Group Galileo Galilei

Title: The Effectiveness of Conditional Cash Transfer of Pantawid

Pamliyang Pilipino Program

MAIN PROBLEM

This research will attempt to determine the effectiveness of the conditional

cash transfer given by the government to the Grade 11 4Ps member of

Kalilangan National High School Kalilangan, Bukidnon S.Y 2019-2020.

Specifically, this study will seek answer to the following questions.

1. What is the profile of the respondents?

1.1 Age

1.2 Sex

1.3 No. of Siblings

1.4 Monthly Income

2. How do 4Ps affect the beneficiaries in terms of;

2.1 Education

2.2 Health and Nutrition

3. How does 4ps benefit members as viewed by the learners?

4. How effective is conditional cash transfer to 4Ps beneficiaries?

HYPOTHESIS

Ho: The Conditional Cash Transfer is not effective in terms of education and

health to the 4Ps beneficiaries.

Ha: The Conditional Cash Transfer is effective in terms of education and

health to the 4Ps beneficiaries

Scope and Delimitation

In this study the researchers will determine the effectiveness of 4Ps

viewed the beneficiaries. This study is only limited for the 4Ps beneficiaries

of Grade 11 students of Kalilangan National High School Kalilangan,

Bukidnon S.Y 2019-2020.

Please take your time to answer the questions honestly and truthfully. Rest

assured that it shall be kept confidential and shall be used solely for the

purpose of this study. Thank you.

1. Please fill in the following;

1.1 Age ____

1.2 Sex ____

1.3 No. of Siblings _____

1.4 Monthly Income __________

2. Education. Please put a check on your chosen answer.

a. Do you attend school regularly?

Yes ___ No____

b. Do you maintain your attendance in school?

Yes___ No___

c. Are your parents able to pay your school contributions?

Yes___ No___

d. Are they able to provide your school requirements such as projects

and requirements?

Yes___ No___

e. Do you have complete uniform and school supplies?

Yes___ No___

3. Health and Nutrition. Please put a check on your chosen answer.

a. Do you eat before going to school?

Yes___ No___

b. Do you wear clean clothes in going to school?

Yes___ No___
c. Are you having a regular health check-up?

Yes___ No___

d. Are you having a vaccination and immunization twice a year?

Yes___ No___
 Review of Related Literature

According to Brul (2009) that Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps)

is a poverty reduction and social development strategy of the national government

that provides conditional cash grants to extremely poor households to improve their

health, nutrition, and education particularly of children age 0-14. The program is

currently being implemented by the Department of Social Welfare and

Development (DSWD). (as cited by de Guia, 2011) Additionally, Aquino’s

Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program as a stratagem to alleviate poverty is not

freedom but a shackle that locks up the Filipino people to abject poverty (de Guia,

2011).

4Ps Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program is also called as Conditional

Cash Transfer (CCT) as Philippine government version. This program helps the

penniless people and most of them are living in squatter area and family who can’t

provide their basic needs. Cited by Department of Social Welfare and development

(2010).Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program is a poverty reduction strategy that

provides grants to extremely poor household to provide their health, nutrition and

education particularly of children aged 0-14. The program objectives is to alleviate

the needs (short term poverty alleviation) of the poor people through cash grants

and to provide discontinuity poverty cycle through human investment capital.

According to Felizardo (2009), the 4Ps program is not a dole out. It’s not

meant to make the poor become lazy and rely on the government nor the NGO’s to

alleviate their sad poverty states. The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program, just

like the other conditional cash transfer programs of other countries prioritize human

dignity through availability of equal opportunities. If aims to provide monetary aid

to poor beneficiaries with the hope that these investments in human capital would

lessen the great financial divide among the haves and have nots. The program was

meant not a kind dole-out because the chosen beneficiaries are following the

condition through abiding the agreement of the said program. In this, the family

receive cash to provide the needs of the children especially the children will attend

in school regularly, have visited the health centre for regular check-ups and also the

mother receive a cash for their medical check-up specially treatments during

pregnancy.

MIMAROPA (2011), Pantawid Pamilya is a conditional cash transfer

program that incentives for poor families to invest in their future by insuring that

mothers and children avail of health care and the children go to school. As such, it

is a human development program that invest in their health and education of

children. On the other hand, providing immediate relief from cash flow problems

well alleviate through providing cash. The benefits that can get by the beneficiaries

of this program are health and nutrition grant in which a household receives P500

per month that is intended for their needs in health and nutrition; and for education

household receives P300 per month per children that is intended for 10 months only

per year, and those amount that was receive by every well depends on the

compliance of the conditions that was agreed.

According to Maboloc (2012), it can be argued by the PNOY government

that making the CCT program work should help guarantee the most basic

entitlement of people under any democratic system- respect for humanity. The CCT

can be construed as a matter of right, i.e., the right “not to be hungry”, to borrow

from Amartya Sen. It can be said that numbers or the many economic assumption

may be very ambiguous at this point. The right thing to do, in this regard, is to
introduce people, especially the very poor or the poorest of the poor, to fundamental

opportunities that well ultimately untie them from fetters of poverty. The program

is good, but he has some serious doubts about it. The problem lies in the fact that

the Pantawid Pamilya Program does not address the root cause of poverty- our

unjust inequitable economic system. At the outset, critics will say that it is more

prudent to use this budget to fund the construction of schools, hospitals, roads, and

many others. Basically, the argument against it is built upon the standard idea and

development theory that income is not equal “well-being achievement”. Simply put,

the idea is that the CCT is a “butas na balde”, metaphorically suggesting that the

CCT can be money down the drain, for it teaches people dependency. In short, it

does not really empowered them. But does the CCT uphold the dignity of the poor?

It does not. It only provides a temporary relief to their miserable life. The “CCT

program address both future poverty, by fostering human capital accumulation

among the young as a means of breaking the intergenerational transmission of

poverty and current poverty, by providing income support for consumption in the

short run” (Rawlings & Rubio, 2005, p. 33). Indeed, the main objective of the 4Ps

and other CCT program is to prevent intergenerational transference of poverty and

help break the infinite cycle of poverty by providing the children the suitable

educational and health assistance so as to help them develop the facilities for a better

future. Investing in children’s human capital and ensuring that they grow into

educated and healthy adults, is the equivalent of teaching them how to fish. Healthy,

educated children ultimately have more choices in life and are able to become

productive members of the society (Bloom, 2008).

Mangabas (2009), statistically 53% of Filipino household called themselves as

“Mahirap” (poor) as evidence by the survey finding in the last 26 years there is no

progress to fight against poverty as indicated. The result of the survey is that the

measurement of poverty is rapid and frequent due to increase SRP but fluctuations

of poverty is cannot be explained clearly by the economic growth. Filipino who are

poor needs increase of wage and stable consumer price and not the economic

growth since they can’t benefit. In addition, Bolivar (2009), the truth about poverty

is hunger. As a survey conducted last November 27 to 20, 2010 was found out that

there are 3.4 million families are saying that they experienced hunger and because

of the problem the Malacanang said that they are expecting to reduce the poverty

as long as the hunger just once or a few times and serve hunger refers to those who

experienced hunger as often or always. So, conditional cash transfer (CCT) is

already implemented and to complete the list of CCT beneficiaries to be able for it

to validate is that secretary Corazon Soliman had travel throughout the country. The

DSWD is the group wherein they are capable to manage the budget and to handle

CCT beneficiaries to ease the poverty and hunger situation. Calica (2011).
Theoretical Framework

The theoretical bases of this study are the Human Capital Theory and Social

Capital Theory. Human Capital Theory indicates the importance of investments in

human capital of a country, while Social Capital Theory,which explains social

network where individuals work together to improve wellbeing. The following

theories are showed bellow;

Human Capital Theory

Human capital refers to the set of skills that an individual can contribute to

productivity. These skills are usually dependent on education, health and work ethic

of an individual (LSE Economic,2014).

Moreover,Schultz also established that education and productivity are factors

that are positively related ( Kern,2009). Hence, that human capital theory states that

when capital invested in education and training programs, then human capital will

improve (Fitzsimons,1999). Human capital can make an impact on an individual

(employment opportunities) organizational (core competencies and

competitiveness) and societal (socio-political development) level.

Furthermore,Kwon (2009) cites the human capital can be measured using an

output-based approach (through measuring the costs of education) and an income-

based approach ( through measuring the school enrolment rates, literacy and other

educational variables), a cost- based approach( through measuring the cost of

education and training). Putting all the aforementioned insights into perspective, it

is intuitive that returs on human capital children. For a given household,

investments on children depend on the household income and number income, more

investment is distributed on each child with fewer children in the household. With
this, countries with little human capital are usually characterized by large family

size and invest little on each child. On the country, those with abundant capital

invest more on fewer kids. Thus, a country would be well off if there are more

investments in children, and long-term physical capital accumulation (Tamura et

al.,1990).

Social Capital Theory

According to Garson(2006),social capital can be defined as the resource that

are integral in social relations, which help facilitate cooperative and collaborative

action within the society. Given that a conditional cash transfer program is a part of

a social network where individuals develop social relationships in order to

strengthen their wellbeing, social capital is imperative with regard to the program

success, especially since the social network in this study is composed of the

government, the community, and the household members. Using the capital theory

as a basis, the cash transfer program can be seen as a form of social protection

method in order to alleviate poverty and vulnerability through giving cash transfers.

Hence, there is a need to developed relationship between the government and

community for a proper implementation of the program (Ressler,2008).

Spillover Effects\

Spillover effect is defined as the unintended impact of a certain program on

individual that are not targeted by the program (Jaffe,1996).Spillovers can also be

viewed as externalities, which could be positive or negative depending on the

private and social gains and cost incurred (Helbling,2010). As such spillover effects

may also be present in CCT programs. This is because the resources that the

beneficiares use are the same resource used by non beneficiares (