REPORT ON THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY OF FYs 2007-2008 FOR THE MUNIIPALITY OF CAMALIGAN By: Dominador N. Marcaida, Jr. 1.

Historical background In May 2006, the plan was made to conduct a socioeconomic survey in the municipality of Camaligan that would provide the agricultural data required for the feasibility study preparation in connection with the submitted farm-tomarket road subproject to the DA - Infrastructure for Rural Productivity and Enhancement Sector (InfRES) Project amounting to 28 Million Pesos. The survey activity was jointly undertaken then by the three municipal offices of Municipal Agriculture Office, Municipal Planning and Development Office and Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office that were involved in the DA-InFRES project. A computer system software was commissioned to be designed based on the DILG Minimum Basic Needs and the Bureau of Agricultural Statistics parameters that was installed in 29 May 2006 at the cost of P60,000.00. The survey instrument, consisting of 25 pages with 180 indicators, included the following variables: basic household information, household data, agriculture data, health and sanitation, household sources of income and livelihood, housing and garbage disposal, peace and order, other information, and Philippine Minimum basic needs (MBN) questionnaire. A canvass of local printing costs was also made in 6 July 2006 for the survey instrument. The printing was however discontinued even if several pages had already been printed by the publisher. In October 2007, the survey project was revived by virtue of a Sangguniang Bayan resolution. The Municipal Planning and Development Office were tasked to undertake the said activity. The publisher was contacted and ordered to resume printing the survey instrument. The software developer was likewise contacted to reinstall the software after full payment on the balance amount was made.

In 26 November 2007, the actual survey was started in a pilot barangay. After a week of piloting activity, in December 2007, other barangays were already included for survey. As soon as the accomplished survey sheets arrived, encoding was done on the software provided. In December 2008, a year after it was started, the data report was printed finally and copies were released in 17 January 2009. The data of the said socio-economic summarized in this report, as follows. 2. Demography There were 4,960 households, or families, in the 13 barangays of Camaligan that were surveyed. The number of individual persons identified by survey was 18,643 and classified according to age gender. By gender, there were 9,594 females (48%)that were identified. males (52%) and the and survey were

9,049

By age, there were 1,850 (9%) pre-school children (ages 1-5 years old), 5,604 (30%) school children (ages 617 tears old), 4,830 (25%) youth (ages 18-29 years old), 7,532 (40%) adults (ages 30-65 years old), and 888 (4%) senior citizens (retirable age of 65 years and above), that were identified. Those with no age consisted on 350 individuals (1%). (Please see Figure 1).
GENDER BARANGAY No. of HH No, of Indivs . 1,200 761 808 387 1,397 3,523 3,831 1,609 656 2,214 542 1,208 507 18,643 Femal e 586 366 409 179 639 1,724 1,885 781 331 1,065 261 581 242 9,049 (48%) Male 614 395 399 208 758 1,799 1,946 828 325 1,149 281 627 265 9,594 (52%) Preschool (1-5 y.o.) 118 56 47 24 197 341 347 194 71 283 35 101 36 1,850 (9%) School (6-17 y.o.) 294 189 205 73 613 1,118 1,030 512 191 839 127 294 119 5,604 (30%) AGE Youth Adult (18(3029 65 y.o.) y.o.) 246 450 158 273 184 329 93 134 395 613 969 1,570 391 1,326 415 647 296 163 629 1,163 132 214 310 439 112 211 4,830 7,532 (25%) (40%) Senior Citizen (65 + y.o.) 61 45 45 33 80 163 180 72 20 80 43 36 30 888 (4%) No age 7 1 0 13 96 98 83 2 7 18 2 14 9 350 (1%)

San Marcos St. Tomas San Juan-SR San Lucas Sua Marupit Dugcal Tarosanan San Francisco San Roque San Jose-SP San Mateo Sto. Domingo MUNICIPALITY

317 199 203 90 408 968 913 426 146 710 128 291 160 4,960

Table 1. Demography by barangay. 2

Female 9,594 9,049

52%

48%

Male

4%

9%

1%

40%

Adult Youth
School age

30%

Pre-school age Senior Citizen No age

25%

Figure 1. Individual population classified by gender and age. 3

3. Education (Highest educational attainment) Out of the total population, there were 1,223 individuals (6.5%) who did not attend schooling, 441 individuals (2.3%) attended daycare school, 2,756 individuals (14.8%) reached elementary level, 1,901 individuals (10.19%) were elementary graduates, 2,568 individuals (13.7%) reached high school level, 3,461 individuals (18.5%) graduated in high school, 326 individuals ((1.7%) attended vocational training, 1,903 individuals ((10.2%) reached college level, 1,793 individuals (9.6%) graduated in college, 24 individuals (0.1%) attained masters degree and 5 individuals (0.02%) attained doctoral degree. (Please see Figure 2) Out of the 4,960 households surveyed, 560 (11.3%) reported that they had children 3-5 years old in daycare or preschool education, 3,448 (87%) reported they had no children 3-5 years old in preschool or daycare school, 329 (6.6%) said the question was not applicable to them, 10 (0.2%) said they were not aware and 613 (12.3%) did not answer. In the matter of children 7 years and below who were unattended by adults (who were 18 years old and above), 100 households (2%) answered in the affirmative, 3,906 households (78.8%) replied in the negative, 315 households (6.3%) replied not applicable, 10 households ((0.2%) replied they did not know, and 629 households (12.6%) did not answer. Concerning children 6-12 years old attending elementary education, 1,575 households (31.8%) responded in the affirmative, 2,468 households (49.8%) responded in the negative, 294 households (5.9%) replied not applicable, 4 households (0.08%) said they did not know, and 619 households (12.4%) did not answer.

3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0

Did not attend schooling Pre-school education Elementary level Elementary graduates High school level High school graduates Vocational training College level College graduates Master's degree Doctor's degree

Figure 2. Highest educational attainment by individuals, 2008. 4. Employment Out of the 7,532 adults and about 2,000 individuals in the youth sector who were not students, constituting the labor force, although NEDA RO5 considered the ages 15-64 years as the working age bracket and the dependent age brackets were 0-14 and 65 year old above), 3,494 had gainful occupations, 2,317 were self-employed and housewives, while 1,235 had no gainful occupations and unemployed. The total workforce is around 7,046 individuals. The retirees were reported to be 389 individuals, while those reported not applicable were 2,667 individuals. (Please see Figure 3).

Non-working sector, 2,667 26% Unemployed, 1,235 12% Retirees, 389 4%

Employed, 3,494 35%

Employed Self-employed Retirees Unemployed Non-working sector

Self-employed, 2,317 23%

Figure 3. Employment status by individuals, 2008. 5

Out of the 4,960 households surveyed, 3,273 households (83%) reported that their household heads had a source of livelihood and were employed, 954 households (19%) reported none, 61 households (1.2%) reported not applicable, 3 households (0.06%) reported they did not known, and 669 households (13%) did not answer. 932 households (19%) reported that other members of the family 18 years old and above had sources of income or employed, while 3,158 households (64%) reported none, 220 households (4.4%) responded not applicable, 5 households (0.10%) replied they did not know, and 645 households (13%) did not answer. 49 households (0.98%) interviewed reported that family members 18 years old below were employed or working in hazardous occupation that prevented them from attending school, 4,041 households (81.5%)reported in the negative, 257 households (5.18%) replied not applicable. 3 (0.06%) reported they did not know, and 610 households (12%) did not answer. For the industrial and commercial engagement by the households, 1,254 households heads were in agricultural occupation, 90 households were in the wholesale/retail business, 68 households were in the transportation, storage and communication, 60 households were in community, social and postal services, 30 households were in the construction business, 20 households were in the fishing industry, 3 households were in financing, insurance and real estate business, 2 household heads were in the electricity, gas and water business, and 1 household head was in the forestry business. On the occupation by sector which were engaged by individual persons, there were 668 individuals engaged in building construction, 240 individuals were in the electrical/electronic services sector, 102 individuals were in the general services sector, 88 individuals were in the security services sector, 56 individuals were in the automotive services sector, 192 individuals were in the home/household services sector, 82 individuals were in the health services sector, 6 individuals were engaged in funeral services sector, 290 individuals were in the hotel/food and restaurant business sector. 551 individuals were public and private office employees, 25 individuals were in the computer services, 11 individuals were in the 6

entertainment business, 407 individuals were in the educational services sector, 75 individuals were in the manufacturing services, 148 individuals were in legal services, 98 were government officials and workers, 46 individuals were peace and order personnel, 4 individuals were in the amusement services, and 4 individuals were church workers. They totaled to 3,494 individuals who were gainfully employed. (Please see Figure 4). The self-employed, that included housewives, numbered to 2,317 individuals. The retirees numbered 389 individuals. The unemployed with no stated occupations totaled 1,235 individuals. The professional sector included engineers, and 5 medical doctors. 61 teachers, 23

Special skills possessed by individuals were the following: 1,238 skilled dressmakers and tailors, 243 food processors, 143 skilled carpenters, 48 automotive mechanics, 42 welders, 29 typists, 19 cosmetologists, 18 beauticians, 15 handicraft makers, 9 radio/TV mechanics, 9 gardeners, 13 reflexologists, 6 housepainters, 1 livestock raiser, and 1 pottery maker. (Please see Figure 5).

700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

Building construction Electrical/electronic services General services Security services Automotive services Home/household services Health services Funeral services Hotel/food & restaurant services Agricultural services Office employees Communication services Computer services Entertainment industry Educational services Manufacturing services Overseas contract workers Legal services Government officials & workers Peace and order personnel Amusement services Church workers

Figure 4. Occupation of individuals by sector, 2008.

1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0

Dressmaker Food processor Skilled carpenter Automotive mechanics Welders Typists Cosmetologist Beautician Handicraft-makers Radio/TV mechanics Gardener/landscaper Reflexologist House painters Livestock-raiser Pottery-maker

Figure 5. Special skills by individuals, 2008. Those households in the business sector consisted of the following: 520 households were engaged in small and micro business, while 3,927 households were not engaged in business. The kind of business engaged in by households were: 311 households in sari-sari (variety) store business, 1 household in breeding, 7 households in poultry business, and 98 were in the buy-and-sell (ambulant and sidewalk type)business. Type of business includes the following: 282 single proprietorship, 183 sari-sari store operation, 9 partnerships, 58 sidewalk vendors, and 3 corporation type.

5. Finance and Poverty Incidence First, let us examine the financial condition of the municipality to explain the widespread poverty incidence among the population. Based on the annual COA audit reports from fiscal years 2000 to 2005, the municipality had a total income of 107.2 Million Pesos, of which 100.6 Million Pesos (94%) came form the national government in the form of Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA), and 6.6 Million Pesos (6%) came from local sources in the form of operating and miscellaneous revenues. These figures show that the municipality is IRA-dependent because of its very meager income from local sources. This explains why the municipality was categorized as a 5th Class town. (Please see Figure 6). On the expenditure side, the municipality spent its income for personal services (PS) in the total amount of 61.9 Million Pesos (57.7%); for miscellaneous operating and other expenses (MOOE) in the total amount of 27.2 Million Pesos (25.53%), and for capital outlay (CO) in the total amount of 6.4 Million Pesos (6%). Total expenditures for six (6) years were 92.5 Million Pesos (86.2%), leaving a net income of 14.7 Million Pesos (13.7%) that would have been spent for other development-related projects in the community. (Please see Figure 7).

25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 IRA Op/Misc. Revenue TOTAL INCOME

Figure 6. Municipal income for a period of six fiscal years, 2000-2005.

18,000,000 16,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Personnel Services (PS)

Misc. Operating and Other Expenses (MOOE) Capital Outlay (CO)

Total Expenditures

Figure 7. Municipal expenditure for a period of six fiscal years, 2000-2005.

According to the 4,960 households surveyed, 944 households (20%) reported that their household income were above the subsistence threshold level (based on the NEDA RO5 figure of P 74,540.00 a year family income for a family of five members); while 3,157 households (64%) reported that their annual income was below the subsistence threshold level; 119 households (23%) reported as nonapplicable, 51 households (0.01%) said they did not know and 659 households (13%) did not answer. On the municipal level, 4,960 households reported a total gross annual family income of P 228,533,316.00. This gave an annual per capita family income of P 46,075.26, which was in the lower middle below the subsistence threshold level of P 74,540.00 a year as set by the NEDA RO 5 for a family of five members in the Bicol Region for the year 2008.(Please see Table 2). The updated Regional Development Plan for Region 5, year 2008, authored by the NEDA RO5 stated that a family of five in the Bicol Region needs at least P 74,540.00 a year, or P 6,211.67 a month, or P 207.06 a day, income to be able to meet its food and other basic needs.

10

BARANGAY
San Marcos St. Tomas San Juan-SR San Lucas Sua Marupit Dugcal Tarosanan San Francisco San Roque San Jose-SP San Mateo Sto. Domingo MUNICIPALITY

NO. of HH.
317 199 203 90 408 968 913 426 146 710 128 291 160 4,960

GROSS ANNUAL FAMILY INCOME (In Pesos)

24,460,700.00 13,352,600.00 13,003,128.00 6,674,000.00 11,099,220.00 32,296,640.00 42,414,200.00 12,159,852.00 7,465,060.00 26,767,152.00 11,551,236.00 18,321,928.00 8,967,600.00 228,533,316.00

ANNUAL PER CAPITA FAMILY INCOME (In Pesos)

77,163.09 67,098.49 64,054.81 74,155.55 27,203.97 33,364.29 46,455.86 28,544.25 51,130.55 37,700.21 90,244.03 62,961.95 56,047.50 46,075.26 Above Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Above Below Below Below

REMARK
subsistence TL STL STL STL STL STL STL STL STL STL STL STL STL STL

Table 2. Annual gross and per capita family income for the number of households per barangay, 2008. 6. Land Uses and Resources On land resources and uses, out of the total 4,708,535 square meters (about 470.8 hectares, although as per cadastral survey of the Bureau of Lands, DENR, there was only 468.137 hectares total land area for the municipality of Camaligan), residential area is 860,022 sq. m. (26%), commercial area is 118,595.2 sq. m. (3%), educational area is 19,474 sq. m.(1%), institutional area is 65,319 sq. m. (2%), and agricultural area is 2,306,163 sq. m. (68%) (Please see Figure 8 and Table 3). Of the agricultural area, 2,279,377 sq. m. is devoted for rice and vegetable cultivation, 57,796 sq. m. is devoted for fish ponds,3,387 sq. m. for livestock raising, and 645,317.21 sq. m. is grassland.
Residential, 88 26% Commercial, 11.8 3%

Residential Commercial Institutional Educational Agricultural

Agricultural, 230 68%

Institutional, 6.5 2% Educational, 1.9 1%

Figure 8. Land use, 2008. 11

BARANGAY

San Marcos Sto. Tomas San Juan-SR San Lucas Sua Marupit Dugcal Tarosanan San Francisco San Roque San Jose-SP San Mateo Sto. Domingo MUNICIPALITY

AREA* (sq. m.) 120,547 62,098 255,753 108,407 763,207 954,440 1,116,997 478,730 253,984 359,207 65,755 125,899 43,511 4,708,535

ACTUAL USAGE Residl 34,947 33,228 32,776 18,265 109,529 193,553 218,110 87,615 30,630 41,071 21,293 22,249 16,756 860,022 Coml 6,263 Instit. 122 Educ. Rice 25,516 5,000 188,500 62,765 476,924 508,416 460,728 346,832 149,513 22,534 32,649 19,474 2,279,377 57,796 3,387 Fish Agricultural Livestock Vege. Grass 13,608 22,345 30,122 12,975 122,276 65,080 107,495 14,606 12,652 146,948 31,078 60,237 5,896 645,317

7,000 492 74,257 1,176 100 13,420 7,265 7,098 1,524.2 118,595

14,501 699 11,945 6,499 8,311 429 1,967 7,971 244 12,631 65,319

19,474

6,000 1,178 100 22,120 2,968 339 80

*Based on the record of declared real properties at the Municipal Assessors Office, Camaligan. Actual land area based on the Bureau of Lands cadastral survey, DENR, the total land area of Camaligan is 468.137 hectares, or 4,681,370 square meters.

Table 3. Land use per barangay, 2008. 1. Agriculture Data a. Household type Of the 4,145 households interviewed, 384 households (9.26%) were farming households, 3,729 households (89.9%) were non-farming households, and 32 households (0.7%) were fishing households (which may either be farming or nonfarming households also). b. Palay farm type (in hectares) A total of 451 hectares of palay farms were reported, of which 114 hectares (25%) were irrigated, 251 hectares (55.6%)were rainfed, and 86 hectares (19%) were upland type. c. Irrigation type (in hectares) A total of 210.91 hectares of irrigated rice fields were irrigated by the following methods: 136.34 hectares (64%)by suction or shallow-tube wells, 58 hectares (27.4%) by the NIA, 15.57 hectares (7.3%) by barangay communal irrigation, and 1 hectare (0.5%) by normal tidal water level.

12

d. Number of cropping Of the 653.22 hectares irrigated rice fields, 566.72 hectares (86.7%)were cultivated twice a year, 72 hectares (11%) were cultivated thrice a year, and 14.5 hectares (2.2%) were farmed only once a year. Of the 600.49 hectares rainfed farm types,578.79 hectares (96%) were cultivated twice a year, 13.10 hectares (2%) were cultivated thrice a year, and 8.60 hectares (1.4%) were planted only once a year. e. Average yield by semester and farm type per hectare (in cavans) For the dry season (January-June) of 2006, irrigated rice fields reported a total yield of 398.50 cavans (19,925 kg.)of palay. In milled rice, this quantity will give 199.25 cavans, or 9,962.5 kg., of rice. For the rainfed rice fields during the same season, there was reported a total of 17,931.65 cavans, or 896,582.5 kg. of palay. In milled rice, this will yield 8,965.82 cavans, or 448,291.25 kg., of rice. Upland rice fields for the same season also yielded 517 cavans, or 25,850 kilos, of palay, or in milled rice, this will yieled 258.5 cavans, or 12,925 kilos, of rice. A total rice volume of 9,423 cavans, or 471,178.75 kilos, of rice was reported for the dry season (Jan-June) of 2006. For the wet season (July-December) of 2006, irrigated rice fields reported a yield of 163 cavans, or 8,150 kilos, of palay. In milled rice, this will give 81.5 cavans, or 4,075 kilos, of rice. For the rainfed rice fields during the same season, a yield of 18,346.05 cavans, or 917,302.50 kilos, of palay was reported. In terms of milled rice, this will give 458,651.25 cavans, or 458,651 kilos, of rice. Upland rice fields gave a yield of 17 cavans, or 750 kilos, of palay. In milled rice, this gave 8.5 cavans, or 375 kilos, of rice. In summary, for rice: 458,253.75 kilos for irrigated and rainfed, Dry Season 2006 12,925 kilos for upland, Dry Season 2006. 4,075 kilos for irrigated fields, Wet Season 2006 458,651.25 kilos for rainfed, Wet Season 2006 13

375 kilos for upland fields, Wet Season 2006, for a total of 924,280 kilos of rice for the cropping year 2006. This total yield of milled rice, if sold to the market at P30.00 per kilo, will give a proceed of P 27,728,400.00. With a population of 18,643 individuals, consuming a daily average of about 1 kilo of rice a day, multiplied by 30 days, will give a monthly rice consumption of 559,290 kilos. If multiplied by 12 months, our town population will need 6,711,480 kilos for one year rice consumption. The annual yield of 924,280 kilos of rice produced by our local farmers could only supply for two months of our rice consumption needs at the given rate of 1 kilo a day per person.

Total Land area 468.14 hectares Agricultural Land 258.02 hectares Rice Land 156 hectares Palay Production per hectares 100 cavans per cropping season Total rice land x palay produced for 1 cropping 156,000 cavans Rice produced 78,000 cavans / cropping Population 20,758 persons Rice Consumption 3.75 cavans per person / cropping Monthly Rice consumption 31.25 kilos / person

f. Area (in hectare) planted to alternative crops This were the crops planted according to area in number of hectares: mongo 1,200 hectares, vegetable 0.02 hectares, cassava 143.18 hectares, eggplant 26.04 hectares, sugar cane 0.01 hectare, okra -30.07 hectares, patola 2.01 hectares, squash 1 hectare, bell pepper 10.01 hectares, finger pepper 20.01 hectares, hot pepper 17.09 hectares, native pechay 50 hectares, chinese pechay 0.02 hectares, camote tops 444.08 hectares, camote roots o.25 hectares. g. Average yield in metric tons per hectare (MT/ha)of selected temporary crops The average yield of the following crops planted by farming households in the municipality of Camaligan, given 14

in metric tons per hectare (MT/ha.): cabbage 26 MT, cassava 823.26 MT, eggplant 347.06 MT, mongo 0.03 MT, sugar cane 28 MT, ampalaya 33.18 MT, gabi 7,832.29 MT, ginger 13 MT; upo 1 MT, okra 393.38 MT, ubi root -64.04 MT, kangkong 26.03 MT, patola 59.03 MT, raddish 3 MT, squash 14.01 MT, winged beans 11 MT, yam beans 3 MT, hot pepper 58 MT, finger pepper 13 MT; and string beans 118 MT. Gross sales from these crops amounted to a total of P 203,231,440.00. (Please see Figure 9) 2. Domesticated Animals For the year 2008, the number, cost of animal and maintenance, and population of domesticated animals were given as follows: dog 1,782 population with a capital cost of P83,300.00 and a maintenance cost of P 5,443.00; carabaos 6 heads, costing around P 15,000.00, with zero maintenance cost; cows 34 heads, costing P 71,000.00 with minimal maintenance cost of P 10,000.00; pigs 463 heads, costing P 144,000.00 and a maintenance cost of P 6,695.50, chicken 4,770 heads, costing P 91,398.50 and a maintenance cost of P 3,265.25; and cat 574 heads, costing P 200.00. 3. Fishing No of households engaged in fishing: No. of fishing households 62 No. of non-fishing HH 4,385 HH that sell their catch - 43 Volume of catch: Volume of catch in kilograms 20,362 kilos Volume of catch sold (in kilos) 2,934 kilos. Amount of catch sold (in pesos) P 894,445.00 Fishing methods used (per unit number): Trawl nets 9 Drag nets 7 Trawl line 3 Push nets 3 Biakos (river) 3 Baby trawl 2 Ring net 2 Long line 1 Others (fish lines, fish net) - 33 15

4,610,300.00 27,728,400.00 894,445.00

Livestock, 5,273
Rice Vegetables Fish Livestock

Fish, 20,362

Vegetables & other crops, 9,864.31

Rice Livestock Fish

Rice, 924,280
203,231,440.00

Vegetables & other crops

Figure 9. Gross sales from agricultural products in pesos, 2006. 7. Health and Sanitation a. Health Services:

Figure 10. Volume of yield of agricultural products in kilos, MT or heads, 2006.

Of the 4,960 households surveyed, 271 households (5.4%) responded that they had pregnant and lactating mothers, 3,932 households (79.2%) replied in the negative, 64 households (1.2%) responded not applicable; 5 households (0.10%) responded they did not know, and 688 households (13.9%) did not answer. On the matter of giving iodized oil and iron sulfate, 211 households (4.2%) responded in the affirmative, 1,358 households (27.37%) responded in the negative, 34 households responded not applicable, 3 households (0.06%) did not know, and 3,354 households (67.62%) did not answer. As to being given 2 doses of Tetanus Toxoid while pregnant, 233 households (4.6%) responded in the affirmative, 2,162 households (43.5%) responded in the negative, 50 households (1%) responded not applicable, 2 households (0.04%) responded they did not know, and 2,513 households |(50.7%) did not answer. On the subject of newly born infant with 2.5 kilograms (5.5 pounds) and above birth weight, 254 households (5.12%) replied in the affirmative, 1,212 households (24.43%) replied in the negative, 46 households (0.92%) replied not applicable, 4 households (0.08%) responded they did not know, and 3,444 households (69.4%) did not answer. 16

When asked whether a midwife/doctor/trained hilots assisted in the delivery, 238 households (20.56%) replied in the affirmative, 1,020 households (20.56%) replied in the negative, 39 households (1%) replied not applicable; 1 household (0.02%) replied did not know, and 3,662 households (73.8%) did not answer. On the subject of breastfeeding during the first four months after delivery, 239 households (4.8%) replied in the positive, 1,012 households (20.4%) replied in the negative; 42 households (1%) replied not applicable; 1 household (0.02%) replied they did not know, and 3,662 households (73.9%) did not answer. With respect to malnutrition problem, 73 households (2%) reported there were malnourished children 5 years old and below according to the latest OPT, 2,923 households (59%) reported in the negative, 130 households (2.6%) responded not applicable, 1 household (0.02%) replied he did not know, and 1,833 households (37%) did not answer. There were 4,114 households (83%) that said they ate three square meals a day, while 333 households (6.7%) responded they ate less than three times a day. Concerning the incidence of children 5 years old and below with LBM three times a day, 46 households (1%) responded in the affirmative; 3,977 households (80.2%) responded in the negative, 311 households (6.2%) replied not applicable, 10 households (0.2%) responded they did not know, and 616 households (12.4%) did not answer. Regarding death of a family member during the year 2007 from curable or preventable diseases, like TB, broncopneumonia, heart disease or LBM, 12 households (0.24%) responded in the affirmative, 3,994 households (80.5%) responded in the negative, 339 households (6.8%) replied not applicable, 1 household (0.02%) replied he did not know, and 614 households (12.4%) did not answer. 29 infant deaths were reported for the year 2007. Couples who used family planning method during the past year 2007 (women 15 49 years old who used artificial family planning method), 149 households (3%) responded in the affirmative, 3,807 households (77%) responded in the negative, 239 households (4.8%) responded not applicable, 17

28 households (1%) said they households (15%) did not answer.

did

not

know,

and

737

Couples availing of family planning services, 126 households (2.5%) responded in the affirmative, 3,876 households (78%) responded in the negative, 255 households (5%) replied nor applicable, 19 households (0.4%) replied they did not know, and 684 households (14%) did not answer. Solo parents, like widow/er, unwed mother, OFW spouse, prisoners spouse, or hospital patients confined for more than 1 year, who were given health services or counseling from government facilities, 30 households (1%) responded in the affirmative, 3,859 households (78%) responded in the negative, 364 households (8.3%) replied not applicable, 15 households (0.3%) replied they did not know, and 692 households (14%) did not answer. On the whole, 1,390 children availed of vaccines, 413 couples availed of family planning services, 449 individuals availed of health care services, 422 patients were attended and cured of illnesses, 382 patients received dental care, 385 children 3-5 years old attended daycare; and 391 malnourished children attended feeding programs. b. Toilet: 4,149 households (84%) reported that they had clean toilets (flush type, pour type, antipolo type with covered septic tanks and exhaust), 145 households (3%) replied in the negative, 5 households (0.02%) replied they did not know, and 660 households (13.3%) did not answer. (Please see Figure 11). Below is a list of toilet households: Flush type: Personal use 178 Communal use - 61 Pour type: Personal use 3,613 Communal use - 501 Covered pit: 7 Open pit: 3 No toilet facility: 22 type by the number of

18

Not applicable, 5, 0% Not aware, 1 0%

No answer, 660 13%

With toilets No toilets Not applicable Not aware No answer

No toilets, 145 3%

With toilets, 4,149 84%

Figure 11. Number of households with toilet facilities, 2008. c. Clothing: Whether all family members had three pairs of interior and exterior clothing, 4,117 households (83%) replied in the affirmative, 177 households (4%) replied in the negative, 5 households (0.1%) replied not applicable, and 661 households (13%) did not answer. 8. Housing and garbage disposal a. House and lot ownership 3,591 households (72.4%) said they owned their house and lot, while 680 households (14%) said in the negative, 22 households (0.44%) said not applicable, 3 households (0.06%)said they did not know, and 664 households (13%) did not answer. This was the breakdown on housing ownership: House and lot owners 2,795 households (56%) Renting house and lot 354 households (7%) Owned the house and renting the lot -320 households (6.4%) Owned the house, free use of lot 632 households (13%) Owned the house and occupy the lot without consent of the owner 56 households (1.12%) 19

Occupy house and lot without consent households (0.22%). Did not answer 792 households (16%) (Please see Figure 12).

of

owner

11

Occupy house/lot without consent of owner, 11 0% Occupy lot without consent of owner, 56 1% Owned house, free use of lot, 632 13% Owned house but renting lot, 320 6%

No answer, 792 16%

House and lot owners Renting house and lot Owned house but renting lot Owned house, free use of lot Occupy lot without consent of owner

House and lot owners, 2,795 57%

Renting house and lot, 354 7%

Occupy hose/lot without consent of owner No answer

Figure 12. House and lot ownership by household, 2008.

b. Housing materials used 3,733 households (75%) said they owned durable type of dwelling that could withstand 5 years more of use, 558 households (11%) responded in the negative, 10 households (0.20%) answered not applicable, 2 households (0.04%) said they did not know, and 661 households (13%) did not answer. Of the 4,960 households surveyed, 1,563 houses (32%) were made of light materials (concrete structures), 1,268 houses (26%) were made of light materials (wood), 1,275 houses (26%)were made of semi-permanent materials, and 854 households (17%) did not answer (Please see Figure 13).

20

No answer, 854, 17%

Concrete , 1,563 31%

Concrete Wood Mixed No answer

Mixed, 1,275 26% Wood, 1,268 26%

Figure 13. Housing materials used, 2008. 1. roofing 243 houses (5%) with concrete slab roofing 287 houses (6%) with semi-permanent materials roofing 567 (12%) houses with cogon or nipa roofing 3,197 houses (64%) with galvanized iron roofing 5 houses (0.1%) without roofing 1 house (0.02%) of mixed (salvaged) materials, such as tarpaulin, lawanit, etc. 660 households (13%) did not answer. 2. walling Concrete 3,233 houses (65%) Wood 490 houses (10%) Bamboo/Cogon or nipa 275 houses (6%) Mixed materials (concrete and wood) 247 houses (5%) Galvanized iron 43 houses (0.7%) Improvised/salvaged (tarpaulin/lawanit) 6 houses No walling (shed type) 6 houses (0.12%) Did not answer 660 households (13%) 3. flooring Cement (concrete) 3,233 houses(65%) Earthen 363 houses (7.3%) Wood/bamboo 490 houses (10%) Tile cement 345 houses (7%) Marble slab 11 houses (0.22%) No answer 518 households (10%) 21

c. Energy utilization: 1. energy used for lighting Electricity 4,083 houses (82.3%) Generator 6 houses (0.12%) Candlelight 6 houses (0.12%) LPG 6 houses (0.12%) No answer 623 houses (13%) (Please see Figure 14)

Candlelight, 6 0% Generator , 6 0% LPG, 6 0% Kerosene gas, 236 5%

No answer, 623 13%

Electricity Kerosene gas Generator Candlelight LPG No answer

Electricity, 4,083 82%

Figure 14. Energy used for lighting

22

2. energy used for cooking Electricity 37 households Kerosene gas 76 households Generator 5 households Wood 836 households LPG 1,764 households Charcoal 2,364 households Wood shavings 35 households Rice hull 157 households (Please see Figure 15)

Wood shavings 35 Electricity 37 1% Kerosene gas 76 1% 1% Rice hull 157 3% Firewood 836 16% Charcoal 2,364 LPG 1,764 33% 45%

Charcoal LPG Firewood Rice hull Electricity Wood shavings Kerosene gas

Figure 15. Energy used for cooking by households, 2008. 3. availability of electricity in a day 24 hours a day 3,562 households (72%) 18-12 hours 85 households (1.7%) 12-6 hours 368 households (7.4%) 1-2 hours 97 households (2%) Not applicable 848 households (17%) 4. House appliance owned Radio 3,441 houses CD/Stereo/Component 1,213 households TV 3,680 households Refrigerator/freezer 1,252 households Electric fan 3,278 households VHS/VCD/DVD player 116 households Electric flat iron 1,243 households 23

Washing machine 1,800 households Microwave oven/toaster 716 households Stove oven 234 households Aircon 1,094 households Personal Computer 134 households Others - Laptop computer, motorcycle, pedicab, rice cooker, etc. d. Water supply (per household) 3,998 households (81%) responded they had safe potable water source within 250 meters, or 10 minutes walk, from their house. 286 households (6%) reported in the negative. 12 households (0.5%) replied not applicable. 3 households (0.06%) replied they did not know. 661 households (13%) did not answer. Water source for the 3,998 households: Barangay water system Personal use 446 households Communal water system 573 households Deep Well pumpsPersonal use 1,633 households Communal water supply 321 households Artesian well (continues flow)Personal use 247 households Communal use 129 households Dug well (pit type) -7 households Others (Spring, river, lake, rain) 5 households No answer 1,599 households (Please see Figure 17) e. Garbage disposal: Burning 3,788 households (76%) Collected by garbage collector 355 households (7%) Open pit dumping 163 households (3.3%) Buried in dug well with cover 65 households (1.3%) Composted in containers 42 households (0.84%) Others 1. transported to Naga and other places - 289 households 2. Thrown into the Bicol river 288 households (6%) (Please see Figure 18). 24

Buried with cover, 65 1% Open pit dumping, 163 3%

Composted in containers, 42, 1%

Brought to Naga, 289 6% Dumped into the Bicol River, 288 6%

Burning Collected by garbage collector Open pit dumping Buried with cover Composted in containers Brought to Naga Dumped into the Bicol River

Collected by garbage collector, 325 7%

Burning, 3,788 76%

Figure 18. Garbage disposal method by households in volume per day, 2008 Kind of garbage (in kilogram per day): Biodegradable 5,519 kilos Non-biodegradable, such as: Paper 15,433 kilos Plastic 14,399 kilos Textile 514 kilos Tin/metal 6,998 kilos Glass bottles 6,518 kilos Others (hair) 0.5 kilos For a total volume per day of 43,862.5 kilos. (Please see Figure 19).

Biodegradable 5,519 11%

Biodegradable

Non-biodegradable 43,862.50 89%

Non-biodegradable

Figure 19. Kind of garbage by households in kilos per day, 2008.

25

Summary: Biodegradable 5,519 kilos Non-biodegradable 43,862.5 kilos Total 49,381.5 kilos This means that daily by the houses, 37,529.94 kilos 3,456.70 kilos 1,629.58 kilos 641.95 kilos 414.80 kilos 2,962.89 kilos 2,962.89 kilos 9. Peace and Order Concerning family members victimized by crime or antisocial behavior, like murder, rape, physical abuse or injury, 58 households (1%) answered in the affirmative, 4,005 households (81%) replied in the negative, 235 households (5%) answered not applicable, 1 household (0.02%) answered he did not know, and 661 households (13%) did not answer. On domestic violence, such as physical injury or harm, abuse and rape), 16 households (0.32%) answered in the affirmative, 4,075 households (82%) answered in the negative, 260 households (5.24%) answered not applicable, 1 household (0.02%) did not know, and 608 households (12.3%) did not answer. Family members victimized by crime against property, like robbery, theft, or hold-up, 25 households (0.5%) answered in the affirmative, 4,031 households (81.3%) answered in the negative, 243 households (4.8%) answered not applicable, and 661 households (13%) did not answer. Family members confined in a drug rehabilitation center, treated for or involved in illegal drug use, 9 households (0.2%) answered in the affirmative, 4,036 households (81.3%) answered in the negative, 253 households (5%) answered not applicable, 1 household (0.02%) answered he did not know, and 661 households (13%) did not answer. Family members hospital or mental confined or institution, 26 treated in a 18 households mental (0.4%) of the total of garbage being produced are are are are are are are being burned. collected by garbage collectors dumped openly buried in pits composted in containers transported to Naga City dumped into the Bicol River

replied in the affirmative, 4,032 households (81.3%) answered in the negative, 252 households (5%) answered not applicable, and 658 households (13%) did not answer. Family members victimized by natural calamities, like typhoon, drought, earthquake or fire, last year, 1,225 households (25%) answered in the affirmative, 2,888 households (58%) answered in the negative, 191 households (3.8%) answered not applicable, and 656 households (13%) did not answer. Family members victimized by armed conflicts, 2 households (0.04%) answered in the affirmative, 3,728 households (75%) answered in the negative, 562 households (11.3%) answered not applicable, and 668 households (13%) did not answer. In summary, 14 households (0.3%) were crime victims, 4,433 households (89%) answered in the negative, and 513 households (10.3%) did not answer. The kind of crime victims: Robbery and theft 21 households Victims of armed conflict 2 households Domestic violence or injury 4 households 10. Social Participation and Involvement Membership of at least one family member in a recognized community or social organization or association that were actively involved in community development, 409 households (8%)replied in the affirmative, 3,685 households (74%) answered in the negative, 23 households, (0.46%) replied they did not know, and 669 households (13%) did not answer. Family members 18 years and above who voted in the last elections, 2,424 households (49%) answered in the affirmative, 1,720 households (35%) answered in the negative, 148 households (3%) answered not applicable, 7 households (0.14%) did not know, and 661 household (13%) did not answer. ID in 3,995 1,969 1,583 1,460 possession: individuals individuals individuals individuals SSS Barangay ID Philhealth ID Voters ID 27

555 individuals NBI clearance 511 individuals GSIS ID 501 individuals Passport ID 11. Summary and Conclusion In summary, demographic data showed that 4,960 households surveyed in the 13 barangays of Camaligan, yielded 18,643 individuals that constituted the survey population. By classification as to gender, there were 9,594 males (52%) and 9,049 females (48%). This means that the males are a little bit higher in number than females. By age classification, pre-school individuals aged 1-5 years old constituted 9%, school age population aged 6-17 years old constituted 30%, the youth aged 18-29 years old constituted 25%, adult population aged 30-64 years old constituted 40% of the total population, and the senior citizens aged 65 years old and above constituted 4%.Those with no specified age constituted 1%. The dependent population, consisting of the preschool, school ages and senior citizens, numbered 8,342 individuals, or 45% of the total population. The working age bracket, consisting of the youth and the adult population, numbered12,362 individuals (66%) of the total population. Data on highest education attainment showed that 6.5% of the total population did not attend schooling, 2.3% were in daycare school, 14.7% reached elementary level, 10,19% were elementary graduates, 13.7% reached high school level, 18.5% were high school graduates, 1.7% were vocational graduates, 10.2% reached college level. 9.6% were college graduates, 0.10% attained masters degree and 0.02% attained doctors degree. 11.3% of the total population reported that they had children 3-5 years old who were in daycare or pre-school education. There was a 2% report that children 7 years and below who were unattended by adult members of the family. 31.8% of the total population reported that their children 6-12 years old attended elementary schooling.

28

On the employment data, out of the 9,532 individuals that constituted the employable (working) age bracket, 3,494 individuals (37%) had gainful employment, 2,317 individuals (24%) were self-employed or housewives, and 1,235 individuals (13%) had no employment or engaged in any occupation. 83% of the households surveyed said that their household members had source of livelihood and only 19% reported that other embers of the family 18 years old and above were employed or had sources of income, while 64% reported that they had no source of income nor employed. The top occupation engaged in by household heads was in the agricultural sector, where 1,254 households were engaged in farming. The leading occupation engaged in by individuals was in building and construction business. The top special skills possessed by inhabitants was dressmaking, where 1,238 skilled dressmakers were reported. The second highest skill was in food processing, where 243 food processors were reported, mostly found in barangay Marupit. The top business engaged in by the inhabitants were sari-sari (variety) store businesses, with 311 sari-sari store owners reported. On the poverty incidence, the annual per capita family income on the municipal level was only P46,075.06, which was very much lower that the P 74,540.00 a year subsistence threshold level set by NEDA RO5 for year 2008 for a family of five members (couple plus 3 children) in the Bicol Region. The total yield for rice in the cropping year 2006 was 924,280 kilos. If sold to the market will give a proceeds of P 27,728,400.00. With an annual rice consumption for the whole population of 6,711,480 kilos a year, the total rice yield of our rice fields are barely enough to feed the population for a period of two months. The total area planted to alternative crops was reported to about 1,943.82 hectares. The gross sales of these alternative crops reached P 203,231,440.00. 29

Livestock animals consisted of 6 heads carabaos, 34 heads cattle, 463 heads pigs, and 4,770 heads chicken, which gave a total proceeds of P 4,610,300.00 On the fishing sector, total volume of catch was 20,362 kilos. Volume of catch sold to the market was 2,934 kilos that gave a proceeds of P 894,445.00. As a whole, the total gross income for the agricultural sector was P 236,464,585.00 for the year 2006. On health and sanitation, the survey reported 1,390 children vaccinated, 413 couples availed of family planning services, 449 individuals availed of health care services, 422 patients received dental care, 385 children 3-5 years old attended daycare school, and 391 malnourished children attended feeding program. 29 infant deaths were reported for the year 2007. 73 households (2%) reported that there were malnourished children 5 years old and below according to the latest OPT conducted in the barangay. 46 households reported the incidence of children 5 years old and below who suffered LBM thrice a day. 12 households reported death of family members during 2007 from curable or preventable diseases, such as TB, bronco-pneumonia, heart disease or LBM. 333 households (6.7%) reported that they ate less than three times a day. 145 households (4%) reported that their family members had no three pairs of interior and exterior clothing. On housing, 2,795 household (56%) reported that they owned their house and lot, 354 households (7%) rented their house and lot, 320 households (6.4%) reported that they owned the house while they rented the lot, 632 households (13%) reported that they owned the house but had free use of the lot, 56 households (1.12%) reported that they owned the house by occupy the lot without consent of the owner, 11 households (0.22%) reported that they occupy the house and lot without consent from the owner. Of the 4,960 households surveyed, 32% reported that their houses were made of permanent (concrete) structures, 30

26% were made of light materials (wood), 26% were made of semi-permanent materials. On energy utilization for lighting, 82.3% of the households surveyed reported that they used electricity for lighting, 4.7% used kerosene gas, 0.12% used generators, 0.12% used candlelight, and 0.12% used LPG. Energy utilization for cooking, 2,364 households used charcoal (highest), followed by LPG with 1,764 household users, and next was firewood with 836 household users, followed by rice hull with 157 household users, then electricity with 37 household users, next was wood shavings with 35 household users, kerosene gas with 76 household users, and generator with 5 household users. For water supply, deep well was the highest potable water source with 1,633 household users for personal use and 321 communal users. Followed by barangay water system, with 446 users for personal use and 573 communal water supply users. Next, were artesian wells, with 247 users for personal use and 129 communal users. 7 houses sourced their potable water from dug well, while 5 houses used open water sources, such as spring, river, or rain water. For garbage disposal, out of the total volume of garbage being produced by households daily, which was about 49,381.5 kilos a day, 37,529.94 kilos (76%) were burned, 3,456.70 kilos (7%) were collected by garbage collectors, 2,962.89 kilos (6%) were transported to Naga City and dumped in other places outside the municipality, and an equal amount of 2,962.89 kilos (6%) were dumped or thrown into the Bicol River, 1,629.58 kilos (3.3%) were dumped in open pit inside the municipality, 641.95 kilos (1.3%) were buried in covered dug pits, and 414.80 kilos (0.84%) were composted in containers. On the peace and order situation, 16 households (0.32%) reported being victims of physical injury or maltreatment, sexually abused, or raped, 25 households (0.5%) reported family members victimized by crime against property, such as robbery, theft, or hold-up. 9 households (0.2%) reported that family members were confined in a drug rehabilitation center, treated or involved in illegal drug use.

31

18 households (2.4%) reported that family members were confined or treated in a mental hospital or institution. 1,225 household (25%0 reported that family members were victims of natural calamities, like typhoons, drought, earthquake or fire last year 2007. 2 households armed conflicts. (0.04%) reported being victimized by

On social participation and involvement, 409 households (8%) reported that at least one family member is a member of recognized community organization involved in community development activity, while 3,685 household (74%) were not. 2,424 household (49%)reported that family members 18 years old and above had voted in the last election (2007), while 1,720 households (35%) did not vote. ID in possession: 3,995 individuals SSS 1,969 individuals Barangay ID 1,583 individuals Philhealth ID 1,460 individuals - Voters ID 555 individuals NBI clearance 511 individuals GSIS ID 501 individuals Passport ID In conclusion, poverty is manifested in so many ways, such as the presence of high unemployment rate and poor alternative source of income, poor health and sanitation, illiteracy, poor housing and garbage disposal (there is a study that correlates these two factors; which means, that poor housing condition will likely generate poor garbage disposal by household members), high crime rate and poor peace and order condition. All these problems were reflected and reported in this socio-economic survey of the municipality of Camaligan for the years 2007-2008. Hence, the widespread poverty of the people in terms of socio-economic opportunity, as shown in the high incidence of poor subsistence threshold level in almost all barangays in the municipality, including the fact that the municipality is very much IRA-dependent, is the root cause why the municipality remains a 5th Class municipality for a long time. 32

It would be a great challenge for the local leadership, both in the public and private sector, to devote their full time energies into improving the socioeconomic conditions of the people that is believed to ultimately redound to the betterment and development of the locality in the future.

33