Follow us on Twitter


You are here

Presence of Aid and Relief Assistance

This sub-section focuses on respondents experience with recovery and development programs in the sampled communities. Overall, 72 percent stated that there had been development project in their respective barangay over the one year period prior to the survey. While a large majority of the respondents in Cotabato City (94%), Sultan Kudarat (89%), and North Cotabato (88%) stated that that there had been development project in their communities,only 36 percentsaid so in Maguindanao.[1]According to the survey respondents, support for the projects was most frequently given by the barangay (33%), provincial (21%), and municipal (19%) authorities. A smaller percentage of the population mentioned national government agencies (11%), the Congressional development fund (8%), foreign assistance (10%), and 1% mentioned NGOs.

Respondents most frequently reported projects such as the construction of the Barangay hall (17%), livelihood support (16%), and construction of roads (13%). The type of assistance mentioned by the respondent also varied between strata. In Lanaodel Sur, 44 percent of the respondents mentioned the construction of a Barangay hall compared to 1 percent in Maguindanao. There does not appear to be an association between the type of assistance provided and the priorities expressed by respondents.

In addition to recovery and development projects provided at the community level, the survey assessed whether respondents were aware of anyone in their barangay, including members of their household, had received aid or relief assistance. Over half the respondents indicated that aid an relief assistance had been given to at least some members of the Barangay (53%), most frequently in the form of food (44%), while other forms of assistance where reported by few respondents, including health care (7%), construction materials (3%), or farming support (3%). About half the respondents also indicated that their household had benefited from assistance (45%), with 40 percent indicating to have received food. Few mentioned health care (6%) or farming support (2%). The sources of assistance were (in roughly equal proportion) the barangay authorities themselves, as well as national government agencies, and foreign assistance.

Figure 42: Percentage of households who received aid or relief assistance in the one year period prior to the survey

Figure 42 -  Percentage of households who received aid or relief assistance in the one year period prior to the survey

The proportion of households who reported having received aid or relief assistance in the one year period prior to the survey was lowest in Lanao del Norte (23%) and Maguindanao (25%). About half the households in Lanao del Sur (49%) or more in Sultan Kudarat (56%) and North Cotabato (63%) reported receiving such assistance. By settlement status, displaced households were least likely to report having received assistance in the year prior to the survey: a little over one-quarter (27%) of the displaced households indicated having received aid or relief assistance, compared to 37 percent of those returned home, 47 percent of those resettled elsewhere, and 50 percent of those never displaced. Among all groups, food was the main type of assistance received.

The results show that 40 percent of the households with a poor FCS had received any form of aid or relief assistance, compared to 40 percent among those with a borderline FCS, and 47 percent of those with an acceptable FCS. This indicates that those with a better FCS are receiving more aid and relief assistant than those with worse FCS.Similarly, the proportion of households who received assistance in the poorest wealth quintile (40%) was slightly lower than the proportion among households in the richest wealth quintile (43%).

Aid and Governance

Across strata, two thirds or more of the respondents indicated that decisions on what development projects to undertake and who should be the recipientof aid and relief assistance were made by the Barangay captain (83%) and/or Barangay council (65%). Municipalities were also seen as making decisions on both projects (33%) and assistance (26%). Few respondents, however, indicated that communities as a whole and/or beneficiaries were involved in the decision-making process: as little as 11 percent said that the decisions on development projects were made by the Barangay assembly with most people present, and only 1 percent said a referendum was held in the Barangay. 68 percent were satisfied about how projects decisions are made, and 63 percent were satisfied about how decisions on who receives assistance are made.

Results were similar across regions and settlement status, although respondents in Lanao del Norte and Maguindanao tended to be least satisfied about both types of decisions. The main reasons for not being satisfied with the development projects that are decided for the barangay included the lack of involvement of respondents (38%), the perception that decisions are made to benefit leaders (30%), or that ultimately, nothing is implemented (28%). Nevertheless, few households (1%) reported having experienced disputes over aid or relief assistance.

While about a third of respondents were dissatisfied with how decisions on assistance are made, the results suggest that the presence of aid and relief assistance has a positive impact on perception of local authorities. Compared to respondents, who indicated that there had been no assistance or development projects in their barangay, those where such projects took place were:

  • More likely to trust Barangay officials (85% vs. 73% had moderate to extreme trust) and Tanod (76% vs. 60%)
  • As likely to trust the mayor (94% vs. 91%), governor (93% vs. 90%), and government officials (89% vs. 85%)

With respectto the MILF and MLF, however, the results do not suggest a similar trend. Overall, aid and relief assistance was associated with a lower trust in the MILF: 33 percent had moderate to extreme trust in the MILF among those in Barangays were development project had taken place, compared to 55 percent where no projects had taken place. Similarly, the presence of development project was associated with lower level of trust in the MNLF (27% vs. 49%).

These results suggest a complex association between aid and trust in various levels of government. Given the cross-sectional nature of the survey it is impossible to determine whether development projects impact trust, or whether the level of trust is associated with project targeting.


[1] Results are based on self-reported data. The presence or absence of development projects was not verified.