. However, only
14.4 percent of the total ARBs in ALBAPA ARC are members of the VARB MPC. The
organization of VARB MPC was the result of a series of meetings amongst the DAR,
BARC, cooperative leaders and ARBs to organize a new cooperative that would
replace and consolidate the four non-functional cooperatives.
However, the
membership of VARB MPC is not exclusive to the farmers of ALBAPA ARC. It was
organized to cater to the all the farmers of the Municipality of Valladolid. The
formation of VARB MPC was also in response to the directive of the LGU for a one
town-one cooperative strategy. It is accredited with the Office of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan of Negros Occidental.
2. Status and Activities of the Cooperatives
Of the five cooperatives in ALBAPA ARC, four of them are already non-functional.
Currently, there is only one active cooperative in ALBAPA ARC, i.e., the Valladolid
Multipurpose Cooperative (VARB MPC). Alijis MPC and Pacol MPC have been nonoperational since 1998; Bayabas MPC since 2000; and Sitio Pacol MPC since 2002.
Before these four cooperatives became non-functional, they were able to avail of
production loans from LBP and other financial institutions. The loans that were
extended by the LBP to the Bayabas MPC, Sitio Pacol MPC and Pacol MPC were
purely production loans. However, the loans provided to Alijis MPC were a
combination of production loan and working capital loan. The production loans
availed of by Bayabas MPC, Sitio Pacol MPC and Pacol MPC are collateral free loans.
On the other hand, since the working capital loan availed by Alijis MPC required
collateral, it used the EP titles of the eight ARB members as collateral to LBP.
According to an LBP staff that was interviewed, the ARB members of the four
cooperatives were able to regularly pay their loan amortizations for only two years.
After that, they began to default in the payment of their amortizations until such
time that they totally ceased paying their loans. To give the ARB-members the
chance to repay their loans, the LBP restructured their loans. However, the four
cooperatives were still unable to pay their loans. Since the production loans availed
by Bayabas MPC, Sitio Pacol MPC and Pacol MPC were collateral-free loans, the LBP
just wrote off their loans. But in the case of Alijis MPC which availed not only of
production loans but also working capital loans, the LBP foreclosed the EPs of the
eight ARBs which served as collateral for the working capital loans of the cooperative
members. Since the EPs were used as collateral, the ARBs are no longer in
possession of their EPs. However, the LBP admitted that the foreclosure and
DAR-PSRS, January 2009

10

takeover of the awarded lands from the ARBs would be difficult to implement. Thus,
the ARBs continue to cultivate these foreclosed lands.
Other banks/institutions/agencies that provided credit assistance to the four
cooperatives were: the Quedancor, DBP, Cooperative Bank of Negros, Care
Philippines, Office of the Provincial Agriculturist (OPA) and Philippine-Australian
Community Assistance Program (PACAP). Alijis MPC obtained loans from DBP for the
purchase of some of its pre- and post- harvest facilities. Pacol MPC availed of
production loans and for the purchase of some pre-and post-harvest facilities from
Quedancor, Cooperative Bank of Negros, PACAP, Care Philippines and OPA. On the
other hand, Bayabas MPC availed of loans from Quedancor for the purchase of its
pre- and post- harvest facilities. The Quedancor foreclosed the warehouse and the
solar dryers of Alijis MPC and Bayabas MPC due to failure of the two cooperatives to
pay their respective loans. Based on records, the four cooperatives have total
liabilities in the amount of PhP14,180,000.
The activities that the four cooperatives engaged in before they became nonfunctional are: relending, hog and swine dispersal, palay trading, and renting out of
pre-and-post harvest facilities (i.e., power tiller, thresher, shallow tube wells, water
pump, warehouse and solar dryer).
VARB MPC, the only active cooperative in the ARC, limits its service to micro lending
due to insufficient funds to implement economic activities and other projects.
However, its leaders/officers continuously seek the assistance of DAR, LGU,
Provincial Government, and other agencies to implement their projects. In line with
this, the officers have already submitted project proposals for the following projects:
enterprise development (capital for palay trading and trucking); income-generating
projects (swine/carabao dispersal, duck raising and egg production); and pre-andpost harvest facilities (shallow tube well, thresher and mechanical dryer).
3. Problems and Issues of the Cooperatives
The main problem of the VARB is the inadequacy of funds to implement their
projects, thus it limits its service to its members, particularly in the area of micro
lending. Other problems cited are the lack of capability training for the leaders,
delayed payment of loans by the members, no permanent office, and lack of
financial support and assistance from other agencies.
As regards the four non-functional cooperatives in ALBAPA ARC, the common
problem cited which led to the cessation of the cooperatives activities was the nonrepayment of their production and other loans obtained by their members which
resulted in the cooperatives non-payment of their loans from different financial
institutions. Other factors that led to the non-functionality of these cooperatives are:
mismanagement of the cooperatives by their officers/leaders; lack of regular
monitoring of the cooperatives projects; lack of management and capability training

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

11

for leaders and officers; and lack of interest of leaders and members to attend
meetings.
Notably, the four non-functional cooperatives in ALBAPA ARC have been
continuously subjected to ALDA despite their non-functional status. The
cooperatives officers and even DAR field offices had sought the dissolution of the
cooperatives but they were unable to meet the conditions and requirements set for
delisting of organizations in the ARCs. The CDA registration of one non-functional
cooperative was already cancelled in 2005 but this cooperative was not yet delisted
by the National Agrarian Reform Community Task Force because of the several
requirements for delisting which were not met. One of the requirements for the
delisting of organization which these non-functional cooperatives cannot comply
with is the payment of their financial obligations to their government creditors.

D. Assessment of the Support Interventions in the Development of

ALBAPA ARC
Before the launching of ALBAPA ARC in 2000, the ARBs and non-ARBs from the
three barangays covered by the ARC already received economic and other support
interventions. These interventions were coursed through their cooperatives. The
economic interventions provided to the ARBs through their cooperatives (Alijis MPC,
Sitio Pacol MPC, Pacol MPC, and Bayabas MPC) were the production loan and
working capital loans they availed from LBP and other financial institutions. Through
the loans availed, the cooperatives were able to acquire pre-and post harvest
facilities i.e., warehouse, solar dryer, power tiller, thresher, and water pump which
greatly helped the farmers in their farming operations.
The support interventions provided by DAR through the CARP fund is the
construction in 2003 of a farm-to-market road connecting two barangays in the
amount of PhP2.8 million. The extension of this farm-to-market road was
constructed in 2007 by the LGU through the fund sourced from the CDF of a
congressional representative amounting to PhP1.2 million.
Out of the 33.8
kilometers FMR requirements, about 28.3 kilometers or 84 percent has already been
completed. As part of the program beneficiaries development (PBD), DAR provided
training programs on capability building to the officers and members of the
cooperatives. Because of the non-functionality of the four cooperatives in ALBAPA
ARC, DAR organized the VARB MPC in 2005. However, since the focus of the
Municipal Agrarian Reform Office (MARO) is on LTI, the conduct of PBD interventions
was not sustained. The lack of manpower to undertake PBD activities is also the
problem of the Provincial Agrarian Reform Office (PARO) because usually the
Development Facilitator (DF) handles seven to nine ARCs.
Moreover, the LGU, through the DPWH, constructed a 12-linear meter bridge
amounting to PhP4 million. Through the Municipal Agriculture Office (MAO), it also
provided multi-purpose drying pavements to the various barangays of Valladolid, the

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

12

funding of which came from the CDF of a former Senator. Likewise, through the
Office of the Provincial Agriculturist (OPA), the LGU also provided shallow tube wells
(STWs) and a small water impounding dam to supplement the irrigation needs of the
farmers. According to the MPDO of Valladolid, continuous concreting and
maintenance of the barangay, municipal
and provincial roads are being
implemented by the LGU as part of its regular activities.
Currently, the NIA is implementing the rehabilitation of the Bago River Irrigation
System which also covers the municipality of Valladolid. This project, amounting to
PhP1.8 billion, is funded by the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC).
According to the key informant f r o m t h e NIA, the farmers are experiencing
insufficient supply of irrigation water because of the ongoing rehabilitation of the
irrigation system.
As part of its regular activities, the LGU though the DA, provides training programs
o n f a r m ing technology, integrated pest management and livelihood projects.
Farmers are also trained to adopt organic farming. DA also assists the farmers on
the application of proper farming technology because in every barangay there is an
extension worker or technologist assigned. It also provides subsidized seeds under
the 50-50 Scheme Program to the farmers of Valladolid. However, according to the
key informant (Municipal Agriculturist), only 10 percent of the farmers in Valladolid
benefited from this project due to lack of funds allocated for the project. Likewise,
the DA also undertakes animal dispersal projects (swine and carabao) in different
barangays of the municipality. The Office of the Provincial Agriculturist also
conducts a farmers field school once a year, focused on the adoption of appropriate
farming technology to increase farmers production and income.
The support interventions provided in the ALBAPA ARC b y t h e municipal and
provincial LGUs through the DOH, DSWD and DECS are part of their regular
functions and services to the community. Infrastructure projects are part of the
Barangay and LGUs development plan. The implementation of these projects
depend on the funds available. Prior to the launching of the ARC, basic social
services already existed in the community. Currently, most (80%) of the households
have access to Level I and II potable water, while almost 100 percent of the
household have access to electricity. There are two elementary schools within the
A R C . The provision of these basic social services also depends on the financial
capacity of the LGU and provincial government.
With regard to health services, the LGU through DOH, provides medical assistance
through the health centers located in the barangay. The following services are
provided by the midwife and barangay health workers who manage the health
centers: free medicine, child and maternal health care, immunization/vaccine, and
pre and post-natal check up. Generally, the services provided and implemented by
these agencies are focused on the whole community. According to the Rural Health
Physician, the budget allocated by the LGU for the provision of medical services is

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

13

PhP4.9 million per year for the whole Municipality of Valladolid. Additional medicines
and vaccines are requested at the DOH National Office.

E. LTI Issue and Concern in ALBAPA ARC

Based on the information gathered from the DAR key informants and FGD
participants, the only LTI issue which emerged in LTI implementation in ALBAPA ARC
is the foreclosure of the eight EPs of the ARBs. These EPs were foreclosed by the
LBP due to non-payment of loans obtained by their cooperative and for which their
EPs were used as collateral. Despite the foreclosure by the LBP of the lands
awarded to eight ARBs, no physical takeover of the awarded lands has yet been
made by the LBP. Thus, the ARBs continue to cultivate these foreclosed lands.
Notwithstanding, these ARBs have lost their tenurial rights over their lands because
they are no longer in possession of their EPs.

F. Awareness of the ALDA and the Perceptions on the Current Conditions

of ALBAPA ARC
All the FGD participants in ALBAPA are aware that they are part of the ARC. The ARB
participants in the two ARC barangays heard of the ARC but they have limited
knowledge about the ARC. According to them, there has been no information
dissemination about the ARC. On the other hand, the ARB participants from one ARC
barangay are fully aware of ARC because the cooperative officials informed them
about it. According to them, the ARC is the channel of support services or
interventions provided by the LGU and other CARP-implementing agencies.
Meanwhile, those who are unaware of the ARC are also unaware of the ALDA as a
tool in determining the level of development of the ARC.
On the other hand, the leaders/officers of the four non-functional cooperatives and
the Barangay Officials who participated in the FGDs are fully aware of the ARC and
are also aware that they are part of ALBAPA ARC because they participated in the
FGD during the conduct of ALDA.
Based on the secondary data gathered, the average household income of the ARBs
for 2007 is PhP81,938 which was sourced from on-farm (PhP53,938) off-farm
(PhP20,000), and non-farm activities (PhP8,000). Farm income accounted for 80
percent of the ARBs total household income, off-farm, 15 percent and non-farm,
only 5 percent. Notably, the average household income of the ARBs for 2007 is 37
percent higher than the PhP60,000 target income for the ARB households in the ARC
and 17 percent higher than the 2007 annual national poverty threshold (NPT) of
PhP70,164.

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

14

According to the FGD participants, the ARBs farm productivity and household
income have improved due to seminars/training programs attended and adoption of
farming technology i.e., through the farmers field school of the Office of the
Provincial Agriculturist conducted once a year, and additional income derived from
swine and livestock production. Although there is an improvement in the household
income of the ARBs, the results of the FGDs with the ARBs and some cooperative
leaders and barangay officials show that majority of the ARBs do not have the
capacity to finance their own farm operations, hence most of them (80%) are
dependent on local financiers or private rice millers for production loans at an
interest rate of 10 percent per month. Loans obtained from the financiers are paid
in kind at a price dictated by them. Before the start of land preparation, they usually
obtain loans from these financiers to finance their farm operations. When
harvesting comes, these financiers automatically get an equivalent amount of their
produce as payment for their loans.
As regards employment in the ARC, the FGD participants (composed of ARBs,
cooperative leaders and barangay officials) generally perceive that there is not much
employment opportunities within the ARC. The ARBs still rely on their farm as their
main source of income while their children are working outside the barangay and a
few work as overseas Filipino workers (OFW). On the other hand, they unanimously
claim that there is an improvement in terms of access to health services, education,
source of power supply, and source of potable water as these are regularly funded
by the LGU. The FGD participants also observe an increase in the number of public
transportation plying the ARC because of the improvement in the capacity to
purchase by some residents who have children working abroad.
Overall, majority of the FGD participants in ALBAPA ARC cited the improvement in
farm-to-market roads through the funding support provided by the DAR and LGU.
On the other hand, one of the Barangay officials who attended the FGD complained
that his barangay, which is also covered by the ARC, did not receive any support
interventions in terms of road improvement from the DAR.

G. Strengths and Weaknesses of the ALDA and Suggested Remedial

Measures by the Key Informants
The DAR key informants consider ALDA as the most comprehensive tool in
determining the level of maturity of the organizations and level of development of
the ARC. It also defines the appropriate support services or interventions that are
still needed to improve the level of development of the ARC. Likewise, ALDA
captures the actual status of the ARC based on the interventions provided by the
LGU and other partner agencies. The Provincial ALDA Coordinator cited the
usefulness of ALDA results in the formulation of an action plan and development
plan of the ARC.

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

15

The DAR key informants cited the following weaknesses in the conduct of the ALDA:
1) the allotted time for the conduct of ALDA is not enough to completely gather all
the required data and information; and 2 ) t he inactive or non-functional
organizations are still included in the conduct of ALDA.
To further improve the conduct of ALDA, the DAR key informants suggested the
following: increase the period allotted for the conduct of ALDA per ARC to capture all
the required data and information from the target participants; inactive or nonfunctional organizations should not be subjected to ALDA so that these will not pull
down the overall ALDA rating; and download the STATISTICA program to the
DARPO to facilitate the data processing and analysis of ALDA results.

H. Summary of Findings
1.

The KRAs that contributed to the regressed ALDA ratings in 2007 are FPI,
ECOPISS and OM. Specifically, the ARBs low farm production, the limited
access of the ARBs to irrigation system and credit services negatively affected
the ECOPISS and FPI ratings which contributed to the regressed level of
development of ALBAPA ARC in 2007. From 2001 to 2007, OM has continuously
affected the levels of development in ALBAPA ARC because of the continuous
inclusion in the ALDA of the four cooperatives/organizations despite their being
non-functional for about six to 10 years. GAD has also negatively affected the
development of ALBAPA ARC due to the low ratings obtained on specific
indicators such as women ARBs, women membership in organization, and
women holding key positions in the organization.

2.

The non-functional cooperatives have been continuously covered by the ALDA

because of the standing policy of the DAR that unless these
cooperatives/organizations are delisted by the National Agrarian Reform
Community Task Force (NARCTF), they will be subjected to ALDA assessment.

3.

One of the stringent requirements for the delisting of organizations which the
non-functional cooperatives cannot comply with is the payment of their
outstanding loans with the government creditors. Considering the non-functional
status of these cooperatives, the settling of their financial obligations is remote
hence, the delisting of non-functional cooperatives will tend to be a perennial
problem in the conduct of ALDA.

4.

The four non-functional cooperatives in ALBAPA ARC were organized primarily

for the purpose of obtaining production loans from the LBP. Thus, they lacked
social preparation and management and capability training programs for their
leaders and members which are also attributions to the non-functional status of
these cooperatives.

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

16

5.

The foremost reason which led to the non-functionality of the cooperatives was
the failure of members to pay their production loans. They attributed the nonpayment of loans to their low farm and household income. Because of the nonfunctional status of the cooperatives, the credit needs of the ARB-members were
not addressed.

6.

DAR organized a cooperative for the purpose of replacing and consolidating the
membership of non-functional cooperatives in three barangays covered by the
ARC to enable the ARBs to have access to support interventions through a
cooperative. However, this cooperative does not exclusively cater to the needs
of the ARBs in the ARC as its membership is open to all sectors in all the
barangays in the municipality. Only 14.4 percent of the total ARBs in ALBAPA
ARC are members of the cooperative. Moreover, the progress of development
of this cooperative is very slow because of limited financial capability to
implement their projects.

7.

A non-functional cooperative in one sample ARC used the EPs of eight ARB
members as collateral to avail of working capital loans from LBP that resulted to
the foreclosure of these EPs. Despite the foreclosure by the LBP of the lands
awarded to eight ARBs, no physical takeover of the awarded lands has yet been
made by the LBP. Thus, the ARBs continue to cultivate these foreclosed lands.
Concomitantly, these ARBs have lost their tenurial rights over their lands
because they are no longer in possession of their EPs.

8.

The support interventions provided by non-CARP implementing agencies such as

the DSWD, DOH and the LGUs have greatly contributed to the overall ALDA
ratings of ALBAPA ARC as shown by the consistently high ratings obtained on
BSS.

9.

The LGUs and other government agencies have implemented their programs
and projects not as part of their being ARCs but based on their own respective
development plans and programs and the availability of funds. They perform
their regular functions, not focusing on any particular sector or area regardless
of whether or not they are part of the ARC.

10. The support interventions provided in ALBAPA ARC by the LGU, provincial
government and other line agencies are part of their regular functions and
services to the community.
11. Based on the information provided by the FGD participants, the ARBs farm
productivity and household income have improved due to seminars and training
programs attended on farming technologies and the additional income derived
from swine and livestock production. Likewise, secondary data shows that the
average household income of the ARB households in 2007 has exceeded the
PhP60,000 target average household income for the ARB households in the ARC
and the national poverty threshold (NPT) of PhP70,165. However, majority of
the ARBs perceive that they still have no capacity to finance their own farm
DAR-PSRS, January 2009

17

operations and are heavily dependent on private moneylenders or local traders

for credit assistance at an average interest rate of 10 percent per month.
12. The Development Facilitator assigned in ALBAPA ARC handles two municipalities
which comprise nine ARCs thus, PBD interventions to the five existing
cooperatives in ALBAPA ARC was not sustained. The lack of manpower and
funds to undertake institutional development interventions also hinders the
development of the organizations and the ARC. Moreover, the focus of the
MARO and DF is on LTI not only in Valladolid but also to the other municipalities
which are part of their coverage.
13. Most of the ARB participants in the FGDs are aware of the ARC but have limited
knowledge about it. For those who are aware of the ARC, their knowledge is
only limited to the benefits that could be derived through program and project
interventions implemented in the ARC. On the other hand, all the
leaders/officers of the ARBs cooperatives and the barangay officials are fully
aware of the ARC because they participated in the annual conduct of FGDs for
the ALDA.
14. The DAR key informants considered ALDA as the most comprehensive tool in
determining the level of maturity of the organizations and level of development
of the ARC. It also defines the appropriate support services or interventions
that are still needed to improve the level of development of the ARC. Likewise,
ALDA captures the actual status of the ARC based on the interventions provided
by the LGU and other partner agencies. However, they cited the following
weaknesses in the conduct of the ALDA: a) the allotted time for the conduct of
ALDA is not enough to completely gather all the required data and information;
and b) the non-functional cooperatives are still included in the conduct of ALDA.

DAR-PSRS, January 2009

18