document of the world bank · document of the world bank ... dao department administrative order...

Document of

The World Bank

Report No: ICR3123

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT

(IBRD-72980)

ON A

LOAN

lN THE AMOUNT OF US$18.99 MILLION

TO THE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

FOR THE

LAND ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT II PROJECT

March 18, 2015

Social, Urban, Rural and Resilience Global Practice

East Asia and Pacific Region

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective March 18, 2015)

Currency Unit = Philippine Peso (PhP)

US$1.00 = PhP44.63

FISCAL YEAR

January 1 – December 1

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AF Additional Finance

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development

BIR Bureau of Internal Revenue

BLGF Bureau of Local Government Finance

CADT Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title

CAS Country Assistance Strategy

CCM Consolidated Cadastral Map

CPS Community Participation Strategy

DAO Department Administrative Order

DENR

DFAT

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Australia)

DIS Development Impact Study

DoF Department of Finance

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FM Financial Management

GoP Government of the Philippines

HRMD Human Resource Management and Development

IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report

IERR Internal Economic Rate of Return

IP Indigenous People

ISF Innovation Support Fund

ISR Implementation Status Report

KPI Key Performance Indicator

LAA Land Administration Authority

LAM Land Administration and Management

LAMP Land Administration and Management Project

LAMS Land Administration and Management System

LEI Land Equity International

LGAF Land Governance Assessment Framework

LGU Local Government Unit

LSFD Land Sector Development Framework

LTCP Land Titling Computerization Project

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MAG Mass Appraisal Guidebook

MTR Mid-Term Review

NCIP National Commission on Indigenous Peoples

NEDA National Economic and Development Authority

NSC National Steering Committee

NTRC National Tax Research Center

OSS One-Stop-Shop

PAD Project Appraisal Document

PDO Project Development Objective

PhP Philippine Peso

PPIO Provincial Project Implementation Office

PRF Project Result Framework

PSR Project Status Report

PVS Philippine Valuation Standards

QEA Quality at Entry Assessment

QSA Quality of Supervision Assessment

RESA Real Estate Services Act

RoD Registry of Deeds

RPT Real Property tax

SAFO Systematic Adjudication Field Office

SDGF Social Development and Gender Framework

SEBS Socio-Economic Baseline Study

SMV Schedule of Market Values

TA Technical Assistance

TTL Task Team Leader

UPOU University of the Philippines Open University

VRA

VS

Valuation Reform Act

Valuation Standards

Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg

Country Director: Motoo Konishi

Global Practice Manager: Jorge A. Muñoz

Task Team Leader: Keith Clifford Bell and

Maria Theresa G. Quiñones

(Co-TTL)

ICR Team Leader: Keith Clifford Bell

ICR Primary Author Cecilia Zanetta

PHILIPPINES

LAND ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT II PROJECT

CONTENTS

Data Sheet

A. Basic Information

B. Key Dates

C. Ratings Summary

D. Sector and Theme Codes

E. Bank Staff

F. Results Framework Analysis

G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs

H. Restructuring

I. Disbursement Graph

1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design ............................................... 1

2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes .............................................. 3

3. Assessment of Outcomes ............................................................................................ 7

4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome ......................................................... 13

5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance ..................................................... 15

6. Lessons Learned ....................................................................................................... 16

7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners .......... 16

Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing .......................................................................... 17

Annex 2. Outputs by Component ................................................................................. 18

Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis ................................................................. 25

Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes ............ 31

Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results ........................................................................... 33

Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results ................................................... 34

Annex 7. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR ..................... 35

Annex 8. Comments of Co-financiers and Other Partners/Stakeholders ...................... 47

Annex 9. Lessons Learned ............................................................................................ 61

Annex 10. List of Supporting Documents .................................................................... 76

Annex 11. People consulted as part of the ICR Mission

MAP

i

A. Basic Information

Country: Philippines Project Name:

LAND

ADMINISTRATION

AND MANAGEMENT

II PROJECT

Project ID: P073206 L/C/TF Number(s): IBRD-72980

ICR Date: 03/19/2015 ICR Type: Core ICR

Lending Instrument: SIL Borrower: REPUBLIC OF THE

PHILIPPINES

Original Total

Commitment: USD 19.00M Disbursed Amount: USD 15.31M

Revised Amount: USD 15.31M

Environmental Category: B

Implementing Agencies:

Bureau of Local Government Finance, Department of Finance

Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)

National Tax Research Center

Cofinanciers and Other External Partners:

B. Key Dates

Process Date Process Original Date Revised / Actual

Date(s)

Concept Review: 06/10/2003 Effectiveness: 10/11/2005 10/11/2005

Appraisal: 07/28/2004 Restructuring(s):

11/11/2010

03/22/2011

03/15/2012

12/11/2012

09/27/2013

Approval: 05/31/2005 Mid-term Review: 04/11/2008

Closing: 03/31/2011 03/31/2014

C. Ratings Summary

C.1 Performance Rating by ICR

Outcomes: Moderately Satisfactory

Risk to Development Outcome: Substantial

Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

ii

C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR)

Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings

Quality at Entry: Moderately Satisfactory Government: Moderately Satisfactory

Quality of Supervision: Moderately Satisfactory Implementing

Agency/Agencies: Moderately Satisfactory

Overall Bank

Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

Overall Borrower

Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators

Implementation

Performance Indicators

QAG Assessments

(if any) Rating

Potential Problem

Project at any time

(Yes/No):

No Quality at Entry

(QEA): None

Problem Project at any

time (Yes/No): Yes

Quality of

Supervision (QSA): None

DO rating before

Closing/Inactive status: Satisfactory

D. Sector and Theme Codes

Original Actual

Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing)

Central government administration 65 50

General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector 50

Sub-national government administration 30

Tertiary education 5

Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing)

Land administration and management 25 25

Law reform 13 13

Other public sector governance 25 25

Other rural development 13 13

Personal and property rights 24 24

E. Bank Staff

Positions At ICR At Approval

Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg Jemal-ud-din Kassum

Country Director: Motoo Konishi Joachim von Amsberg

Practice

Manager/Manager: Jorge A. Munoz Mark D. Wilson

iii

Project Team Leader: Keith Clifford Bell Keith Clifford Bell

ICR Team Leader: Keith Clifford Bell

ICR Primary Author: Maria Cecilia Zanetta

F. Results Framework Analysis

Project Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) There is a slight difference in the wording of the PDO between the PAD and the Loan

Agreement (LA). The latter is used for the purpose of this ICR as it is more detailed and

legally binding.

To increase land tenure security and improve land administration services (p. 2, PAD).

To increase land tenure security and improve the efficiency of the land titling and

administration system (Schedule 6, p. 36, LA).

Revised Project Development Objectives (as approved by original approving authority)

N.A.

(a) PDO Indicator(s)

Indicator Baseline Value

Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target

Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

Indicator 1 : Strengthened perception of land tenure security

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

Leyte: 82.9%

Bohol: 77.2%

Bukidnon: 65.9%

n.a.

Leyte: 83.6%

Bohol: 81.3%

Bukidnon: 96.3%

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Substantial progress. Issuance of land titles under the Project increased the

survey respondents’ perception of land tenure security.

Indicator 2 : Reduced incidence of conflicting claims in project sites

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

Leyte: n.a.

Bohol: 74.2%

Bukidnon: 57.1%

n.a.

Leyte: 25.6%

Bohol: 40.0%

Bukidnon: 26.4%

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Substantial progress. Percentage of respondents who observed cases of land

disputes in Bohol and Bukidnon has significantly gone down. This is partly

attributed to Project activities on survey validation, systematic adjudication, and

LGU-led titling.

Indicator 3 : Increase in diversification of incomes

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

0 N.A. N.A.

iv


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target

Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Undetermined. Indicator was proposed to be dropped under the aborted AF—

beyond Project scope and affected by outside factors. Nevertheless, DENR's

proactive post-titling strategy is helping capitalize on potential economic impacts

of titling.

Indicator 4 : Increased investment in land property development

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

0 N.A.

W/ With

Leyte: 5% 13%

Bohol: 4% 13%

Bukidnon: 10% 6%

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

The Project's titling activities and the corresponding improvement in tenure

security contributed to the increase in investments by owners in the titled lands.

Indicator 5 : Increase in land values

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

100% N.A. 135%

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Substantial progress. Results from a case study in 2 municipalities in Leyte

Prov. indicate that the ratio of land prices of titled versus untitled lands is 1.35.

Same applies for perceived prices for LAMP and non-LAMP beneficiaries in

Bohol and Bukidnon

Indicator 6 : Increase in formal land transactions

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

An average of 2,624 titles

issued per year N.A.

An average of 7,013

titles issued per year

under the Project.

Date achieved 06/30/2006 06/30/2011 06/30/2012

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Substantial progress. Project's strategies and resources (on systematic

adjudication, improved technical procedures, LGU participation, etc.)

significantly increased the volume and value of land titles being issued.

Indicator 7 : Increased satisfaction in land registration

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

Leyte: n.a.

Bohol: 88.2%

Bukidnon: 94.0%

N.A.

Leyte: 93.1%

Bohol: 91.2%

Bukidnon: 99.7%

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Substantial achievement. Results of the Development Impact Study indicated

increased satisfaction with land registration as a result of the Project.

Indicator 8 : Increase in percentage of subsequent transactions registered in one-stop-shop

(OSS).

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

6,936 subsequent

transactions (e.g.,

subsequent sales,

N.A.

13,088 subsequent

transactions (e.g.,

subsequent sales,

v


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target

Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

inheritance, liens, etc.,

excluding registration of

new titles)

inheritance, liens,

etc., excluding

registration of new

titles)

Date achieved 06/30/2006 06/30/2011 06/30/2010

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Substantial progress. The OSS, which co-located different government offices

involved in land matters, has improved the public's access to land-related

services. The service standards put in place improved the processing of various

requests.

Indicator 9 : Decrease in informal and formal transactions costs in land registration.

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

Leyte: PhP6,380

Bohol: PhP3,112

Bukidnon: PhP14,396

N.A.

Leyte: PhP1,744

Bohol: PhP1,809

Bukidnon: PhP894

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Streamlined titling procedures, reduced processing time, and dissemination of

transaction fees and service standards made transparent the requirements and

costs of transaction processing. (Values reflect only formal transactions costs)

Indicator 10 : Increase in collectible revenue from property and other land-related taxes

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

0 N.A.

W/ With

Leyte: 113% 114%

Bohol: 122% 129%

Bukidnon:112%

136%

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Substantial progress. There was a significant increase in Real Property Tax

collections as a result of titling activities in Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon and the

adoption of a market-based schedule of market values (SMV) in Naga City.

Indicator 11 : Reduce processing time in land registration process.

Value

quantitative or

Qualitative)

Leyte: 84 months

Bohol: 24 months

Bukidnon: 30 months

N.A.

Leyte: 7.2 months

Bohol: 6.1 months

Bukidnon: 5.3 months

Date achieved 06/30/2007 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Substantial achievement. The improved procedures and service standards

introduced by the Project resulted in drastic reductions in title processing time.

vi

(b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s)


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

Indicator 1 : DENR Department Administrative Order (DAO) 98-12 revised by December 31,

2006, to provide for the amendment/updating of the Survey Manual.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None Revised survey

manual.

DENR DAO 2007-

29

Date achieved 01/01/2006 12/31/2006 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. Six (6) DAOs were issued by DENR defining and/or simplifying

survey procedures, including DAO 2007-29.

Indicator 2 : Draft Land Administration Code prepared and submitted to Congress by

December 31, 2008.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

Land

Administration

Code submitted to

Congress.

Land

Administratio

n Code

submitted to

Congress.

Draft Code

(proposed Bill)

completed and

under review;

awaiting results of

the proposed

institutional reform

of rural

development

agencies.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 12/31/2008 07/30/2010 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Partially Achieved. Proposed Bill updated and under final review for submission

to the current Congress.

Indicator 3 : Department Administrative Order on the management of government land

developed and adopted by December 31, 2010.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

DAO on the

management of

government land

developed and

adopted.

Draft DAO on

"Guidelines in the

Development and

Institutionalization

of Foreshore

Administration and

Management Plan";

under final review.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 12/31/2010 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Partially Achieved. The guidelines drafted are key for management of

government lands and included valuation aspects.

Indicator 4 : Department Administrative Order on Miscellaneous Sales Application revised by

March 2009 and issued by June 30, 2009

Value

(quantitative None

DAO on

Miscellaneous

DENR DAO 2009-

05 issued on April

vii


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

or Qualitative) Sales

Application

issued.

21, 2009 as interim

measure to

facilitate titling of

residential lands.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 03/31/2009 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. The addition of this indicator is critical and supported the imple-

mentation of the Residential Free Patent Act (Republic Act No. 10023) that was

subsequently passed, allowing for issuance of free patents to residential lands.

Indicator 5 :

Strategic Framework Plan outlining long-term priorities for the Land

Administration and Management Sector completed by March 2010 and endorsed

by NSC by June 2010

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

Strategic

Framework

Plan

completed and

endorsed by

NSC.

Land Sector

Development

Framework (LSDF)

completed and

endorsed by the

National Steering

Committee (NSC).

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2010 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. Achievement of this additional indicator addressed the needed

framework for land sector. Framework provides a 20-year vision, mission

statement, and policy statement and was a key input in preparation of the

Philippine Development Pan 2010-2016.

Indicator 6 :

Human Resource Management and Development (HRMD) Strategy, together

with appropriate training developed, adopted, and implemented by June 30,

2006.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None HRMD

implemented

HRMD

implemented

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. The HRMD Strategy and Plan, together with the appropriate training

programs were developed, adopted, and implemented by June 30, 2006.

Indicator 7 : Education programs in at least two (2) academic institutions for land

administration and management (LAM) fully operational by June 30, 2009.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

Education

programs in LAM

being offered by

two universities.

Education

programs

(academic

and/or

professional

development)

in LAM being

offered by two

universities.

Continuing

education, Diploma

and Masters

programs are being

offered by the

Visayas State

University and the

University of the

Philippines Open

University.

viii


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2009 06/30/2010 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved.

Indicator 8 : Titles issued

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

0

264,000 titles

issued if Free

Patent Act passed.

137,000 titles

issued if Free

Patent Act not

passed.

102,000

titles/tenure

instruments

issued.

101,793 new titles

registered

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 06/30/2011 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. 99.8% achieved.

Indicator 9 : Records Management Strategy (RMS) prepared and adopted by June 30, 2006.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

Records Management

Strategy (RMS)

developed under LAMP I.

RMS developed

and adopted.

RMS developed,

adopted and under

implementation.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. In addition to RMS, a supporting Land Administration Management

System (LAMS) has been developed and rolled-out to all the 16 regions in the

country.

Indicator 10 : Community Participation Strategy (CPS) prepared and adopted by October 31,

2006.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None CPS prepared and

adopted.

CPS prepared and

adopted.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 10/31/2006 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved.

Indicator 11 : Community participation rate of 80% in systematic titling.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

0 80%

Leyte: 71.96%

Bohol: 88.37%

Bukidnon:

83.69%

Average:

81.34%

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 06/30/2013

Comments

(incl. % Achieved.

ix


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

achievement)

Indicator 12 : Minimum service standards of OSS developed, agreed and in place by June 30,

2006.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

OSS developed,

agreed and in

place.

OSS developed,

agreed and in place.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. Minimum service standards of OSS developed and agreed and a

monitoring system was in place by November 30, 2006.

Indicator 13 : OSS established in each selected Province, City, or Municipality no later than 12

months after said province, city or municipality has been selected.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

OSSs established

in participating

provinces.

OSS building

constructed and

operational in

Leyte.

Virtual OSS

operational in

Bohol and

Bukidnon (for

Consolidated

Cadastral Map and

patent registration

and distribution

activities.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Partially Achieved. The physical establishment of OSS buildings in Bohol and

Bukidnon was not pursued. Instead, a linkage between the information systems

of the various LAM agencies was agreed to be developed.

Indicator 14 : First Independent monitor appointed by September 30, 2008.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

Independent

monitor for OSS

Leyte appointed.

First

independent

monitor

appointed by

September 30,

2006 and

subsequent

independent

monitors to be

appointed by

no later than

six months

after

establishment

Independent

monitor for OSS

Leyte appointed in

Sept. 2008.

No monitor

appointed for Bohol

and Bukidnon, as

OSSs were not

established.

x


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

of OSS in

other sites.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 09/30/2006 09/30/2008 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved.

Indicator 15 : OSS meeting 90% of service standards after three years of operation.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

0 n.a. 90% achieved in

Leyte

Date achieved 01/30/2006 06/30/2009 11/30/2013

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. Target achieved until Super Typhoon Haiyan severely disrupted the

operations of the Leyte OSS.

Indicator 16 : Valuation standards and guidelines for taxation purposes developed and adopted

by DoF by June 30, 2007.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

Valuation

standards and

guidelines issued.

Valuation

standards for

taxation

purposes

prepared by

June 2009 and

adopted by

December 31,

2009 (DAO

issued), and

associated

valuation

guidelines

developed and

issued by June

30, 2010

Philippine

Valuation

Standards (PVS)

issued (DoF DO37-

2009).

Mass Appraisal

Guidelines issued

(DoF DO10-2010).

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2007 06/30/2010 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved.

Indicator 17 :

One LGU adopts uniform valuation/appraisal processes and completes LGU-

wide property appraisals by mid-term review (MTR) and at least one more LGU

by June 30, 2009.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None n.a.

One LGU

adopts

uniform

valuation/appr

aisal processes

and completes

Naga City adopted

market-based SMV

in 2008.

Iloilo City prepared

market-based

xi


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

LGU-wide

property

appraisal by

MTR and at

least one more

LGU is ready

to adopt LGU

wide property

appraisal by

June 30, 2010.

SMVs; ready for

adoption.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2009 06/30/2010 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved.

Indicator 18 : Education programs in property valuation in at least one academic institution

fully operational by June 30, 2009.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None 1

Diploma, Master's

and continuing

education programs

in property

valuation in place

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2009 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. The University of Philippines Open University instituted the

Continuing Professional Education on Property and Land Valuation in May

2010. Diploma and Master's courses on Property Land Valuation and

Management were approved in June 2011.

Indicator 19 : All project management structures are established and systems implemented by

start of the Project.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

Partial management

structure in place from

project preparation and

LAMP I

Management

structures are

established and

systems

implemented.

Management

structures are

established and

systems

implemented.

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 06/30/2006

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved.

Indicator 20 : An effective Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) System is established by March

31, 2006.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

M&E System from

LAMP I

M&E System is

established

M&E System is

established

Date achieved 01/01/2006 03/31/2006 06/30/2006

Comments

(incl. % Achieved. LAMP II M&E framework was cited by AusAID as best practice.

xii


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

achievement)

Indicator 21 : Initial baseline of socio-economic and environmental impact assessment study

completed by September 30, 2006 and the second survey by December 31, 2010.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

Baselines in 2006

Final assessment

in Dec. 2010

Baselines in 2007

and 2010; and final

impact assessment

in 2013

Date achieved 01/01/2006 12/31/2010 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. The Socio-Economic Baseline Study (SEBS) was conducted in 2007

in Leyte and in 2010 in Bohol and Bukidnon. Final impact assessment was

completed in 2013.

Indicator 22 : A public relations strategy is adopted by June 30, 2006.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None Strategy adopted

Social Mobilization

Strategy

implemented

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2006 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. Social Mobilization Strategy developed and finalized in June 2007

and approved by the Bank in August 2007. Information materials developed and

disseminated.

Indicator 23 : A strategy and implementation plan establishing a framework for consolidating

and sustaining GoP commitment to LAM reform.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

Sustainability

strategy being

implemented

Sustainability Plan

under

implementation

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. Sustainability Plan was developed in November 2009 and is under

implementation.

Indicator 24 : Innovation Support Fund (ISF) in place and operational by September 2006.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None ISF in place and

operational

ISF was

implemented

successfully

Date achieved 01/01/2006 09/30/2006 03/30/2014

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. Operational Guidelines approved by DENR and AusAID in

September 2006.

Indicator 25 : At least ten (10) selected LGUs adopting LAM good practices, technologies, and

local innovations based on LGU needs and partnerships by December 2008.

Value

(quantitative

or Qualitative)

None

At least 10 LGUs

to adopt LAM

good practices

24 LGUs adopted

LAM good

practices

Date achieved 01/01/2006 06/30/2011 03/30/2014

xiii


Original Target

Values (from

approval

documents)

Formally

Revised

Target Values

Actual Value

Achieved at

Completion or

Target Years

Comments

(incl. %

achievement)

Achieved. Ten LGUs participated in Phase I and 14 LGUs in an expansion

phase. LGU contributions to ISF projects totaled PhP72.55 million (US$1.61

million), representing 49% of total LAMP II ISF funding.

G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs

No. Date ISR

Archived DO IP

Actual

Disbursements

(USD millions)

1 12/21/2005 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.09

2 01/12/2007 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately

Unsatisfactory 1.22

3 04/24/2007 Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory 1.56

4 08/29/2007 Moderately

Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.10


Unsatisfactory

Moderately

Unsatisfactory 3.24


Unsatisfactory

Moderately

Unsatisfactory 4.14


Unsatisfactory

Moderately

Unsatisfactory 4.72









12 06/29/2010 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 10.27

13 02/14/2011 Moderately Satisfactory Satisfactory 14.07



16 01/09/2013 Highly Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory 15.36



xiv

H. Restructuring (if any)

Restructuring

Date(s)

Board

Approved

PDO Change

ISR Ratings at

Restructuring

Amount

Disbursed at

Restructuring

in USD

millions

Reason for Restructuring &

Key Changes Made DO IP

11/11/2010 MS MS 12.43

Level 2 restructuring to address

slow pace of implementation,

including: (a) the partial

cancellation of loan funds; (b)

reduction of original titling

target; (c) land administration

service delivery to be

undertaken only in provinces

with systematic titling under the

project; (d) transfer of valuation

education from Component 2 to

Component 4 for better

alignment with responsible

implementing agency.

03/22/2011 MS S 14.20

Level 2 restructuring to extend

the closing date from March 31,

2011 to March 30, 2012 to

allow the full implementation of

Project activities.

03/15/2012 S S 15.30


the closing date for the second

time from March 31, 2012 to

Dec. 31, 2012 to allow the full

implementation of Project

activities and the preparation of

Additional Financing (AF).

12/11/2012 S S 15.36


the closing date for the third

time from Dec. 31, 2012 to

September 30, 2013 to enable

the negotiation of the AF.

09/27/2013 HS HS 15.36


the closing date for the fourth

time from September 30, 2013

to March 31, 2014 to enable the

GoP to secure the final

documentation requirement to

complete the Negotiations of

the proposed AF.

xv

I. Disbursement Profile

1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design

1.1 Context at Appraisal

The land administration system in the Philippines was characterized by weak and

inefficient institutional structures, rigid and outdated land laws and regulations, the co-

existence of multiple and inconsistent land valuation systems, and lack of transparency and

accountability in the land registration system. These weaknesses, in turn, undermined the

efficiency and effectiveness of the land administration system, resulting in severe land

insecurity and lower government revenues from land-related taxes and fees. About one-

third of rural parcels remained untitled, as obtaining an original title could take several

years, with the cost of obtaining a court-defendable title one of the highest in the world and

often in excess of the land value itself. Land insecurity was also exacerbated by poor land

records, arising from years of illegal alteration, fire and water damage, and misplacement

from transfers. The cadastral maps were in very poor condition and information searches

were costly and time consuming. These inefficiencies, combined with high land tax rates,

fueled informal land markets, imposed constraints on economic development, reduced

opportunities for the poor, and discouraged sustainable management of land resources.

Recognizing the need for a unified institutional approach to the delivery and management

of land administration services, the Government of Philippines (GoP) established a Land

Administration and Management (LAM) Task Force in 1999 to supervise the design and

implementation of a long-term (15-20 year) program to guide the implementation of the

land administration and management reform in the Philippines. The initial step was the

implementation of the first Land Administration and Management Project (LAMP I), a

learning and innovation loan (LIL) with support from the International Bank for

Reconstruction and Development (Word Bank) and the Australian Agency for

International Development (AusAID) 1 . LAMP I was designed to test alternative

approaches to accelerated land titling, including records management, and to build a sound

policy and institutional foundation for the implementation of the long-term land

administration and management program. This was instrumental in testing the existing

legal framework, procedures and institutional coordination among the various agencies,

and identified the necessary policy, legal framework and institutional reform agenda

required to establish a sustainable and efficient land administration system. Building on the

experience and lessons learned under LAMP I, the Second Land Administration and

Management Project (LAMP II) was designed and implemented in three initial provinces.

LAMP II was in full alignment with the GoP's LAM priorities and national development

plans and the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS). In particular, it supported the

Medium-Term Philippine Development Plans (2001-2004 and 2004-2010) objectives of:

(a) promoting good and effective governance; and (b) socially equitable modernization of

agriculture and fisheries to achieve sustainable increases in rural in incomes, improved

1 Philippines’ First Land Administration and Management Project (FSLT-7034); September 26, 2000 to

December 31, 2004; US$4.79 million IBRD commitment.

access to land tenure, extension services, rural infrastructure, and credit. It was also

consistent with the Bank’s CAS (2003-2005 and 2006-2008) objectives of: (a) accelerating

environmentally sustainable rural development with social equity; (b) promoting good and

effective governance; and (c) reinforcing community participation processes.

1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators

There is a slight difference in the wording of the PDO between the Project Appraisal

Document (PAD) and the Loan Agreement (LA). The PAD’s PDO statement reads

“increase land tenure security and improve land administration services though the

implementation of institutional and legal reform, the realization of an accelerated land

titling program and the establishment of a fair and uniform property valuation system” (p.

2, PAD).

Alternatively, the PDO statement indicated in the LA reads “increase land tenure security

and improve the efficiency of the land titling and administration system” (Schedule 6, p.

36, LA). The LA’s PDO statement is utilized for the purpose of this evaluation.

1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators,

and reasons/justification

The PDO and corresponding key performance indicators (KPIs) remained unchanged

during the operation’s lifetime. Some intermediate indicators underwent minor changes

under the 2010 restructuring while additional ones were added to reflect implementation

progress and changing priorities.2

1.4 Main Beneficiaries

The Project’s direct beneficiaries were farmers with no tenure security who received land

titles under the Project, as well as existing landowners in the three participating provinces

who will benefit from a more effective LAM system. Indirect beneficiaries include the two

implementing agencies, i.e., Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)

and Department of Finance (DOF) through the Bureau of Local Government Finance

(BLGF) and National Tax Research Center (NTRC), as well as participating Local

Government Units (LGUs) and local Registry of Deeds (RoDs), which received support

under the Project. In addition, the general population is expected to have benefited from

the increase in local government revenues from land-related taxes and fees, as well as a

more equitable taxation system resulting from an improved property valuation system.

1.5 Original Components

Component 1: Development of Land Policy and Regulatory Framework (US$2.3

million, equivalent to 2.6 percent of Project cost). This component provided support to

PDO 2 (improve the efficiency of the land titling and administration system) by supporting

2 Changes in intermediate indicators are noted in the Datasheet (pp. iv-ix).

the development of land policy, legislation and regulatory changes for the land

administration reform program. In particular, it supported: (a) policy, legislative and

regulatory activities initiated under LAMP I, including the preparation of a comprehensive

land administration law; (b) the development of a land management policy framework; and

(c) the transition to the new institution, i.e., the Land Administration Authority (LAA).

Component 2: Institutional Development and Capacity Building (US$3.89 million,

equivalent to 1.7 percent of Project cost). This component provided support to PDO 2 by

supporting the implementation of transparent, responsive, and more service-oriented

institutional arrangements for land administration and to the development of the capacity

of local academic institutions to provide land administration education and training. In

particular, it supported: (a) strengthening of existing land administration coordination

arrangements; (b) improvement in the transparency and accountability of land

administration; and (c) establishment of an education program in land administration and

management in one of the national universities in the Philippines in order to strengthen

land administration expertise.

Component 3: Tenure Security (US$21.51 million, equivalent to 76.5 percent of Project

cost). This component provided support to PDO 1 (increase land tenure security) through

an accelerated land adjudication program and the establishment of an efficient and

accessible land registration system. It provided support for: (a) community participation

and awareness campaign; (b) issuing free-patent titles in rural and urban areas in up to four

regions; and (c) streamlining the guidelines to facilitate the acceleration of issuing land

titles on demand. It also supported the establishment of functional land administration units

at LGU-level, including One Stop Shops (OSS), as well as the development and monitoring

of uniform service delivery standards.

Project Component 4 - Property Valuation (US$5.02 million, equivalent to 7.6 percent

of Project cost). This component provided support to PDO 2 by supporting actions aimed

at raising the quality of government and private sector property valuation performance,

achieving one single valuation base for taxation and ensuring sustainable improvement

through institutional and educational reform. In particular, it supported the formation of a

property valuation unit in the DoF to develop guidelines for the adoption of international

standards in property valuation, to provide support for selected LGUs for the application

of those standards, and to support the development of an appropriate valuation professional

body in the Philippines.

Component 5: Project Management (US$5.84 million, equivalent to 6.2 percent of

Project cost). This component aimed to establish administrative capacity, systems and

plans for the management of LAMP II. In particular, it provided support to DENR and DoF

to manage the Project, the establishment and implementation of a monitoring and

evaluation (M&E) system, and technical assistance at all levels to implement the Project.

1.6 Revised Components

In view of the Project’s poor initial performance, the Mid-Term Review (MTR) identified

the need to introduce several changes, which eventually were formalized in a Level 2

restructuring in 2010. The major modifications were: (a) cancellation of US$2.8 million in

loan funds; (b) reduction in the titling target to 102,000 (down from the original target of

265,000 which had been subsequently adjusted to 137,000 due to delayed passage of the

proposed amendment in the Free Patent legislation; (c) land administration service delivery

to be undertaken only in provinces with systematic titling under the Project; and (d) transfer

of valuation education from Component 2 to Component 4. Other changes to individual

components are summarized on Table 1.

Table 1. Changes in Individual Components under the 2010 Project Restructuring

Component Changes Introduced under 2010 Restructuring

1. Development of Land

Policy and Regulatory

Framework

Revision of some output delivery dates to reflect

implementation progress.

Addition of the Land Sector Development

Framework (LSDF) as a new activity and

intermediate outcome.

Allocation of funds to support activities previously

funded by AusAID Technical Assistance (TA)

Grant (given the closure of the grant).

Increase in the component cost from US$0.49 to

US$0.641 million.

2. Institutional Development

and Capacity Building Transfer of valuation education activities to

Component 4.

Increase in the component cost from US$0.33 to

US$0.736 million.

3. Tenure Security Reduction of participating provinces from four to

three.

Reduction of titling targets owing to the delayed

passage of the amendment of the Free Patent (FP)

from 264,000 to 102,000. A 50 percent reduction

(to 137,000 titles) had already been identified

during Appraisal in the case the FP would not be

passed in the first two years of Project

implementation.

Adjustments to the scheduling of OSS-related

activities.

Decrease in component cost from US$14.54 to

US$11.55 million.

4 - Property Valuation Transfer of valuation education activities from

Component 2.

Allocation of funds to support tax policy studies and

the adoption of valuation and taxation reforms in

LGUs (due to closure of the AusAID TA grant).

Increase in component cost from US$1.45 to

US$1.702 million.

5. Project Management Allocation of funds for the monitoring and

supervision of activities initiated under the

Innovation Support Fund (due to closure of the

AusAID TA grant).

Increase in component cost from US$1.186 to

US$1.469 million.

1.7 Other significant changes

DENR made the decision not to pursue the physical establishment of OSS buildings in

Bohol and Bukidnon in view of the construction of new RoD buildings under the Land

Registration Agency’s ongoing Land Titling Computerization Project (LTCP) and the

result of the OSS sustainability study in 2010. Instead, a linkage between the information

systems of the different LAM agencies was agreed to be developed, with the data from the

titles of the three provincial RoDs being captured by the project, providing users under the

Project a one-stop service point for consolidated cadastral caps, and patent registration and

distribution. This decision resulted in some cost savings and the reallocation of funds.

The project was restructured four times as shown in Section H of the ICR Datasheet for a

total of 36 additional months to, first, allow the full completion of all Project activities and,

from December 2012 onwards, enable the processing of Additional Financing (AF) at the

GoP’s request.

2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes

2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry

(a) Soundness of the background analysis. The operation adequately reflected lessons

learned in other land management operations in the region, while adapting them to the

Philippines context. For example, while the issuing of land titles was included under the

Project to ensure political support at the sub-national level, the number was significantly

more modest compared to other countries such as Cambodia and Indonesia. The operation

also incorporated the lessons learned from LAMP I, which was a key input in the design

of the reform strategy, particularly the use of free patent titling, and the identification of

priority areas of intervention under LAMP II. As mentioned earlier, the Project was fully

aligned with the strategic priorities of the GoP and the Bank’s CAS.

(b) Assessment of the Project design. The operation benefited from a sound technical

design. The Bank team correctly chose to limit the Project’s geographical scope in the

absence of the required nationwide institutional and legal framework. Likewise, although

the Project was designed to support the formation of the creation of a single land

management agency under the proposed legislation, it also included a set of alternative

actions aimed at enhancing the efficiency and efficacy of land administration systems in

the absence of new legislation; thus adequately mitigating such risk. There were some

minor weaknesses in the Project Results Framework (PRF), mainly its overly dependence

on an impact evaluation to measure the Project’s impact. There were also too many loan

covenants (over 20 legal covenants in the LA), which required a large percentage of

supervision resources without a corresponding payoff, as many of them were secondary

aspects of implementation that could have been included in the Operations Manual. The

Project was complemented with a Technical Assistance grant from AusAID.

(c) Adequacy of government's commitment. The GoP was largely committed to the

reforms supported by the operation. Although with delays, the Free Patent Act was

eventually approved as well as the Real Estate Services Act (RESA). The Land

Administration Authority (LAA) bill, however, was met with strong opposition from the

Land Registration Authority (LRA) and was not passed despite the strong support of

legislators and civil society at large. This, however, will be re-filed in this current Congress.

(d) Assessment of risks. The Project was correctly identified as High Risk at Appraisal.

The main risks were specifically indicated in the PAD such as the uncertainty regarding

the passage of legislation needed for more drastic reform and the inclusion of an alternative

target for the number of land titles issued in case of delays in the passage of enabling

legislation on free patent. After weighing the various options, including not proceeding

with the operation in the absence of such legislation, the Bank Team opted to support a

phased reform strategy to capitalize on the momentum that had been generated under

LAMP I. However, as denoted by the significant delays in Project start in the components

under the DENR’s orbit, the Bank team seems to have underestimated the complexity of

the planned institutional and legal reforms, which proved to be more challenging than

anticipated. As noted below, other factors such as excessive management turnover were

also important contributors to the initial delays in implementation. Likewise, as illustrated

by the negative impact of Typhoons Frank and Haiyan on implementation and

sustainability of the Project’s outcomes, the risk of natural disasters should have also been

taken into consideration at Appraisal.

The Bank's Quality Assurance Group did not evaluate Quality at Entry.

2.2 Implementation

(a) Outside the Control of the Government

Natural disasters. Typhoon Frank hit the Philippines in June 2008, causing great

devastation in Iloilo City.3 This city was one of three cities piloting the adoption of

revised guidelines for property valuation. In view of the devastation and the losses

suffered by the population, local authorities decided to postpone the adoption of the

new valuation schedule. In addition, Typhoon Haiyan, one of the strongest tropical

cyclones ever recorded, hit the Philippines in November 2013. It had a devastating

effect in the island of Leyte, with an estimated death toll of 10,000 people. The Leyte

OSS, which had been financed under LAMP I was severely damaged as a result of the

storm and is currently not operational.

Global financial crisis. The 2008-2009 global financial crisis had a negative impact

on the Project, as the resulting fiscal constraints caused severe shortages of counterpart

funds and the government agencies’ inability to hire and retain competent staff, both of

which slowed implementation.

AusAID support. The Innovation Support Fund (ISF) under AusAID TA proved

invaluable in fostering innovation and generating systematic learning under the Project.

In particular, the ISF was critical in helping demonstrate the key role of LGUs in land

management and governance.

(b) Within the Control of the Government

Delayed restructuring. Project implementation started in 2005 and progress was very

slow until 2009. It was agreed during the Project’s MTR, which was undertaken jointly

by the World Bank and AusAID in 2008, that a restructuring was needed to improve

the Project’s implementation performance and disbursements, which amounted to only

21 percent after two-and-half years of implementation. In the event, GoP processing of

the request for loan fund cancellation and restructuring was delayed and the official

request was only submitted on March 19, 2010 - almost two years after it was initially

discussed. Nevertheless, Project implementation gained momentum following the

MTR, with performance and disbursements improved significantly, as illustrated by

3 Typhoon Frank resulted in over 1,300 deaths due to flooding and mudslides. In Iloilo City, 30,000 people

were forced to the rooftops when a nearby reservoir burst

(http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hurricanes/archives/2008/h2008_fengshen.html).

the fact that by the time of the restructuring (November 2010), disbursements had

reached US$11.7 million (equivalent to 62 percent of the Loan amount).

Delays in the approval of critical legislation. The legislative and institutional reforms

proved more difficult than expected. The Residential Free Patent Act (Republic Act

No. 10023) was passed but only after substantial delays in 2010, which require to

reducing the titling targets at the MTR and subsequent restructuring. Two of the

anticipated laws, i.e., LAA bill and Valuation Reform Act (VRA) bill, were not

enacted, although the passage of the VRA bill is still likely. While the LAA bill had

the strong support of legislators and civil societies, it met strong opposition from the

LRA. In the absence of the LAA bill, the Project pursued an array of innovative

approaches to achieve operational improvements, including a collaborative partnership

with LGUs on land titling, the development of computerized records management

system within the DENR and the adoption of a new Land Sector Development

Framework (LSDF), thus illustrating that there are indeed multiple paths toward

reform.

Additional Financing (AF). As early as 2010, the GoP expressed interest in an

Additional Financing to the project to scale-up key reforms on land administration (viz.

computerization of public lands records and the national roll-out of the Land

Administration and Management System, LAMS, software) and property valuation

supported under the Project. As the partnership with LGUs on land titling was working

well, there was no need to include titling under the AF.

The actual Project implementation was substantially completed by 20114 , but the

closing date was extended two additional times to allow for AF preparation and internal

government approval processes. Jointly with the DENR and the DOF, the Bank Team

completed in April 2013 all preparation and clearance processes for an AF of US$61.47

million to be implemented over three years. However, finalization of the proposed AF

did not materialize on time and GOP has decided to finance the planned activities for

LAMP AF.

(c) Within the Control of the Implementing Agencies

Emphasis on LGU role in land management and administration (LAM). Although

conceptually envisioned at preparation, LGUs assumed a critical role during

implementation of titling activities under Component 3, not only as key partners in

titling activities but also by ensuring the coordination at the local level of the

interventions of LAM national agencies, which in the case of the Philippines are

fragmented and uncoordinated. LGU active participation in land-titling activities first

started in Bohol in 2009. Taking the new approach of training and deputizing local

government staff for titling activities from the Bayawan City experience, the Bohol

Provincial Project Implementation Office (PPIO) led a strong campaign on the benefits

4 By February 2011, the Project had disbursed 92 percent of loan proceeds. By January 2012, the level of

disbursement was 99.5 percent.

of cadastral maps and land survey and titling to the local government. Their efforts paid

off as within a year, nine Memorandum of Partnership Agreements were subscribed

with various levels of counterpart resources from LGUs totaling more than PhP 20

million. The Leyte and Bukidnon PPIOs also adopted this scheme, adopting it to local

conditions.

Frequent changes in leadership in DENR. There were five different DENR

Secretaries and eight LAMP II Executive Directors as well as the Project’s technical

staff (i.e., Financial Management, procurement, and M&E functions) during the

Project’s lifetime, which contributed to some of the delays in the Project’s

implementation.

Agency support and coordination. While coordination among implementing

agencies presented a challenge initially, the two participating national agencies (i.e.,

DENR and DOF, through BLGF and NTRC) demonstrated the ability to cooperate and

coordinate efforts. In addition, these two agencies were effective in coordinating efforts

with administrative units at the regional, provincial and city levels. While the Project

enjoyed the strong support of DOF, BLGF and NTRC, support from DENR authorities

was more uneven given the leadership changes mentioned above.

2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization

(a) Design. Project implementation was supported by an adequate and operational M&E

system at various levels of government, with quality assurance systems in place in the three

participating provinces. AusAID cited the LAMP II M&E system as a best practice.

The Project Results and Monitoring Framework (PRF) was overly dependent on an impact

evaluation to measure the Project’s impact, as PDO indicators tended to reflect hypothetical

impacts of land titling on a wide array of variables. Moreover, some indicators were not

fully attributable to the Project. For example, an increase in the diversification of income

among those that received a title would depend on various factors and complementary

interventions beyond land titling per se and would only become evident after the lifetime

of the Project. In addition and as in the case with many older projects, PDO indicators did

not have quantified baselines, annual targets or target outcomes - for which measuring the

Project’s impact had been problematic as expected results had been more ambiguous.

Conversely, the definition of Intermediate Indicators was overly detailed, with an excessive

emphasis on dates, which required them to be changed during the MTR.

As mentioned above, the Project fully capitalized on its potential for generating systematic

learning and fostering innovation. A large number of studies were supported as part of

AusAID TA to test critical hypothesis about the impact of land titling on various variables

such as land value, land investments, etc. It also financed the impact evaluation to

systematically measure the impact of the Project.

(b) Implementation. In addition to monitoring progress, regular performance assessments

were held regularly. For the impact evaluation, Socio-Economic Baseline Studies (SEBS)

were conducted in 2007 in Leyte and in 2010 in Bohol and Bukidnon, well after Project

implementation had begun. Thus, some of the impacts, such as pre-Project satisfaction,

were not fully captured. In addition, there were changes in the composition of the control

and experimental groups, as some municipalities initially classified as “control areas”

during SEBS were eventually covered by LAMP II and vice versa. To compensate for these

shortcomings, the final survey, which was conducted in 2013, studied the initial impacts

of titling and land registration using both “before and after” and “with and without” Project

comparisons, the latter ones being less rigorous in terms of comparability (see Annex 5).

(c) Utilization. During implementation, studies conducted under AusAID TA served to

evaluate the impact of the Project and its cost-effectiveness. 5 The final Development

Impact Study (DIS) utilized a rigorous methodology to measure the Project’s impact in the

three participating provinces. In addition, the studies and wealth of information resulting

from LAMP I and II were critical inputs in the preparation of the Philippines’ Land

Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF), in particular the modules on land tenure,

land policy, land administration, and property valuation and taxation.6

2.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance

The Project triggered three safeguards: Environment, Involuntary Resettlement, and

Indigenous Peoples, and their compliance were satisfactory. The Project's Environmental

category was "Category B".

(a) Social Safeguards. The dropping of earlier planned infrastructures resulted in

cancellation of any potential triggers on involuntary resettlement policy. Lands covered by

applications for and fully-fledged Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles (CADTs) as

certified by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) were excluded from

the Project (titling operations for ancestral domains are the responsibility of the NCIP).

Nevertheless, Indigenous Peoples (IP) living in alienable and disposable lands outside

ancestral domains in the lowlands of Bukidnon Province received effective support for

Project participation through the integration of the IP Coordinators within the Provincial

Project Implementation Office (PPIO). The experience has been acknowledged by the

PPIO in facilitating the attainment of Project objectives in the province, despite a very real

threat of stoppage in the beginning.

(b) Environmental Safeguards. As identified in the PAD, the direct impacts on the

environment were minor and attributable to civil works. However, with the cancellation

of the establishment of the OSS in Bohol and Bukidnon, no other civil works were

undertaken. Indirect impacts identified were associated with investment and development

improvements of land, but may only be expected in the longer term beyond the Project life.

5 There were studies conducted on the impact of titling on land prices, investments, cost comparisons

between various titling modalities, etc. 6 LGAF (2013, p 31; http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTLGA/Resources/Philippines_Final_Report.pdf)

(c) Financial Management (FM). The Project was generally rated with moderately

satisfactory Financial Management (FM) performance rating and substantial to high FM

risk throughout the life of the Project. On one occasion, the project was rated as

unsatisfactory due to various issues identified during the implementation support mission

in October 2008. In the last two implementation support missions, the project received a

satisfactory FM rating.

Among the issues raised in October 2008 mission included: (i) several internal control

weaknesses noted such as the inaccurate reporting of the nature of expenditures in SOEs,

inaccurate classification of expenditure by category, absence of reconciliation of

expenditures reported in the SOEs, no internal audit coverage of the Project, and apparent

tampering of official receipts for petty cash fund replenishment; (ii) slow and inadequate

transfer of project funds to the field offices; (iii) delayed submission of quarterly Interim

Financial Reports (IFRs) and audited project financial statements; and (iv) lack of adequate

supervision by an FM Officer knowledgeable on government budgeting and accounting

policies and procedures. A time-bound action plan was agreed and based on subsequent

reviews, significant progress were made in addressing the FM issues, which brought the

Project back to a moderately satisfactory FM performance rating. An internal audit review

of the Project was taken as part of the plan to strengthen internal control. This included

review of official receipts/documents submitted for petty cash fund replenishment.

Appropriate action was taken based on the results of the internal audits.

The Project had two implementing agencies – the DENR and the DOF (through BLGF and

NTRC). The two implementing agencies were required to submit combined Interim

Financial Reports (IFRs) and a separate annual audited project financial statements for the

Project. Of the 27 IFRs submitted, the main implementing agency (DENR) incurred

various delays in the submission of IFR as follows: (a) 12 instances – 1-30 days; (b) 8

instances – 31-89 days; and (c) 7 instances – more than 90 days. For the submission of the

audited project financial statements, compliance by each implementing agency are as

follows:

DENR – For the components implemented by DENR, the annual audited project

financial statements were received with 3 to 4 months delays from CY2007 to

CY2010. This was deemed beyond the full control of the Project but an area for

improvement in terms of close coordination with the Commission on Audit (COA).

The delays in submission were reduced to few days during the last two years of

submission (CY2012 to CY2013). In the eight audit reports submitted, six have

qualified audit opinions and two have unqualified audit opinions. Issues raised by the

COA included the following: (a) unreliability of Cash – Disbursing Officers Account;

(b) unreliable balance of Property, Plant and Equipment account due to: (i) non-

submission of physical inventory; (ii) erroneous recording and classification of items;

(iii) non-maintenance of equipment ledger card and property card; and (iv) reconciled

accounting and property records; (c) unreliable year-end balance of inventory

accounts; (d) erroneous classification of transactions/expenditures resulted to

unreliable balances of several expense accounts; (e) overstatement of the Advances to

Officers and Employees account due to unliquidated but expended advances for travel

expenses; and (f) overstatement of receivables. The audit findings and the reasons for

qualifications raised by COA did not result in ineligible expenditures, and were

subsequently addressed by DENR. Follow up on the actions taken were also included

in the regular implementation support missions.

DOF – For the component implemented by DOF, through BLGF and NTRC, the annual

audited project financial statements were generally received on time except for four

instances where the audit reports were received from 7 days to one month after the

due date. All the audit reports submitted contained an unqualified audit opinion from

COA.

(d) Procurement. Although there were earlier lingering delays in procurement mainly

due to procurement capacity issue and frequent changes in the composition of the DENR

Central Bids and Awards Committee, Project procurement was reasonably in compliance

and accordance with the provisions of the Loan Agreement and completed satisfactorily.

The DENR Procurement Improvement Program was a result of the Bank analysis of

procurement weaknesses in a number of Bank-financed projects. It was implemented by

DENR, in 2009 and helped strengthen the procurement capacity of the Central Office and

the Regional Offices. The LAMP II Cadastral Survey procurement, customized and

successfully used for Bohol Province, was adapted by the DENR for the Bank-financed

contracts for the Political Boundary Survey contracts under the National Program Support

for Environment and Natural Resources Management Project. This resulted in increased

participation of bidders and significant lowering of prices (i.e., around 10 percent), which

allowed DENR to cover additional cadastral survey in more areas.

(e) Loan Covenants. By the end of the project, compliance with legal covenants was

generally satisfactory although there were issues of non-compliance early on.

2.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase

Although the AF did not materialize, DENR has advised that the activities that were

planned to be funded under AF have now be covered under government funds. In fact,

activities at the National Capital Region (Metro Manila) have started last year to serve as

pilot for the LAMS rollout nationwide. DENR has already allocated more than PhP100

million and has requested PhP1.2 billion in funding under the 2015 Government's

Appropriations Act to complete the rollout in all its field offices within the next three years,

as it had been planned under AF. Improvements in public land records management and

land valuation and Real Property Tax (RPT) collection by local governments are also ready

for mainstreaming. Local government-led land titling is proceeding on a national basis

under the government's own resources.

3. Assessment of Outcomes

3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation

Rating: Substantial

(a) Objective – Substantial. The importance of land management issues and related taxes

is explicitly acknowledged in the Philippines Development Plan (PDP) 2011-2016, as well

as the GoP’s Good Governance Program, the LSDF, and the DoF’s Roadmap for Valuation

and Real Property Tax Reform. It is important to note that the PDP is the first one to include

the land sector and draws upon the LSDF. The LSDF was prepared under LAMP II and its

coverage of the land-based sectors and the work under LAMP II was acknowledged by the

UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) as being international best practice and a

key contributor to the shaping and formulation of The Voluntary Guidelines on the

Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of

National Food Security.7

(b) Design – Substantial. Project design effectively supported PDO achievement in the

Philippine context, focusing on titling and valuation aspects both at an operational level as

well as at the legislative, regulatory, and administrative level. The continuous relevance of

the LAMP II design is manifested in the GoP’s commitment to continue to finance LAMP

II activities with its own resources (see Section 2.5).

(c) Implementation – Substantial. Project implementation effectively adapted to

implementation constraints, including adopting a regulatory approach to address delays in

the passage of supporting legislation. Active participation of LGUs in titling activities was

identified as a successful innovation and mainstreamed into the Project implementation.

3.2 Achievement of Project Development Objectives

Rating: Substantial

(a) PDO 1 – Increase land security

PDO Achievement: Substantial

Main Project Outputs (see Annex 2 for a detail description of Project Outputs by

Component)

The Project provided technical support and social mobilization activities that

contributed to the passage of the Residential Free Patent Law (Republic Act 10023).

Enacted in March 2010 and operationalized through the issuance of the associated

Implementing Rules and Regulations in May 2010, the Residential Free Patent Law is

now under implementation. It enables titling of residential properties without

7 Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations – FAO (2012), Voluntary Guidelines on the

Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security,

FAO, Rome.

encumbrance, in addition to agricultural lands. This law is expected to benefit about 40

million Filipinos who are currently living on unregistered land.

The Project supported streamlined land titling activities (also called systematic titling)

in the provinces of Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon. The implementation of these activities

was underlined by: (a) streamlining of land titling guidelines to facilitate the

acceleration of issuing of land titles on demand; (b) development and implementation

of a comprehensive community participation strategy; (c) development and

implementation of a new records management strategy and supportive LAM system;

and (d) improvement of service delivery by the establishment of an OSS in Leyte and

a virtual one-stop service point in Bohol and Bukidnon.

Under its streamlined titling activities, the Project successfully rolled out systematic

titling in the three provinces, using more streamlined approaches, including conducting

survey and adjudication activities simultaneously, simplifying the requirements and

increasing the reliance on non-documentary forms of evidence to recognize long-term,

unchallenged possession.

Modifications were also introduced to land titling procedures to provide stronger

partnerships with LGUs, thus, reducing the costs to the national government and fast

tracking implementation. The Project worked in cooperation with 74 LGUs in the

provinces of Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon (including 11 under the LGU-assisted titling

modality with LGUs having their own adjudication teams). It should be noted that prior

to LAMP, land-titling assistance by LGUs was virtually non-existent. LGUs

contributed over US$2 million of their own resources to titling activities under the

Project. The success of this partnership is highlighted by the Good Practice Awards

2012 of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) granted to the LAMP

II Project team under the “Strategies in Achieving Desired Outcome” category for its

entry on LGU-Led Public Land Titling Through Systematic Adjudication. In addition,

Maribojoc, the first LGU to work in partnership with the Bohol PPIO in systematic

titling activities, received a “Galing Pook”8 Award, presented by the President in

recognition of the remarkable results.

8Galing Pook traces its beginnings in 1993 when the first Galing Pook Awards was held. The Awards

Program was a joint initiative of the Local Government Academy–Department of the Interior and Local

Government, the Ford Foundation, and other individual advocates of good governance from the academe,

civil society and the government. The Asian Institute of Management administered the awards program until

2000. However, the Galing Pook Foundation was formally established as a private awards giving body in

1998 to sustain the Awards program. In its almost two decades of existence, Galing Pook has become a

leading resource institution continuously promoting innovation and excellence in local governance. It

proactively searches and recognizes best local government practices and facilitates their adoption in more

communities in the country. http://lga.gov.ph/bestpractices/galing-

pook.htmlhttp://lga.gov.ph/bestpractices/galing-pook.html

http://lga.gov.ph/bestpractices/galing-pook.html



A total of 101,793 new land titles were registered utilizing these streamlined

procedures, successfully demonstrating their potential for cost-effective

implementation with shared responsibilities with LGUs. This represents a dramatic

improvement when compared to the situation before LAMP.

More than 180 LGUs have subsequently partnered with the Project which signaled the

strong interest on the part of local governments to play a more active role in LAM.

Project Outcomes. Evidence from the Development Impact Study (DIS) and other sources

indicate a strengthened perception of land tenure, a reduction in the incidence of conflicting

claims and an increase in formal land transactions as a result of the successful

implementation of systematic titling activities in the three participating provinces.

Evidence of the impact of land titling on investments and land prices is less conclusive,

suggesting that land titling is one of a myriad of factors affecting land markets and

landowners’ investment decisions.

While no targets were defined, three out of the six PDO Indicators showed significant

progress under the Project, while two showed mixed results (see Table 2). Progress of one

PDO indicator that was not fully attributable to the Project—i.e., diversification of

income—was undetermined. Specifically:

Strengthened perception of land tenure security. Survey respondents consistently

reported a strong sense of security as a benefit of having a land title. Although already

high at the time when the baseline was conducted, the perception of security of land

tenure continued to increase in the three provinces in which the Project was

implemented, from 82.9 to 83.6 percent in Leyte, from 77.2 to 81.3 percent in Bohol,

and from 65.9 to 96.3 percent in Bukidnon. 9

Reduced incidence of conflicting claims in project sites. “Before” and “After”

LAMP II comparisons indicate that the percentage of respondents who reported land

disputes decreased significantly in Bohol (from 74.2 to 40 percent) and Bukidnon (from

57.1 to 26.4 percent).10 The Project’s implementation revived old unresolved disputes

arising mostly from boundary conflicts, overlapping claims, duplication of technical

description and disagreements among heirs over inherited property. However, these

were addressed and resolved to a large extent under the Project through validation

surveys and adjudication work.

9 It is important to note that the baselines do not capture the perception of land tenure security prior to the

Project, as they were conducted only after the Project was well under implementation. In Leyte, LAMP II

implementation began in 2006 as an expansion of LAMP I, and the baseline was conducted in 2007. The

baselines for Bohol and Bukidnon were conducted in 2010, although Project implementation had begun in

late 2007 and 2009, respectively. 10 While there was no “Before the Project” measurement in Leyte, only 25.6 percent of respondents

reported land disputes “After the Project.”

Increased investment in land property development. Except in Bukidnon,11 the

percentage of those who invested in the development of their land in LAMP II areas is

higher compared to non-LAMP areas (13 and 5 percent for LAMP II and non-LAMP

II respondents in Leyte, and 13 and 4 percent for LAMP II and non-LAMP II

respondents in Bohol). Among the improvements introduced were the use of hand

tractor and planting materials. DENR has undertaken a proactive post-titling strategy—

so called “convergence strategy”—aimed at facilitating inter-agency cooperation to

help capitalize on the potential economic impacts of titling.

Increase in land values. Regression results from a case study focusing two

municipalities in Leyte Province indicate that the ratio of actual land prices of

comparable titled versus untitled lands is 1.35.12

Results from the DIS in terms of land values are less conclusive and methodologically

weak. The average market value of agricultural lands in Leyte and Bukidnon, as

estimated by the surveyed landowners, was higher in LAMP II sites compared to the

estimates generated for non-LAMP areas (i.e., greater by 195 and 5 percent,

respectively). These results, however, do not hold for Bohol, where the reported land

values were smaller for LAMP II respondents with respect to non-LAMP respondents

(i.e., equivalent to 65 percent). This is, of course, having reported land values for titled

parcels be lower than those for untitled ones, which is an unintuitive result. It is also

important to note that in the case of the DSI, the land values were not actual market

values but, instead, they only indicate perceived values. In addition, DIS results reflect

the difference between “with and without Project,” in which the comparability of the

experimental and control groups is not fully guaranteed. At the same time, results

might point to the myriad of factors affecting land markets beyond land titling.

Increase in formal land transactions. Based on ROD data collected during the

SEBSs, the number of titles issued before LAMP in the three provinces averaged only

some 2,624 per year. The titling performance more than doubled (i.e., 267 percent)

during LAMP II with an average issuance of 7,013 free patent titles per year.

11 The fact that Bukidnon shows a different behavior than Leyte and Bohol in terms of increased investments

in land improvements might be explained by the predominance of indigenous population as well as ancestral

domains and territories, which were protected under LAMP II. 12 LEI (2010).

Table 2. PDO Indicators - Increasing Land Security

Note: In the case of PDO Indicators 1, 2, and 6, the comparison is between “before” and “after” the Project, while for PDO Indicators 3, 4 and 5 is for “without” and “with” Project. Source: LAMP II Development Impact Study – DIS (2013); LEI (2010) for case study of Leyte’s land values.

(b) PDO 2 – Improve the efficiency of titling and land management systems

PDO Achievement: Substantial

Project outputs (see Annex 2 for a detail description of Project Outputs by Component)

The Project provided technical support and social mobilization activities in support of

priority policy, legislation, and regulatory changes to support land administration

reform at the national level. As discussed above, it contributed to the passage of the

Residential Free Patent Act. The Project also contributed to the enactment of the Real

Estate Service Act (Republic Act No. 9646 – RESA in June 2009. This law, which is

now under implementation, requires the licensing of real estate appraisers, including

the local government assessors. The Property Valuation Office is being operationalized

as the organization responsible for valuation and land tax reform.

The formulation of the LSDF, which provides a 20-year vision, mission statement and

policy statement for the sector is also considered a key output of this component. It also

effectively supported the adoption of other LAM regulations conducive to the

harmonization of LAM systems and procedures (see Annex 2 and Datasheet).

The Project has also provided support to the development of policy on management of

government lands, including a comprehensive policy on foreshore administration and

management.

The Project supported the rollout of Land Administration and Management Systems

(LAMS) to computerize the public land application and survey records in regional

DENR offices in the three participating provinces. These systems have been

mainstreamed within DENR as well as implemented in all 16 regional offices and they

are ready to be rolled-out nationally to all DENR field offices.

With Project support, the BLGF promulgated/issued the Philippine Valuation

Standards (PVS), and the Mass Appraisal Guidebook (MAG), which provide detailed

guidance on correct market valuation given existing market conditions affecting the

property market.

The Project partnered with three cities to pilot the new procedures and methodologies

prescribed for the reform valuation process. Naga, one of these cities, successfully

implemented and adopted a Schedule of Market Values (SMV) based on these

procedures, which resulted in a substantial fiscal impact (see Annex 3).

A total of 30 additional provinces and 52 cities have updated their SMVs during the

Project’s lifetime. A roadmap for valuation reform is included under the LSDF with

the full support of the DoF as part of its broader strategy geared toward real property

tax reform.

With Project support, educational programs for land administration and valuation are

now underway at three universities, providing for the first time in the Philippine formal

continuing education, diploma and masters programs in these areas (see Annex 2).

Project Outcomes. The improved efficiency of titling and land management systems is

illustrated by a decrease in titling transaction costs and processing times, as well as

increased real property related taxes as a result of titling and updating SMVs. In turn, these

improvements are reflected in the public’s increased satisfaction with land registration.

Specifically:

While not all indicators have baselines or targets were defined in the project appraisal

document, the five PDO indicators associated with PDO 2 show significant progress (see

Table 3). Specifically:

Increase satisfaction in land registration. Results of the DIS showed that the

percentage of respondents satisfied with land registration increased during the Project,

with more than 90 percent of respondents in all three provinces expressing satisfaction

(see Table 3).

Increase in percentage of subsequent transactions registered in OSS. The number

of subsequent transactions (e.g., subsequent sales, inheritance, liens, etc.) almost

doubled in Leyte’s OSS between 2006 and 2010, with the number of land transactions

recorded increasing from 6,936 to 13,088, excluding the registration of new LAMP II

titles (see Table 3).

Decrease in informal and formal transactions costs in land registration. The

average transaction cost reported by respondents was significantly lower under LAMP

II compared to the baseline, i.e., 6.2 percent in Leyte, 27.3 percent in Bohol, and 58.1

percent in Bukidnon (see Table 3). These reductions are the result of streamlined titling

procedures and reduced processing time. However, some of the reduced costs are also

the result of activities subsidized by the Project (e.g., surveys, mapping) and may not

always be provided in post-LAMP II titling activities. A detailed cost study conducted

in Bohol indicated that private expenditures required to obtain a title under LAMP II

were 11.6 percent of those under regular procedures (see Annex 3). Changes in

informal transaction costs were undetermined, although there is evidence that there was

still some involvement of third-party “facilitators” in titling activities continued during

the Project.

Increase in collectible revenue from property and other land-related taxes. There

was a significant increase in Real Property Tax collections as a result of titling activities

in Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon and the adoption of a market-based SMV in Naga City.

In the case of Naga City, there was also a substantial increase in Property Transfer Tax

at the LGU level as well as at the central level with the Bureau of Internal Revenue also

adopting the new SMV (see Table 3).

Reduce processing time in land registration process. There were drastic reductions

in title processing time under LAMP II. In Leyte, DIS respondents reported that it took

an average of about 7 years to secure a title prior to LAMP II, and only about 7 months

under the Project. For Bohol, the experience before LAMP II was 2 years, while it only

took an average of about 6 months to complete the transaction under the Project. In

Bukidnon, the difference in average time was equivalent to about two years.

Table 3. PDO Indicators - Improve the Efficiency of Titling

and Land Management Systems

Control Group LAMP II

% %

7. Increase satisfaction in land registration

Leyte n.a. 93.1%.

Bohol 88.20% 91.20%

Bukidnon 94.00% 99.70%

8. aIncrease in percentage of subsequent transactions registered in OSS

Leyte6,936

transactions 13,088 transactions

9. aDecrease in informal and formal transactions costs in land registration

Leyte PH$6,380 PH$1,744

Bohol PH$3,112 PH$1,809

Bukidnon PH$14,396 PH$894

10. development (i.e., respondents who invested in land improvements)Increase in collectible revenue from property and other land-related taxes

Leyte 113% 114.50%

Bohol 122.30% 129.30%

Bukidnon 112.10% 135.80%

11. aReduce processing time in land registration process

Leyte 84 months 7.2 months

Bohol 24 months 6.1months

Bukidnon 30 months 5.3 months

PDO 2 - Improved efficiency of land tilling and administration system

Note: In the case of PDO Indicators 7, 8, 10 and 11, the comparison is between “before” and “after” the Project, while for PDO Indicator 10 is for “without” and “with” Project. Also to be noted, Indicator 9 reflects only formal transactions costs, as informal transaction costs could not be determined. Source: LAMP II Development Impact Study (2013)

3.3 Efficiency

Rating: High

At appraisal, the total project cost was estimated at US$40.6 million, financed by the

US$19.0 million IBRD loan, a US$19.31 million AusAID grant, and US$2.29 million in

Government co-financing. After restructuring, the Project cost was reduced to roughly

US$35.0 million, of which US$15.36 million was from proceeds of the IBRD loan,

US$15.3 million from the AusAID grant, and approximately US$2 million from GoP (see

Annex 1). In addition, LGUs contributed approximately US$2.3 million of their own

resources to systematic adjudication activities. A total of US$3.64 million of loan funds

were cancelled in 2010 due to reduced titling activities due to delays in the passage of the

Residential Free Patent Act as well as the decision not to construct OSSs for land

administration services delivery in Bohol and Bukidnon Provinces due to LRA’s

construction of new RoDs in these provinces. The revised loan proceeds were fully

disbursed.

The Project made highly efficient use of the loans proceeds. When taking into

consideration both the costs of producing and obtaining a title (i.e., the costs incurred by

public agencies in producing a title and the costs incurrent by applicants to obtain a title),

the unit cost of a LAMP II title was just a fraction (i.e., 21.6 percent) of a DENR-CARP

title (see Annex 3).

The project’s economic efficiency is deemed to be high, as the Project’s actual Internal

Economic Rate of Return (IERR) is estimated to be significantly higher than the one

estimated at the 2010 restructuring. Specifically, while the number of registered titles was

in line with that anticipated at restructuring, the increases in property value as a result of

having a title are expected to be higher than compared to the 10 percent that was assumed

for the economic analysis conducted at the time of the restructuring (i.e., up to 35

percent).13 Results from a sensitivity analysis indicate a high economic efficiency, with the

IERR ranging from 22 percent for a 5 percent increase in land values as perceived in

Bukidnon, to 93 percent for a 35 percent, as determined by a case study in Leyte that

examined differences in market prices between titled and untitled agricultural land.

The Project’s Fiscal impact is also deemed to be high and the Project has resulted in an

increase in fiscal revenues at both the local and national level as a result of: (a) titling

activities; and (b) the adoption of a market-based SMV in the pilot city of Naga. As shown

in Annex 3, LAMP II municipalities show stronger increases in real property taxes and less

dependence on transfers from the central government than their peers. The fiscal benefits

will continue to increase, as other LGUs are adopting the titling and valuation practices

developed under the Project. Likewise, the adoption of the new SMV in Naga City and the

13 LEI (2010).

Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) has resulted in the sustained growth in Real Property

Tax (RPT) and Property Transfer Tax collections at the local and central level of

government (see Annex 3).

3.4 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating

Rating: Moderately Satisfactory

Project performance is deemed moderately satisfactory, based on its substantial ratings in

terms of relevance and efficacy and high rating in terms of efficiency.

3.5 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes and Impacts

(a) Poverty Impacts, Gender Aspects, and Social Development

Poverty. It is estimated that more than 40 percent of the respondents in Leyte and

Bohol fall below the 2009 poverty threshold level while in Bukidnon, about 20 percent

are below the poverty line. In Bukidnon, it is estimated that about 36 percent of title

recipients belonged to various IP communities, which are considered among the

disadvantaged groups of society. For most of the poor in the Philippines, as in

developing countries in general, land is the primary means for generating a livelihood

and a main vehicle for investing, accumulating wealth, and transferring it between

generations. Although securing a land title does not automatically reduce poverty, by

helping poor beneficiaries secure property rights to land they already possess, the

Project has provided a first step toward unlocking their potential to increase their wealth

by fostering increased investments in land and housing and access to credit.14

Gender. Gender Mainstreaming Guidelines and Social Development and Gender

Framework were developed under the Project to promote an inclusive, cohesive and

accountable approach to LAM in support of social and gender equality and inclusion

among participating communities, other stakeholders and LAM agencies in general. In

addition, titling procedures included an investigation to determine whether possession

was acquired through the male or female spouse, and the title was recorded accordingly.

However, this practice is not widely implemented outside the participating provinces.15

The Philippines’ National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) has

classified LAMP II as “gender responsive” according to its Harmonized Gender and

Development Guidelines, ranking fourth out of the 14 projects in the Philippines IBRD

portfolio.16

14 Payne, G., Durand-Lasserve, A., Rakodi, C. (2009), "The limits of land titling and home ownership",

Environment and Urbanization 21 (2), pp. 443-462. 15 While the law does not discriminate the registration of properties in the name of women owners, either

individually or jointly, in practice titles are issued in the name of the head of the family, usually the male

member. 16 The harmonized GAD guidelines seek to promote the twin goals of gender equality and women’s

empowerment. Specifically, these aim to: (a) provide NEDA, donors, Philippine government agencies, and

(b) Institutional Change/Strengthening. Through technical support and its social

mobilization activities, the Project has been instrumental in supporting the passage of the

Free Patent Act, RESA and the Philippines Valuation Standards. It also provided direct

support to the design and implementation of regulations and systems aimed at harmonizing

and increasing the efficacy and efficiency of land administration and management within

the DENR and fostering integration with LGUs and RoDs in the three participating

provinces. In addition, two major bills have been submitted to Congress as a result of

LAMP’s work: (a) the LAA Bill, which aims to address the systemic constraints affecting

service delivery in land administration; and (b) the Valuation Reform Act (VRA) Bill,

which would require the adoption of market-based valuation of properties by LGUs and

the National Government.

(c) Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts. The implementation of LAMS in the

Leyte province illustrated the importance of computerizing land records to mitigate the risk

of physical records being destroyed by natural disasters. In addition to the massive loss of

lives and property, Typhoon Haiyan caused the almost total destruction of land records in

Leyte’s OSS in November 2013. LAMS computerized records have served to lessen the

impact of the loss and provide a foundation for the future reconstruction of the land registry. 3.6 Summary of Findings of Beneficiary Survey and/or Stakeholder Workshops

See Annex 5 for Beneficiary survey.

4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome

Rating: Significant

There are several factors that support the sustainability of the outcomes under LAMP II,

including:

As noted earlier, key enabling legislative and administrative framework is now in place.

The LSFD constitutes a road map for sustaining the momentum of the reform process

and the benefits of LAMP II in a programmatic manner over the medium and long term

through 2030. The LSDF, which sets out the land sector strategy until 2030, was

endorsed by government. It supports an innovative harmonization agenda being

pursued to progress the institutional reform without the passage of key legislation

(LAA Bill). It also works for the harmonization of systems, land service delivery and

alignment of the land reform and land fiscal reform agendas.

development practitioners with a common set of analytical concepts and tools for integrating gender concerns

into development programs and projects; and (b) help achieve gender equality in, and empower women

through, projects and programs.

Main tools and processes developed under the Project have been mainstreamed within

DENR and BLGF (i.e., standards, systems). The nationwide rollout of LAMS will

result in the computerization and modernization of DENR’s land records management,

including surveys and public land applications. DENR’s LAMS will complement other

ongoing investments in LAM systems and tools, including the LRA’s LTCP, which has

recently completed the computerization of 85 percent of the country’s RoD offices, and

DENR’s ongoing efforts to complete all cadastral surveys in the country by 2016.

Active engagement of LGUs in land administration and improving overall land

governance, including titling and mapping, is increasing, as the importance of land

titling is seen as essential for local government planning and land taxation. More than

180 municipalities have already adopted LGU partnerships, which signal the strong

interest on the part of local governments to play a more active role in LAM.

Formal higher education programs and continuing professional development courses

on land valuation and management programs will provide proficient human resources

in these areas. However, these programs need to be sustained to fully address the

capacity gap in the sector. While RESA has laid out the policy and human resource

framework to achieve the professionalization agenda, the operational structures and

implementation arrangements have to be set in a sustainable fashion.

The DENR has undertaken a proactive post-titling strategy (“convergence strategy”)

aimed at facilitating inter-agency cooperation to help capitalize on the potential

economic impacts of titling.

Conversely, there are other factors that might undermine their sustainability, including:

The existence of multiple agencies at the national level with conflicting and duplicate

mandates results in the fragmentation of land management functions. These systemic

constraints affecting service delivery in land administration would be addressed under

the LAA bill, which approval has been elusive, despite having the support of the

President and key congressmen, including the former President who is now a member

of Congress. This risk is considered significant.

The absence of passage of Valuation Reform Act, which proposes the adoption of

market-based valuation of properties by LGUs and the National Government, as well

as the political resistance to adopt SMV in the absence of such legislation.17 This risk

is considered significant.

Weak technical and institutional capacity at the local level constitutes a serious

limitation to the scaling-up of titling and valuation activities. The ambiguous mandate

of LGUs in these areas also presents a challenge. Both DENR and BLGF need to have

17 The proposed VRA would provide authority to the Secretary of Finance to approve SMVs in order to

remove the political influence in the updating of SMVs. In addition, the VRA includes a provision by which

LGUs that do not update their SMVs would lose their authority to collect taxes.

adequate budgets to provide continuing support and oversight for LAM activities at the

local level. This risk is considered significant.

There are several factors limiting the registration of subsequent transactions. These

include the lack of information and understanding about registration procedures and

high transactions costs, in particular the cost of registering the transfer with the RoD,

which has increased significantly due to the newly imposed IT service fees. There

might be some room for rationalization of both registration processes and fees to make

it more accessible and affordable to property owners. This risk is considered significant.

Improving the currently weak flow of LAM information across LGUs, DENR offices,

and the RoD is a necessary condition for ensuring that the massive LAM information

systems (i.e., LAMS, cadaster mapping, and LTCP) currently being developed. This is

to fully capitalize on their potential impact, including land use planning, and property-

based fiscal revenues and do not become quickly obsolete. This risk is considered

significant.

A special note has to be made with regard to the sustainability of Leyte’s OSS, which was

established under the Project. This OSS was operating successfully, achieving at least 90

percent of the newly defined OSS service standards after three years of operation according

to the reports from an independent monitor. In addition, there was a steady increase in

formal land transactions recorded until late 2013. However, the OSS was severely damaged

by Typhoon Haiyan in November 2013, which has destroyed much of the building, its

equipment and infrastructure and, as a result, disrupted its regular operations and reporting.

Six months after the catastrophe, the OSS (just like other damaged government

infrastructures in the area) continues to be in total disarray. Unless it receives adequate

resources and support from DENR, the massive loss of physical land records seems

unavoidable. At this point, the risk to its sustainability is considered high.

5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance

5.1 Bank Performance

(a) Bank Performance in Ensuring Quality at Entry Rating: Moderately Satisfactory

The Bank adequately identified, facilitated preparation and appraised the operation,

ensuring consistency with policies and safeguards. The Project Team prepared a

technically sound operation, fully capitalizing on the experience and the momentum built

under LAMP I as well as relevant lessons learned in related projects in other countries.

However, several issues proved more challenging than originally envisioned, including

ensuring political will for legislative reforms, and the complexity of implementing

arrangements. More problematic, however, was the failure to capture adequate data on

some baseline indicators during project preparation. That being said, the Project

substantially achieved most of its development objective and maintained the momentum

for LAM reform despite the lack of enabling legislation. It is also important to credit the

Team for including an experimental impact evaluation under the operation’s original

design. Although the evaluation was delayed due mainly to procurement issues, it

ultimately generated important information for validating the outcomes of the project.

(b) Quality of Supervision Rating: Moderately Satisfactory

The Project Task Team provided close and regular supervision, maintaining strong

collaboration with AusAID and the implementing agencies. Supervision missions were

conducted regularly and were well documented through Aide Memoires and

Implementation Status Reports (ISRs). Field visits were routine, which allowed the Project

Task Team to observe first-hand the challenges being faced during implementation. Having

a co-Team Task Leader (TTL) based in the country and the continuity of the TTL helped

with fluid and consistent communications between the Bank and the implementing

agencies. Furthermore, supervision was very much enhanced by having a continuity of

the same TTL from the time of appraisal to the ICR. Project supervision also benefited

from the strong support of FAO, which provided the same technical expert from

preparation through project closing. The team also provided intensive procurement support

including assistance in strengthening the DENR’s Procurement Unit and large-scale

procurement training ultimately improving overall implementation

The Project had a slow start, primarily due to legislative delays and need for implementing

agency agreements. Starting in Jan 2007, the Project consistently received Moderate

Unsatisfactory/Unsatisfactory ratings. A MTR in April 2008 proved critical in reorienting

the Project, recommending substantial changes in the Project that eventually materialized

in the 2010 restructuring (see Section 1.6). As noted, while the formal restructuring was

significantly delayed due to a lengthy Government approval process, counterparts

immediately began work to turn the project around following the MTR, demonstrating the

effectiveness of strong implementation support work by the Bank Task Team. It should be

noted that while additional changes could have been introduced under the restructuring,

including modifications to the PDO objectives, this was not considered feasible by the

Borrower (NEDA in particular) and thus was not pursued.

The Project Task Team also worked very closely to support the Borrower during the

preparation of the AF. However, recurrent delays in the processing of the AF by the

Government led to multiple extensions of the project several years after activities were

substantially completed. In retrospect, although the Bank could have closed the project

earlier and pursued other options, it continued to support the client in the preparations for

Additional Financing.

(c) Justification of Rating for Overall Bank Performance


Overall Bank Performance is rated moderately satisfactory to reflect its performance during

project preparation and supervision phases.

5.2 Borrower Performance

(a) Government Performance Rating: Moderately Unsatisfactory

Government performance is rated moderately unsatisfactory to reflect the uneven

availability of counterpart funds, the substantial delays in processing the request for

restructuring after the MTR and the protracted process and eventual dropping of the request

for Additional Financing, two years after requesting it from the Bank.

(b) Implementing Agency or Agencies Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory

Performance of DOF (through BLGF and NTRC) is deemed satisfactory, and that of DENR

is deemed moderately satisfactory. Both implementing agencies demonstrated the ability

to cooperate and coordinate efforts among themselves and maintain a close working

relationship with the Bank and AusAID. In addition, these two agencies were effective in

coordinating efforts with administrative units at the regional, provincial and city levels.

While the Project enjoyed the strong support of BLGF, NTRC and DoF leadership

throughout the Project’s lifetime, the frequent rotation of managers at both the Project level

and at DENR in general was detrimental to the Project’s implementation.

The successful implementation of systematic titling activities under Component 3 has to

be largely credited to the Bohol Provincial Project Implementation Office (PPIP) and the

Systematic Adjudication Field Offices (SAFOs). Taking the approach of training and

deputizing local government staff for titling activities from the Bayawan City experience,

the Bohol PPIO led a strong campaign on the benefits of cadastral maps and land survey

and titling to local governments. Their proactivity and dedication paid off. Within a year,

counterpart funds were secured from nine municipalities, totaling more than PhP20 million.

The Leyte and Bukidnon PPIOs also acted proactively when subsequently replicating the

Bohol approach under local conditions. Specifically, from 2011 onwards, Leyte focused

on residential lots, capitalizing on the passage of the Residential Free Patent Act in 2010.

It also worked in partnership with land surveyors since many lots required subdivision.

Bukidnon, in which a big part of the provincial territory is claimed as ancestral domain

land, formally included Indigenous Peoples into the systematic titling process in the

process through Partnership Agreements.

(c) Justification of Rating for Overall Borrower Performance


The overall rating is moderately satisfactory, reflecting BLGF/NTRC’s strong satisfactory

rating (particularly towards the end of project implementation), and DENR’s moderately

satisfactory performance.

6. Lessons Learned18

Lessons of Wide General Application

For the potential benefits of land titling and valuation to accrue, other

complementary interventions ranging from agricultural support to tax

administration also need to be pursued. As shown by the international experience

on the impact of land tenure programs on poverty, economic development, and fiscal

strengthening, land tenure constitutes just a first step and a more complex set of

institutional reforms, poverty alleviation and economic development initiatives and

fiscal and fiscal administration reforms are needed to fully capitalize on its potential

benefits.

Legislative enactment as precondition of projects creates operational risk. Enabling legislation and institutional reform, while critical to achieving reform goals,

is an internal government matter and seldom driven by the needs of external projects.

Projects like LAMP II that weave into their project design the enactment of certain laws

or a change in institutional arrangements create an operational risk for project

implementation.

There is more than one path toward reform. In the case of LAMP II, many of the

benefits that were originally perceived as requiring the establishment of the LAA (i.e.,

more effective service delivery, reduced time and cost of titling, improved property

valuation and taxation leading to increased revenues) have been achieved through other

policy, administrative, technical, and training interventions and, most notably, through

facilitating partnerships between national LAM agencies and LGUs at the sub-national

level.

The reform initiatives that have been achieved by LAMP II have largely come

about through partnerships between change agents recruited by the Project from

the private sector, advocacy groups and academic circles. The change agents,

whether national or international, have played a central role in: (a) introducing the

reforms to the executive of the national LAM agencies and in shepherding the policy

reform bills through the Congress and the Senate; and (b) developing the Executive and

Administrative Orders in support of the reforms and the systems, and technology and

training programs for the improvement of LAM service delivery.

It is also critical to identify executive champions in the national LAM agencies and

in the Congress and the Senate. In parallel with the development of the policy agenda,

committed political champions, preferably a Committee Chairperson in the Senate and

Congress, needs to be identified as well as other key officials and gatekeepers of the

legislative process.

18 For an extended discussion on the lessons learned under LAMP II, see Annex 7 (Borrower’s ICR) and

Annex 9 (Lessons Learned under LAMP II, prepared by Keith Bell, TTL).

As shown by the LAMP II experience, there is great potential in the active

participation of LGUs in titling activities. However, the DENR has a critical role to

play in providing close supervision to the titling activities carried out by LGUs to

ensure transparency and technical soundness.

Experience has shown that greater efficiency is achieved in municipalities where

LGUs are actively involved in titling. Thus, in planning for the rollout, it is more

important to consider the LGU’s commitment to partner than the proportion of untitled

parcels in a municipality.

The adoption of SMVs at the local level is constrained not just by technical and

capacity limitations. Equally important is to obtain the support of strong champions

at the local level committed to advancing property valuation reforms. Moreover, the

systematic adoption of market-based SMV by all local governments, rather than just

by those with a vocation toward reform, needs to be a requirement from the central

government that is adequately enforced. This is particularly important given the

perceived political cost attached to the increase in property assessments.

Project-Specific Lessons

A solid M&E framework with quantifiable baselines, annual targets to measure

progress, and clear end-of-project expectations is a critical component of a

project’s design. Specifically, performance indicators should reflect the scope of the

Project rather than hypothetical impacts that depend on factors outside the orbit of the

Project. While Impact Assessment Studies can enhance the project results framework,

they should not constitute the sole basis for assessing Project’s efficacy to avoid

unnecessary risks. Likewise, baselines should be constructed during preparation or

early stages of implementation.

7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners

(a) Borrower/implementing agencies See Annex 7.

(b) Co-financiers See Annex 8.

(c) Other partners and stakeholders N.A.

Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing

(a) Project Cost under IBRD Financing by Component (in USD million equivalent)

Components Appraisal Estimate

(USD millions)

Actual/Latest Estimate (*) (USD millions)

Percentage of Appraisal

1. Development of Land Policy and Regulatory Framework

0.49 0.15 30.6%

2. Institutional Development and Capacity Building

0.33 0.11 33.3%

3. Security of Land Tenure 14.54 11.26 77.4%

4. Property Valuation 1.45 1.70 117.2%

5. Project Management 1.19 1.98 166.3%

Total Baseline Cost 18.00

Unallocated 0.90

Front-End Fee 0.10 0.10 100%

Total Financing Required 19.00 15.30 80.5% (*) Note: The Borrower did not provide Actual Cost by Component. The amounts shown here reflect actual

loan disbursements weighted by the proportional cost by component determined at restructuring, which is

considered to provide a close approximation to the actual executed values.

(b) Financing

Source of Funds Type of

Co-financing

Appraisal Estimate

(USD millions)

Actual/Latest Estimate

(USD millions)

Percentage of Appraisal

Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID)

Grant 19.31 15.3 44.9%

Borrower Co-financing 2.29 2.0 86.0% International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Loan 19.0 15.3 80.5%

Local Government Units Voluntary contributions

0.0 2.3 --

Annex 2. Outputs by Component

Component 1: Development of Land Policy and Regulatory Framework

The operation effectively provided support to priority policy, legislation and regulatory

changes at the national level to support land administration reform. Most notably, through

its policy dissemination and consensus-building activities, LAMP II has supported the

passage of the Free Patent Residential Act, which enhances the process of tenure security.

It also effectively supported the adoption of other LAM regulations conducive to the

harmonization of LAM systems and procedures (see Table below).

The formulation of the Land Sector Development Framework (LSDF) that provides a 20

year vision, mission statement and policy statement for the sector is also considered a key

output of this component. The framework plan was completed in March 2010 and approved

by the National Steering Committee (NSC) in June 2010. NSC Resolution No. 2010‐01

endorsed the adoption of LSDF. While no formal adoption at the Office of the President

was issued, the LSDF became the key reference document for the preparation of the

Philippines Development Plan 2010-2016, which, for the first time, includes a section on

Land Administration. Emphasis has been given to the completion of the cadastral survey,

partnership with LGUs and computerization of land records.

The Project has also provided support to the development of policy on management of

government lands, foreshores in particular. A comprehensive policy on foreshore

administration and management (i.e., draft DAO on “Guidelines in the Development and

Institutionalization of Foreshores Management and Disposition Maps”) has been

developed and presented to DNER’s Policy Technical Working Group (PTWG). Its

approval was postponed to allow for another round of revisions to take into consideration

the experience under typhoon Haiyan (known as Yolanda in the Philippines), which hit the

Philippines in November 2013, causing catastrophic damage throughout cities and towns

in the islands of Leyte. The management of government lands has also been given high

priority within the LSDF, with an emphasis on: (a) the devolution and decentralization of

public land management; (b) the adoption of sustainable land management strategies

focusing on biodiversity conservation, preservation, rehabilitation and sustainable use of

the country’s forestlands as one of the highest development priority in the country’s future

national development agenda and sustainable development; and (c) optimizing the use of

disposable public and government land assets and resources based on best uses balancing

economic, environmental, and social development objectives.

The enactment of the proposed Land Administration Authority (LAA) Bill has proved

elusive. At the close of the 16th Congress, the LAA Bill (Senate Bill No. 2776) was still

pending in the Committee of Environment and Natural Resources. There are indications

that this measure will be pursued in succeeding sessions of Congress. The recognition of

its importance however continue to grow with no less than the President issuing

Administrative Order (AO) 34 to determine the best institutional arrangement for delivery

of LAM services and even mentioned its urgency in the 2013 State of the Nation Address.

Component 1: Development of Land Policy and Regulatory Framework

a. Policies to Promote LAM Reforms

Republic Act 10023 – Free Patent Residential (March 2010)

The newly enacted law aims to ease the requirements and procedures in the titling of residential lands. Under the Public Land Act, free patent is the acquisition of public lands by means of an administrative confirmation of imperfect title. It is intended to legalize the land rights of Filipinos who are founded to be occupying and cultivating such lands for a certain period of time. This law is expected to benefit about 40 million Filipinos who are living on unregistered land today. This law amended RA 9176, otherwise known as the Public Land Act.

The most salient features include:

It reduces the period of eligibility for titling from 30 years to 10 years.

Any Filipino who has paid all the real estate taxes for 10 years shall be entitled to free patent for such parcel of land in all municipalities and cities.

The Law avoids the lengthy and tedious process of acquiring a title through the courts under the Public Land Act which usually takes a long period of time.

In order to qualify, the land should not exceed 200 square meters if it is in a highly urbanized city, 500 meters in other cities, 750 meters in first-class and second-class municipalities, and 1,000 meters in third-class municipalities.

The law allows the issuance of free patents without payment of outstanding real estate taxes and removal of restrictions after issuance of free patents.

Local government units may also apply for a free patent for public land being used for public schools, municipal halls, public plazas or parks, and other government institutions for public use.

The Law provides security of the property rights of the owner and will also facilitate the title holders to credit facilities of banks and other financial institutions using their land titles as collateral for loans.

With the new law signed, landowners can now apply with the DENR to acquire a title through a free patent.

DENR DAO 2011-06 (May 23, 2011)

Adopts the LGU partnership approach as the new strategy of the DENR to fast track the completion of land titling activities nationwide.

DENR DAO 2010 – 12 (May 5, 2010)

Provides the implementing rules and regulations for the issuance of FPs in residential areas

DENR Memorandum Circular 2010 – 11 (May 31, 2010)

Prescribes the forms for the processing of FP applications under RA 10023

DENR DAO 2010 – 18 (June 23,2010)

Defines the policy on land information management, including custodianship, updating, and sharing of information. It adopts LAMS as the platform for the management of all land information in DENR.

DENR DAO 2010 – 05 (March 9, 2010)

Prescribes the revised regulations on land surveys

DENR Special Order 2010 – 397 (May 20 , 2010)

Establishment of LAMS Task Force to lead in the roll out of LAMS to DENR regional offices and selected CENROs

DENR DAO 2009-05 (April 21, 2009)

Simplified the requirements and streamlined the procedures for issuance of Miscellaneous Sales Agreements in residential properties under Republic Act 730

DENR DAO 2007 – 29 (July 31, 2007)

Revised regulations on land surveys

DENR DAO 2007 – 10 (June 18, 2007)

Modifies the survey process for LAMP II areas and provides guidelines for its implementation

DENR DAO 2007 – 09 (June 18, 2007)

Prescribes the Systematic Adjudication process to simplify, fast track the disposition of public alienable and disposable lands through Free and Homestead Patents

b. Management of Government Land

Draft DAO on “Guidelines in the Development and Institutionalization of Foreshores Management and Disposition Maps”

A comprehensive policy on foreshore administration and management has been developed and presented to DNER’s PTWG. Its approval was postponed to allow for another round of revisions to take into consideration the experience under typhoon Haiyan.

Management of government lands has also been given high priority under the LSDF

The LSDF guiding principles for the management of government lands are:

the devolution and decentralization of public land management;

the adoption of sustainable land management strategies focusing on biodiversity conservation, preservation, rehabilitation and sustainable use of the country’s forestlands as one of the highest development priority in the country’s future national development agenda and sustainable development; and

the optimum use of disposable public and government land assets and resources based on best uses balancing economic, environmental, and social development objectives.

Component 2: Institutional Development and Capacity Building

This component supported the implementation of more transparent, responsive and

service-oriented institutional arrangements for land administration. This component also

supported the development of the capacity of local academic institutions to provide land

administration education and training. Specifically:

Component 2 – Institutional Development and Capacity Building

a. Institutional Strengthening and Coordination of Arrangements for Land Administration

Human Resources Management and Development (HRMD) Strategy and Plan, together with the appropriate training programs were developed, adopted and implemented. HRMD procedures were used in the recruitment of 715 regular and contract staff.

The Institutional Development and Capacity Building (IDCB) strategy and plan developed and adopted.

Policies, systems and guidelines for human resource development and management developed, including recruitment, development of competency-based standards, and procedures for training targeted more effective use of staff resources.

Competency standards for various skills for titling, adjudication and title records management functions developed.

Center for Land Administration Management – Philippines (CLAMP) established. The CLAMP is a specialized unit of LMB to integrate, propel and sustain technology and knowledge transfer, with a Field Training Site in DENR-RO8.

Standardized technical training programs for mainstreaming innovations for surveying and titling (including paper-based and e-based learning materials) to be delivered by CLAMP developed.

Staff trained on, among other skills, dispute resolution, LAM system technologies, gender sensitivity, consensus building and valuation system, tax policy, and others.

Organizational assessment of the Land Management Bureau (LMB) completed and endorsed.

Organizational assessment of the Bureau of Local Government Finances (BLGF) completed and endorsed. Institutional strengthening plan for LMB completed.

b. LAM Education and Training

A one-year Diploma in Land Administration and Management (DLAM) leading to a two-year Master in Land Administration and Management (MLAM) or a Master in Science in Land Administration and Management (MSLAM) is now being offered by Visayas State University (VSU). A total of 39 students have enrolled. A plan to offer the course online is being finalized to allow more students from other regions to enroll.

The University of the Philippines - School of Urban and Regional Planning (UPSURP) has enhanced its existing Graduate Diploma and Master degree in Urban and Regional Planning (URP) by the injection of land administration and management topics, theories, principles and examples. This was started in July 2010.

Component 3: Security of Land Tenure

This component supported the implementation of an accelerated land adjudication program

and the establishment of an efficient and accessible land registration system in the three

participating provinces of Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon. The component contributed to

strengthening land tenure security in participating provinces by: (a) supporting community

participation and awareness campaign; (b) issuing free-patent titles in rural and urban areas

in the three participating provinces; and (c) streamlining the guidelines to facilitate the

acceleration of issuing land titles on demand.

A total of three provinces (as opposed to four as originally anticipated) participated in the

Project. Project activities first started in Leyte in 2006, subsequently expanded to new

municipalities, and tater to the other two provinces of Bohol, and Bukidnon. The selection

of new sites involved assessment of potential of provinces for titling, support of provincial

LGUs and, the cooperation of local RoD offices. Bohol was selected in mid-2006 and

operations began January 2007, with the first titles being issued in September 2007.

Bukidnon was selected in February 2008, but did not start to operate till September of that

year due to the lead-time needed in the establishment of Regional Project Implementing

Units (RPIUs)

The specific outcomes under the Project can be summarized as follows:

Component 3–Security of Land Tenure in Participating Provinces

a. Community Participation

A program Community Participation Program was implemented, in partnership with LGUs and other government agencies, to promote community participation and awareness of land rights, responsibilities, and the benefits of land titling and improved tenure.

High levels of community participation were achieved under the Project, with the 81.34 percent average of the three provinces exceeding the 80 percent target (i.e., Leyte with 71.96 percent, Bohol with 88.37 percent, and Bukidnon with 83.69 percent. Community participation was defined as the number of applications in an LGU relative to the total number of workable lots, i.e., those lots that had not yet been titled.

b. Systematic Titling

A total of 103,064 titles were processed and transmitted to the Register of Deeds (RoD), of which 101,793 (equivalent to 99.8 percent of revised target) were registered. Of them, 96,356 were distributed to property owners.

The successful implementation of Component 3 in terms of systematic titling was mainly the result of an expanded partnership with LGUs in patent generation that first started in Bohol in 2009. Taking the new approach of training and deputizing local government staff for titling activities from Bayawan City experience, the Bohol Provincial Project Implementation Office (PPIO) led a strong campaign on the benefits of cadastral maps and land survey and titling to the local government. Their efforts paid off—within a year, nine MOPAs were subscribed with various levels of counterpart resources from LGUs totaling more than PhP 20 million. In 2010, Bohol PPIO was able to issue more than 25,000 patents (combined output from LAMP and CARP). In fact, the first municipality (Maribojoc) to work in partnership with the Bohol PPIO received a “Galing Pook” Award from the President because of the remarkable results.

Participating Provinces Number of Patents Leyte Bohol Bukidnon Total

Patents submitted to RoD 37,032 51,750 14,282 103,064 100% Registered 36,022 51,659 14,112 101,793 99 % · Distributed 34,089 48,673 12,594 95,356 93% · Unclaimed 1,933 2,986 1,518 6,437 6% Unregistered 1,010 91* 170 1,271 1%

Source: DENR (2014)

The Leyte and Bukidnon PPIOs also adopted this scheme with some variations depending on the potential lots and level of commitments from LGUs. Leyte focused on residential lots and added partnership with land surveyors in the scheme since many lots require subdivision. Bukidnon on the other hand brought the IP participation in the process since the entire province is claimed as ancestral domain land.

c. Land Registration and Service Delivery Standards

As implementation arrangements were adapted to local conditions, LGU partnerships emerged as a promising implementation modality. Thus, under the Project DENR worked more closely with LGUs to not only facilitate the systematic adjudication and titling process but also improve land records management and service delivery through the rollout of LAMS to DENR’s LMS regional offices.

The Records Management Strategy (RMS) developed under LAMP I was adopted and is being implemented. A supporting Land Administration Management System (LAMS) has been developed and adopted. It has already been deployed to all 16 DENR regions and the capturing of land records has already begun. DENR is committed to completing the implementation of LAMS throughout the country within the next three years.

A One-Stop Shop (OSS) was established in Leyte and was operational, with staff and records of LAM agencies located in the building. The Leyte RD continued to hold office in the building. Coordination between the ROD and PENRO has been sustained. It has been independently monitored since 2009, and was achieving at least 90 percent of the newly defined OSS service standards after three years of operation. There was a steady increase in formal land transactions recorded until 2012. However, the OSS office in Leyte was severely damaged by Typhoon Haiyan in November 2013, which has disrupted its regular operations and reporting.

In view of the construction of new twin RoDs under the Land Registration Agency’s ongoing LTCP and the result of the OSS sustainability study in 2010, DENR decided not to pursue the physical establishment of OSS buildings in Bohol and Bukidnon. Instead, a linkage between Philares and LAMS systems was agreed to be developed instead, providing users under the Project a one-stop service point for Consolidated Cadastral Maps (CCM), and patent registration and distribution.

Component 4: Property Valuation

This component contributed to raising the quality of government- and private sector

property valuation performance, including achieving considerable progress toward one

single valuation base for taxation as well as the required institutional and educational

reform. This component was implemented by the Department of Finance (DoF), through

the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF) and the National Tax Research Center

(NTRC). Specifically:

Component 4–Property Valuation

a. Institutional Development and Policy Formulation for Property Valuation

The Valuation Reform Act (VRA) Bill approved by the House of Representatives as House Bill No. 6044, with pending approval by Senate. The VRA bill is the centerpiece legislative reform proposal to establish a regulatory regime towards the adoption of uniform, market-based valuation system that is governed by globally accepted valuation standards, techniques, and best practices. It seeks to amend key provisions in the Local Government Code of 1991.

Several research and studies were undertaken to develop policy reform proposals on the national and local land-related taxes and fees to balance the tax impact of increases in property valuation, particularly for property transfer taxes imposed by the national government.

b. Development and Implementation of Guidelines, Standards and Procedures for Property Valuation

Development and promulgation of the Philippine Valuation Standards based on the International Valuation Standards (DoF DO37-2009). In addition to its required adoption by all local government assessors and other government agencies conducting mass appraisal of real property for taxation purposes, the PVS have also been voluntarily adopted by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Mass Appraisal Guidebook (MAG) developed and issued through DoF Do. No. 10-2010 on 25 May2010. Basic Course on Mass Appraisal (BCMA) modules and attendant materials developed, piloted, and finalized in March 2012.

Market-based valuation was piloted in the cities of Naga, Iloilo, and Mandaue, and a revised SMV was developed for each site. Naga City completed the whole process of developing market-based values (using validated sales data), including adoption, and tax implementation and collection, earning the distinction of being a model LGU in the country with harmonized and market-based valuation.

Drawing from the experience from these pilots, the cities of Alaminos, Bayawan, Legazpi, San Carlos and Tayabas completed extensive trainings on market-based valuation procedures and are now in the process of finalizing the new SMVs. With the new manual and standards in valuation, other provinces and cities have also on their own initiative started the groundwork for updating their property values.

Two prototype information systems on property valuation were designed in support of the pilot implementation in the LGUs. These are the Valuation Database and Information System (VDIS) and the electronic Field Appraisal and Assessment Sheet (eFAAS). The VDIS is a data storage facility for capturing sales transactions in the LGUs. The eFAAS, on the other hand, is a computerized real-property tax administration and records management system designed for low-income class LGUs to back-up and manage all assessment records currently in manual forms, and to generate computer-based tax declaration, assessment roll, notice of assessments, and other external reports.

Under the LAMP II Innovation Support Fund, spatial information and revenue generation systems were implemented in selected LGUs on demand basis. By 2010, all of the 16 participating LGUs had operational revenue systems, ten of which adopted eTRACS, while other LGUs upgraded their current commercial systems. The use of parcel-based GIS system and DCDB was also adopted by 14 LGUs and the systems were further expanded towards developing tax, social, and geo-hazard maps.

c. Establishment of a Recognized Valuation Professional Body

Enactment of the Real Estate Service Act (Republic Act No. 9646 - RESA), which professionalizes and regulates the country’s real estate service practice (real estate consultancy, appraisal, and brokerage). It aims to develop and nurture through proper and effective regulation and supervision a corps of technically competent, responsible and respected professionals. The law requires the establishment of a bachelor’s degree in real estate, the licensure and regulation of real estate consultants, appraisers and brokers, and the accreditation of real estate persons.

The implementation of RESA is under the Professional Regulation Commission, through its Professional Regulatory Board of Real Estate Service. As of December 2012, there were 3,902 licensed appraisers, half of them from the government sector.

RESA marks an important milestone in the LAM reform program as it provides the human resources regulatory regime to support the real property valuation reforms in the Philippines. It requires the positions

in national and local government service to be filled only by licensed and professional real estate appraisers. In 2012, the Civil Service Commission modified the qualification standards for all positions in the government performing appraisal functions in view of RESA. Even if the appointing authority remains with the local chief executives, RESA ensures appointments of assessors who are technically qualified and equipped to perform the job.

d. Property and Land valuation Education and Training

The University of Philippines Open University (UPOU) instituted the Continuing Professional Education on Property and Land Valuation (CPEPLV) in May 2010. The Diploma and Master’s courses on Property Land Valuation and Management (PLVM) were approved in June 2011. These courses have been included in the UPOU course offerings since November 2011, with 80 enrolled students in the first cohort.

Component 5: Project Implementation

Activities under this component supported the effective and efficient implementation and

management of the Project, including monitoring and evaluation, as well as fluid

communication with key stakeholders. Specifically:

Component 5–Project Implementation

Appropriate organizational structures and mechanisms were established at the national, provincial and LGU levels, including the formation of committees and coordination and communication lines between and among the participating agencies.

M&E framework was formulated in 2006 and it became the basis for the monitoring progress under the Project. M&E tools were developed and implemented; regular assessments of performance held regularly. SAT QA systems were in place in Leyte, Bohol, and Bukidnon. LAMP II M&E system was cited as a best practice by AusAID.

Impact evaluation completed. The Socio-Economic Baseline Study was conducted in 2007 in Leyte, and in 2010 in Bohol and Bukidnon. Final impact assessment completed in 2013.

Social Mobilization Strategy developed and finalized in June 2007 and approved by the Bank in August 2007. Information materials were widely developed and disseminated.

Sustainability Plan was developed in November 2009 and is currently under implementation.

Ten LGUs participated in Phase I of LAMP II Innovation Support Fund, and an additional 14 LGUs in an expansion phase, resulting in the widespread adoption of model LAM tools and practices (see Component 4.b). LGU contributions to ISF projects totaled PhP 72.55 Million (US $ 1.61 M), representing 49 percent of total LAMP II ISF funding.

Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis

Economic Impact

Project costs - At appraisal, the total project cost over four years was estimated at US$55.2

million to be financed by a US$18.99 million IBRD loan, US$19.31 million from a

AusAID grant, and US$2.2 million in Government co-financing. The restructured project

cost was roughly US$19.31 million, of which US$15.36 million was from proceeds of the

IBRD loan, US$15.3 million from the AusAID grant, and approximately US$2 million

from GoP (see Annex 2). In addition, LGUs that contributed approximately US$2.3 million

of their own resources to systematic title adjudication activities. A total of US$3.64 million

of loan funds were cancelled in 2010 due to reduced titling activities as a result of delays

in the passage of the Residential Free Patent Act as well as the decision not to construct

One-Stop-Shops for land administration services delivery in Bohol and Bukidnon

Provinces. The revised loan proceeds were fully disbursed.

Unit costs - The Project made highly efficient use of the loans proceeds. When taking into

consideration both the costs of producing and obtaining a title (i.e., the costs incurred by

public agencies in producing a title and the costs incurrent by applicants to obtain a title),

the unitary cost of a LAMP II title being just a fraction (i.e., 21.6 percent) of a DENR-

CARP title (see Table 3.1).

On the public end, the cost of producing a tile under Component 3, which represented 72

percent of the total loan after restructuring, were comparable in the case of Leyte (only 3.5

percent higher) or substantially lower than in Bukidnon (i.e., 43.5 percent) than the cost of

producing a title under DENR-CARP-funded traditional free patent titling approach.19

These cost calculations, which include the entire production chain from social mobilization

to title distribution, were based on an exhaustive cost study that took into consideration

salaries and benefits of both regular and contracted employees as well as maintenance and

operating expenses under the two modalities, and shown in the following table (LEI,

2010a).

19 The DENR-CARP-funded traditional free patent titling approach had been in existence prior to LAMP

implementation. Under this procedure, free patent title applications are sporadically processed in response

to individual requests filed at the CENRO offices.

Table 3.1 Public and private cost of titling under LAMP II and DENR-CARP

Source: LEI (2010)

Private expenses (i.e., those incurred by applicants) were significantly lower under LAMP

II than those issued under DENR regular titling procedures. Specifically, expenses incurred

by LAMP II beneficiaries in processing fees and professional services were only 11.3

percent of those typical under the DENR-CARP modality. These fees do not include any

payments to fixers, which could exacerbate the difference between the two modalities even

more. Likewise, other out-of-pocket expenditures such as transportation and food

associated with the need to mobilize as part of the application process were also

substantially lower under LAMP II (i.e., 11.6 percent).

There were also significant differences in the time to obtain a title. In Bohol, 48 percent of

LAMP II participants received their title in four months or less, and 99 percent in tem

months or less. Also in Bohol, only 32 percent of those applying for a title under DENR-

CARP received it in six months or less, and only 60 percent in nine months or less. In

Bukidnon, the average processing time to secure approval for a free patent application from

date of filing to distribution under LAMP II was roughly four months, with the longest

being six months and the shortest duration being two months. Also in Bukidnon, the

average time to process a free patent application from date of filing to approval at the

PENRO level under the DENR-CARP modality was roughly six months. The shortest

processing time was one month while the longest is 7.8 years.

Internal rate of return -The Project’s Economic Efficiency is deemed to be high. The

Project’s actual Internal Economic Rate of Return is expected to be above 15 percent

estimated at the 2010 restructuring. While the number of registered titles was in line with

that anticipated at restructuring (i.e., 95,356 titles distributed to landowners), there are

indications that the value of land may be higher than the 10 percent estimated at

restructuring, reaching up to 35 percent.20

An economic analysis was conducted as part of this ICR utilizing the same assumptions of

the economic analysis conducted at restructuring, which are considered adequate and of

continuous relevance. As the Project’s focus was primarily on agriculture land, the

20LEI (2010).

economic analysis took into consideration benefits from improved land productivity as a

result of potentially expanded access to credit, greater propensity to invest in land

improvements and a second-round intensification of inputs. In turn, increased land

productivity is reflected in the higher land prices, which capture the increases in the future

stream of land-yielded outputs. As in the economic analysis presented in both PAD and at

restructuring, increases in land value are phased over a 5-year period and be in effect over

a 35-year time period. The same assumptions were used in terms of plot sizes by province

(0.71 ha in Leyte, 0.6 ha in Bohol, and 1.25 in Bukidnon), as well as land prices

(PhP100,000/ha), which were adjusted by the actual number of titles that were granted and

the current exchange rate (PhP43.82/USD1.00) to derive benefits. Another benefit was the

time savings (two days at PhP100 per day) in the application process accrued by title

applicants (95,356 landowners).

Costs included Component 3 of the Bank’s loan (equivalent to 66.8 percent of the total

proceeds), the same percentage (66.8 percent) of AusAID TAL (US$15.3 million) and the

GoP contribution (USD2 million), and the full amount of LGU contributions (2.3 million).

In terms of recurrent costs, management costs equivalent to 2 percent of the initial costs of

issuing a title were also included in the analysis, being phased over 5 years.

Results from a sensitivity analysis indicate a high economic efficiency, with the IERR

ranging from 22 percent for a 5 percent increase in land values as perceived in Bukidnon,

to 93 percent for a 35 percent, as determined by a case study in Leyte that examined

differences in market prices between titled and untitled agricultural land. These results are

consistent with Bank estimates for similar projects in other countries. For example, in the

case of Ghana, the ERR was estimated around 38 percent; in the case of Thailand, the ERR

was estimated around 34 percent.21

21 LAMP II PAD (2005).

Fiscal Impact

The Project’s fiscal impact has been high, both as a result of the titling activities conducted

in municipalities in the provinces of Leyte, Bohol and Bukidnon, as well as well as in Naga

city, which has adopted and implemented a market-based Schedule of Market Values

(SMV).

Component 3 – Land Titling: The increase in Real Property Tax (RPT) revenues under

LAMP II was the result of two sources: (i) payment of unpaid RPTs as a condition of title

registration; and (ii) improved RPT collection as a result of new Real Property Units (RPU)

registered under the correct owner. The evolution of RPT revenues for LAMP II and non-

LAMP II municipalities in the provinces of Bohol, Leyte and Bukidnon between 2009 and

2012 indicates that LAMP II had a substantial fiscal impact among participating

municipalities in the Bohol, Leyte and Bukidnon provinces. The average growth in RPT

revenues between 2009 and 2012 was higher in municipalities that had systematic titling

activities under the Project in all three provinces (see Table 3.2). While the difference is

only slight in the case of Leyte (equivalent to 1.4 percent), it is larger in the case of Bohol

(5.5 percent) and Bukidnon in particular (21.1 percent).

Table 3.2 Average Change in RTP Revenues for Participating and Non-participating

Municipalities 2009-2012

A stronger growth in RPT revenues results, in turn, in municipalities’ greater reliance on

own-source revenues. Thus, as expected, dependence on fiscal transfers from the central

government (i.e., Internal Revenue Allotments – IRA) has decreased more in LAMP II

municipalities than in non-LAMP II ones between 2009 and 2012, except for Bukidnon

where LAMP II municipalities were already less IRA dependent than their non-LAMP II

peers (see Table 3.3).

Average change in RPT Revenues

2009-2012

Bohol

LAMP II municipalities * 129.28%

Non-LAMP II municipalities ** 122.52%

Leyte

LAMP II municipalities *** 114.48%

Non-LAMP II municipalities **** 112.94%

Bukidnon

LAMP II municipalities ***** 135.80%

Non-LAMP II municipalities 112.12%

Source: Based on data from BLGF (2014).

** Based on data for 13 out of 15 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.

*** Based on data for 19 out of 27 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.

**** Based on data for 12 out of 14 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.

***** Based on data for 12 out of 13 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.

* Based on data for 25 out of 32 municipalities, for which there was a complete 2009-2012 data series.

Table 3.3 Average Change in IRA Dependence for Participating and Non-participating Municipalities 2009-2012

Source: Based on data from BLGF (2014).

Component 4 – Property Valuation: Naga City adopted its market-based SMV in October

2008 via City Council Ordinance No. 2008-080. The same Ordinance provided an

implementation strategy to soften the tax impact on the taxpayers. As a result of the 12-

year gap in the SMV revision of Naga City, real property values increased significantly

under the new SMV, with increases in land values reaching 150-400 percent for residential,

16-171 percent for commercial and 42-209 percent for agriculture. The same ordinance

prescribed several measures to ameliorate the impact on tax payers, including a capping

scheme that set maximum increases in RPT based on 2008 tax due and collectible.

With the 10 percent cap, total RPT collectibles in Naga City increased gradually since the

adoption of the new SMV, by 7 percent in 2009, 16 percent in 2010, and 23 percent in

2011. Although actual collections initially grew at a slower pace (4.5 percent in 2009),

perhaps as a result of an initial reticence on the part of taxpayers to the new assessments,

they grew steadily from 2010 onward (see Table 3.4).

The Bureau of Internal Revenues (BIR) based in Naga City also adopted the new SMV and

implemented new zonal values which approximate more or less the new Naga SMV. The

BIR tax for property transfers had no capping. Zonal values were applied directly; thus, the

net effect was a much more significant increase in property transfer taxes (see Table 3.4).

Table 3.4 Collections of RPT and Property transfer tax for Naga City and the Bureau of Internal Revenues 2008-2011

Source: Office of the City Treasurer, Naga City, as reported by OIDC (2013)

As shown on Table 3.5, in spite of the capping that was imposed to ameliorate the increase

in RPT among taxpayers, the implementation of the revised SMV has contributed to Naga

City’s fiscal soundness, as shown by its good rankings in terms of IRA dependence and the

ratio between own-source revenues and external taxes.

Table 3.5 IRA dependence and own-source versus external taxes in Naga City

Source: BLGF (2014)

A total of 30 additional provinces and 52 cities have updated their SMVs during the

Project’s lifetime as a result of the issuance of DoF-DILG JMC No. 2010-01 enjoining

LGUs to update their SMVs and conduct general revision of property assessments.

Local Government

Unit Income Class Ordinance/

Resolution No. Effectiveness

Provinces with Revised SMVs

Benguet 2 10-139 2014 Iloilo 1 2002-045 2012 Agusan Del Norte 3 236-2008 2013 Rizal 1 008 s. 2010 2011 Romblon 3 12-2010-85 2012 Tawi-Tawi 3 004 S.2011 2014 Cavite 1 09-004 2011 Nueva Vizcaya 2 2009-002 2011 Mountain Province 4 150 2014 Pangasinan 1 146-2010 2011 Abra 3 151 s. 2010 2011 North Cotabato 1 480 2012 Agusan Del Sur 1 68 s. 2011 2012 Compostela Valley 1 08-2011 2012 South Cotabato 1 11-02 2012 Nueva Ecija 1 01-s-2011 2012 Laguna 1 1 s. 2011 2012 Oriental Mindoro 2 016-2011 2012 Camarines Norte 2 08-11 2012 Sorsogon 2 01-2011 2012 Capiz 1 001 s. 2011 2012 Negros Occidental 1 11-003 s. 2011 2012 Siquijor 5 2011-132 2012 Surigao Del Norte 2 01-2012 2013 Catanduanes 3 008-2011 2013 Cebu 1 2011-26 2013 Davao Del Sur 1 12-64 2013 Northern Samar 2 13 s. 2011 2013 Kalinga 3 2013-002 2014 Lanao Del Norte 2 237-2012 2014 Cities with Revised SMVs

Tarlac City 1 04-009 2012 Puerto Princesa City 1 501 2012 Cabadbaran City 2 123-2003 2012 Iloilo City 1 2011-060 2012 Santiago City 1 6th CC-27 2011 Bacoor City 1 09-004 2011 Bayawan City 2 7 2011 Imus City 1 09-004 2011 Cabuyao City 1 1 s. 2011 2012 Passi City 4 2011-070 2012 Kabankalan City 1 2009-012 2011 Trece Martires City 4 2009-161 2011 Antipolo City 1 2010-412 2011 Calapan City 3 016-2011 2011 Pagadian City 2 2K10-313 2011 Tagaytay City 2 2010-09 2011 Cadiz City 2 02-2011 s. 2011 2012 Cavite City 4 2011-3328 2012 Palayan City 5 19-B s. 2010 2012 Santa Rosa City 1 1729-2011 2012 Talisay City (Negros Occidental)

4 11-001 2012

Vigan City 4 5 s. 2010 2012 Zamboanga City 1 2010-159 2012 Biñan City 1 06-(2011) 2012

Digos City 2 11-72 2012 Himamaylan City 3 2011-26 2012 Koronadal City 3 922 2012 La Carlota City 4 2011-103 2012 Lapu-Lapu City 1 123-2011 2012 Marawi City 4 11 s. 2011 2012 Ozamis City 3 1030-11 2012 Sorsogon City 3 018 2012 Talisay City (Cebu) 3 2011-14 2012 Tangub City 4 2011-09-0030 2012 Victorias City 4 07 s. 2011 2012 Balanga City 4 29 s. 2011 2013 Bislig City 3 2012-01 2013 Escalante City 4 11-040 2013 Masbate City 4 140-2012 2013 Science City of Muñoz 4 90, S-2011 2013 Surigao City 2 335-2012 2013 Tagum City 1 558,s-2012 2013 Cauayan City 3 8 s. 2012 2013 Muntinlupa City 1 12-081 2013 Batangas City 1 20-S 2013 2014 Calamba City 1 544-S. 2013 2014 Candon City 4 634 S. 2013 2014 Iligan City NC 13-5985 2014 Manila City Special 8330 2014 San Pablo City 1 2013-16 2014 Angeles City 1 - 2014

Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes

(a) Task Team Members Names Title Unit Responsibility/

Specialty Lending

Keith Clifford Bell Senior Land Policy Specialist

TTL, Land Administration and Geospatial Information Technologies

Wael Zakout Lead Operations Officer Past TTL

Maria Theresa Quinones Operations Officer Co-TTL

Li Guo Agricultural Economist Economist

John Bruce Sr. Land Tenure Counsel Land law

Anthony Toft Chief Counsel Legal

Dominic Aumentado Procurement Specialist Procurement

Joseph Reyes Financial Management Specialist FM

Ernie Diaz Sr. Financial Management Specialist FM

Brenda Phillips Program Assistant Program Assistance

Andrew Mendoza Team Assistant Program Assistance

Hilarion Bruneau Sr. Finance Officer Disbursements

Hung Kim Phung Sr. Finance Officer Disbursements

Mei Wang Sr. Counsel Legal

Josefo Tuyor Environmental Specialist Safeguards

Idah Pswarayi-Riddihough Lead Natural Resource Management Program Coordination

Mary Judd Sr. Social Development Specialist Safeguards

Kevin Nettle Land Registration Consultant Land Registration

Chris Grant Land Administration and Surveying Consultant

Land Titling and Surveying

Paul Munro-Faure Chief, FAO Land Tenure Service FAO

Valuation and Land Taxation

Neil Pullar Land Administration Consultant FAO

Surveying Mapping and IT

Supervision/ICR

Keith Clifford Bell Sr. Land Administration Specialist

EASPS

TTL, Land Administration and Geospatial Information Technologies

Maria Theresa G. Quinones Sr. Operations Officer EASPS Co-TTL

Preselyn Abella Sr. Finance Officer CTRLN FM

Agnes Albert-Loth Sr. Financial Management Specialist EASFM FM

Kristine May San Juan Ante Program Assistant EACPF Program Assistance

Fabrizio Bresciani Sr. Agriculture Economist EASIS Economist

Peter J Mallari Carreon Team Assistant EACPF Program Assistance

R. Cynthia Dharmajaya Program Assistant EASER Program Assistance

Fnu Hanny Program Assistant EASER Program Assistance

Victoria Florian S. Lazaro Operations Officer EASPS Safeguards

Andrew Garcia Mendoza Investigative Assistant INTOP Program Assistance

Joseph G. Reyes Financial Management Specialist EASOS FM

Esperanza Sadiua Program Assistant IEGCS Program Assistance

Srinivas Shivakumar Mahalingam M&E Consultant EASNS M&E

Noel Sta. Ines Sr. Procurement Specialist EASR1 Procurement

Tomas JR. Sta. Maria Financial Management Specialist EASFM FM

Josefo Tuyor Sr. Environmental Specialist EASDE Safeguards

Sukanya Venkataraman Online Communications Assistant BPSVP Program Assistance

Kevin Nettle Land Registration Consultant Land Registration

Paul Munro-Faure Chief, FAO Land Tenure Service FAO

Valuation and Land Tax

Michael Barry Land Administration Consultant FAO

Land Administration and Education

Cecilia Zanetta ICR Consultant FAO ICR Author

(b) Staff Weeks No. of staff weeks USD Thousands

(including travel and consultant costs)

Lending FY03 2.76 9.59 FY04 32.25 139.15 FY05 33.32 118.76 FY06 0.00 0.06 FY07 0.00 0.01

Total: 68.33 267.57

Supervision/ICR FY06 8.17 20.57 FY07 14.71 49.77 FY08 24.02 67.74 FY08 25.22 90.72 FY09 28.04 105.11 FY10 24.88 101.73 FY11 24.72 117.20 FY12 (*) 7.15 38.91 FY13 (*) 14.40 79.83 FY14 0.00 0.02 FY15

Total: 171.31 671.6

(*) Includes Additional Financing.

Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results

An extensive survey of LAMP II beneficiaries was conducted as part of the Development

Impact Study (DIS) conducted in 2013. 22 A total of 1,264 LAMP II beneficiaries

participated in the study in the provinces of Bohol, Leyte and Bukidnon. Results from the

DIS, which focused on the impact on LAMP II on the various variables that were

operationalized as PDO indicators under the Project Result Framework are reported under

the PDO Achievement section of this ICR.

The DSI’s main aspects in terms of sampling methodology, characteristics of the

respondents, and main results are summarized as follows:

Sampling Methodology

A total of 1,904 households were covered by the household survey conducted as part of the

Development Impact Study for the titling component in the three provinces. For the

selection of the sample, the survey respondents were classified into four groups:

1) Group 1: Households consisting of baseline survey respondents (in 2007 and 2010)

who were issued free patents under LAMP2. This was qualified to mean all SEBS

respondents who were classified in the ULTP under the following categories:

completed, completed/numbered, or LAMP titled.

2) Group 2: Households who were not baseline survey respondents and were issued free

patents under LAMP2. These households were located either in the baseline barangays

or in other barangays covered by LAMP2 but within the baseline municipality. This

was qualified to mean all non-SEBS respondents in the SEBS-covered barangays who

were classified under completed, completed/ numbered, or LAMP titled. In cases where

the SEBS-covered barangays were not covered by LAMP, the group was expanded to

include LAMP-covered barangays in SEBS-covered municipalities;

3) Group 3: Households in baseline barangays or municipalities who had pending

applications for free patent under LAMP2, irrespective of whether or not they were

respondents in the baseline survey. This includes respondents with LAMP-applied title

or applied with lacking documents. Again, in cases where the SEBS-covered barangays

were not covered by LAMP, this group was expanded to include LAMP-covered

barangays in SEBS-covered municipalities; and

4) Group 4: Households in barangays not covered by LAMP2. This set of households

served as the control group.

22 Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc. – OIDC (2013), Second Land Administration and

Management Project: Development Impact Study – Final Report, Bohol, Bukidnon, Leyte and Naga City,

September 2013, Manila.

Sample selection gave priority to Group 1 as these households were covered in the baseline

survey. In cases where Group 1 households were not sufficient to meet the target sample,

Group 2 households were considered. Group 3 households were considered only to meet

shortfalls in the target sample size or for replacement of Groups 1 and 2 household

respondents.

The target sample size for the “with project” areas was 423 households per province. The

required sample size was distributed proportionately across the barangays (or

municipalities) based on the number of titles issued. The actual selection of households

entailed sampling of barangays per municipality first, and the barangays having bigger

number of beneficiaries were given a higher probability of selection.

For the control group, a simple random sampling of 206 respondents was done from the

total SEBS respondents was performed to determine the sample composition for the DIS.

In cases where the sample size was not met because the HH respondents were no longer

available, replacements were identified from the same SEBS barangays where these

respondents were surveyed during the SEBS.

Structured questionnaires, patterned after the data capture instrument used in the 2007 and

2010 SEBS were used in the household survey. Primary data relevant to the identified

impacts from secured tenure and improved titling procedures were gathered. These include

awareness of the process of obtaining a title, cost and time spent, experiences and problems

met from the application to the release of the title, level of satisfaction on the delivery of

services as well as general perceptions and attitudes to land. Socio-economic

characteristics, access to services, credit practices, and information on land mortgage and

sale were also collected.

Several problems were encountered during the conduct of the study, as follows:

The sampling design that was finally adopted for the DIS differed significantly from

that used in the SEBS in view of changes in LAMP2 project sites, as SEBS control

municipalities actually became project sites and other SEBS municipalities classified

at that time as project areas were eventually excluded under LAMP II. The change in

sampling design affected the plan of analysis, limiting the application of the “before

and after” analysis because of the difference in the composition of the SEBS and DIS

respondents.

These problems also affected the classification of respondent households as belonging

to Project or Control area, the size of the universe from where the samples were taken,

the type of respondents actually sampled, and the type of analysis that could be done

on the resulting database.

Characteristics of the beneficiary population

The household survey generated a profile of the 1,277 title applicant/recipient households

in the sample, which made up 67% of the total respondents in the three provinces. It shows

that the project generally covered a large number of rural poor households, including the

IPs in Bukidnon.

The profile of title applicants/recipients based on these selected parameters shows the

following:

The level of educational attainment is generally low. Those without education and those

who only attended elementary school constituted 54% of title applicants/ recipients.

Only about 37% have easy access to water supply (i.e., their own faucet).

Majority has only one farm parcel (except Bohol), with the average farm size a little

over a hectare.

Farming is the main source of income for 54% while about 17% have no means

of livelihood and income.

Main Results

Project outcomes/impacts of titling at the household level are also generally positive but

some indicators will require a longer period to fully establish the impacts.

Savings due to reduced transaction time and cost, and less need to engage fixers

Improved awareness and knowledge of formal land registration process

Reduced boundary and land ownership conflicts

Strengthened sense of security over their titled asset

Increased land values although based mainly on perception and estimates

Increased access to credit but this is limited by the 5-year prescription period.

Initial investments on farm improvements but observed to be low

Study results indicate that the overall performance of LAMP is deemed positive from the

perspective of beneficiaries and compared to “before LAMP” and “non-LAMP” conditions.

Time and cost of titling significantly reduced in LAMP areas as compared to non-

LAMP areas and to the baseline data.

Awareness level is generally higher in LAMP areas than in non-LAMP areas

Satisfaction levels are higher in LAMP than in non-LAMP areas

LAMP covered households give their assets a higher value than non-

LAMP respondents (except in Bohol).

Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results

(Not Applicable)

Annex 7. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR

A. Executive Summary of the Borrower’s Project Completion Report (July 29,

2014)

1. Background

The implementation of the Second Land Administration and Management Project (LAMP

II) towards the end of 2005 signify the firm commitment of the government to pursue a

long-term reform of the century old yet problematic LAM system of the country.

The last phase saw the successful testing of a systematic approach to land titling, a working

model of one-stop-shop for land transactions, development of a national land records

management strategy and formulation of effective tools for updating schedule of market

values. The major policy studies that were conducted also highlighted the need for

institutional and legal reforms, with the Land Administration reform bill and the early

version of Valuation Reform bill already sponsored by some lawmakers during the middle

part of the 12th Congress. The need to expand the coverage of free patent to residential and

commercial lands and removal of the five-year restriction were also deemed important to

remove disincentives for formalization of these urban lands and spur further development.

Taking off from the strategies developed and innovations pilot tested under LAMP1, the

goal of the second phase is to reform the land administration system so that it contributes

to the country’s socio-economic development goals. The design approach is an expanded

but limited replication of the innovations tested under the learning and innovation phase

while pursuing the priority institutional and legislative reforms in parallel. The second

phase was funded through a loan from World Bank and Technical Assistance from AusAID.

2. Project Results

After eight years of implementation, LAMP II is largely credited for putting the land sector

back as one of the agenda in the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) for 2010 to 2016. The

Land Sector Development Framework (LSDF) and Valuation Road Map which were

produced under the Project served as key reference documents in its preparation, resulting

in the increased awareness of the executive officials and law makers on the importance of

the reform agenda. It also caused the allocation of substantial resources for land

administration activities such as completion of cadastral surveys of about PhP 9 billion and

computerized land records management system which is estimated at PhP 2 billion.

In spite of the setbacks in the early and middle stages of implementation and the continuing

delays in the passage of key institutional reforms that it proposed (i.e. the Land

Administration and Valuation Reform bills), the project was able to institute important

innovations to improving land governance through the development of a stronger

partnership between national and local government. These have clearly demonstrated the

benefits that can be derived from the shared cadastral information and the

collaborative approach to land titling, valuation and land use planning that includes

transparency and effective cooperation between key implementing agencies and land

owners. These are eventually translated to improved land services and revenue generation

at the municipal and provincial level.

The effectiveness of local government’s active role in land titling for example was

highlighted by the phenomenal issuance of 25,000 patents in just a single year in the

province of Bohol. As of this day, this partnership has already spread beyond LAMP II

areas, being adopted in the provinces of Cebu and Ilocos Norte, and is now totaling more

than 180 across the nation. If fully mainstreamed, it is expected to multiply the

government's manpower for land titling by up to 10 times and substantially reduce the time

required to complete the remaining work across the nation.

Indeed, the above approach is just the vehicle needed for the titling of residential lands that

benefited from the passage of R.A. 10023, known as the Residential Free Patent Act of

2009. The law that was achieved mainly through the advocacy effort of the project,

provides for free titling for these lands (estimated at about 3-6 million parcels). It was

hailed by local leaders as very timely for their constituents. The Department of

Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) started to expand titling activities on these

lands, initially targeting an average of 60,000 residential patents per year since 2012.

Not to be overlooked is the potential inclusion of an Indigenous Peoples (IP) component

in the above setup based on the interesting experience of DENR with an IP group in

Bukidnon in discovering workable arrangement for implementing land titling activities in

areas with IP presence.

Strongly complementing these on the valuation side is the successful updating of the

Schedule of Market Values (SMV) in Naga City in 2008 to a nearly uniform level with the

zonal and true market values, which also highlighted another critical area for increasing

the potential income of national and local government in land transactions, hence indicating

the need for pursuing further reforms on this aspect of land administration. The late

Secretary Jesse Robredo who was then the Mayor when this was instituted had actually

foreseen the prospective benefits of these innovations on titling and valuation. When he

became the DILG Secretary in 2010, he issued a memorandum to all local executives to

encourage the adoption of DENR DAO on LGU Partnership. DOF also issued the

Philippine Valuation Standards in line with the passage of the Real Estate Service Act

(RESA) to improve valuation practices and profession. The joint policy of DILG and DOF

(JMC No. 2010-01) further enjoined LGUs to update their SMVs and conduct general

revision of property assessments using the valuation standards and guidelines supported by

the Project.

The above outcomes clearly underpin the importance of complete access to spatial

information for effective land governance at all levels. With the adoption of the gender

sensitive Land Administration and Management System (LAMS) by DENR for its land

records and services, the foreseen benefits of linking computerized systems and

information from land administration agencies will continue to be pursued, thus providing

the alternative for the One-Stop-Shop (OSS) concept earlier tested under LAMP1. OSS,

with all the good intentions at the field level was proven to be difficult to sustain without

the legislated institutional integration needed at the central level as envisioned in the

proposed in the Land Administration and Land Administration Reform Act (LARA).

The successful experience of the Innovation Support Fund (ISF) in addressing LAM

challenges at the local level through 16 pilot LGUs also opened another avenue where both

titling and valuation reforms can be integrated in an incremental approach. Bayawan City

has modeled how a LAM framework can be steered by a progressive minded local Chief

Executive.

Recognizing the importance of sustaining all the reform effort and innovations introduced

under LAMP II and the need to pursue the other important reforms together with the

education and capacity building support that will be required in parallel, strategic

partnership and offices were established. The Land Management Bureau set up the Center

for Land Administration and Management Philippines (CLAMP) to manage the training

requirements for DENR. The Bureau of Local Government Finance also set up the

Valuation Office. In addition, the project also established partnership with academic

institution such as Visayas State University (VSU) in Leyte and the UPOU to offer Land

Administration and Management Diploma and Masters courses in Land Valuation and

Management respectively.

Furthermore, an Asian Development Bank (ADB) funded project in 2011 has picked up

the lessons from ISF for expansion of support to Bayawan City and replication of

programmatic support to 9 new LGUs, while an NGO named Foundation for Economic

Freedom also partnered with LMB in 2011 to provide capacity building support to more

than 150 LGUs for the adoption of LGUs partnership at various levels.

The effort of the government to improve land governance through LAMP II and other

initiatives has already gained local and international recognitions, having received best

practice awards from the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), invitations

to conferences and recognition from Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World

Bank (WB). This has also resulted in a number of visits from Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Bhutan

and Indonesia land administrators for benchmarking purposes, recognizing the valuable

lessons from the Philippine experience.

3. Next Steps

Project sites from tenure security, valuation and ISF components have experience

significant improvement on land governance with reported positive impact on land related

revenues. The combined benefits of systematic titling, an updated schedule of market

values and land use plans done in partnership between national and local government is

therefore seen as an ideal scenario providing both local executives and their constituents,

access to cadastral information, security of tenure and better capability to address the

opportunities and challenges of managing their land.

With the effect of climate change and growing population expected to put bigger challenges

requiring adoption of new policies and land management technologies by both local and

national leaders, the government is faced with the need to pursue the reforms and expand

the adoption of the innovations developed under LAMP II. Mainstreaming the new

approaches in land titling, valuation and support to land use planning with all potential

LGUs and putting in place necessary assessment and monitoring tools will clearly boost

the government’s effort in improving land governance and revenue generation. This will

however require substantial resources for training and capacity building as majority of

LGUs particularly those in the rural areas lacks this expertise.

Land management policies that address tenure issues in forest, protected areas and

foreshore lands also need to be given focus as the recent experience on the effect of climate

change points to the need for such a holistic and spatially supported approach in addressing

the challenges it poses to land governance. The pursuit of major institutional and legal

reforms should not be abandoned as laid down in the Land Sector Development Framework

(LSDF). Against these, the LAMP II achievements have provided the government with

important tools and maps to a still long and difficult journey to a world class land

administration and management system that it envisions.

DENR and DOF are deeply grateful to the overall Technical Assistance provided by

AusAID and particularly in developing the LGU partnership approach, Valuation

technologies, the Land Administration and Management System, courses for Academic

partnership and the LSDF and Valuation Roadmap. The support of World Bank in guiding

the project all throughout its inception to its completion is very much appreciated.

4. Lessons Learned

The following lessons are culled out from the Activity Completion Report (ACR) of the

Technical Advisers Team of AusAID together with project counterparts prepared in 2010.

4.1 General Lessons

The reform initiatives which have been achieved by LAMP II have largely come about

through partnerships between Change Agents recruited by the project from the private

sector, advocacy groups and the academe and Executive Champions located in the national

LAM agencies and in the Congress and the Senate. The change agents, whether national or

international, have played a central role in:

• Introducing the reforms to the executive of the national LAM agencies and in

shepherding the policy reform bills through the Congress and the Senate; and

• Developing Executive and Administrative Orders in support of the reforms, systems

and technology, and training programs for the improvement of LAM service delivery.

For their part, the Executive Champions have taken responsibility for ensuring the reforms

progress through the bureaucracy and, if required, through the Congress and the Senate.

Without capacity to continue to engage external change agents in any future program of

LAM reform, Executive Champions will find it difficult to sustain the current reform

momentum. The reform process is only in its infancy and national LAM agencies still have

a long way to go in addressing the issues of institutional inertia and vested interest

ingrained in their organization and management structures.

4.2 Policy Development

(a) While the LAM reform agenda has generated wide support among stakeholders and

developed champions among legislators, there are no guarantees that Bills will be passed.

Law making in the Philippines is a highly political process that can only be influenced to

some degree by external players.

(b) Without abandoning the legislative track, it is prudent to consider alternative means of

introducing reforms through administrative measures such as Departmental Administrative

Orders (DAO), which while achieving more modest results at least advance the reform

process administratively. Improvement of existing titling approaches through amendments

of existing procedures and harmonizing LAM agency programs should be explored to the

fullest extent.

(c) Experience has shown that policy and legislative reforms that target the rationalization

of several government agency functions under a single authority such as the LAA is a long

and difficult process. Partners must be prepared to sustain advocacy and address the

interests of those to be affected. The reform process is more easily expedited through

rationalization of the systems and procedures of a single agency as demonstrated by the

passage of the Free Patent Amendment through DENR and the RESA through the DOF/

BLGF). Other forms of harmonizing and integrating the systems are alternatives that can

be explored in the short term to progressively achieve results.

(d) Despite the existence of Presidential Orders mandating reforms be implemented,

national LAM agencies have avoided confronting institutional coordination issues. To

break the deadlock, there would need to be higher level or direct Presidential intervention.

(e) Policy studies, which are the prelude to legislative reform, must be initiated and

developed with clear participation, consensus and ownership of implementing partner

agencies. Technical assistance and advice must be directed and guided by the implementing

partners to ensure that ownership and integration of these policies are achieved within the

institution. However, while consensus on policy and implementation issues ultimately rests

with the stakeholders themselves, the process of consensus building can be greatly assisted

by the presence of third party advocates, facilitators and technical advisers acting as

intermediaries.

(f) A decision to pursue policy studies into legislation must be a determined and sustained

effort that is supported logistically, organizationally, technically and politically. In

particular, those agencies initially prepared to sponsor this support must be prepared to

‘stay the distance’ and not prematurely withdraw from legislative process they have helped

to initiate simply because the agreed project period has come to an end. There needs to be

a sustained effort by the agency, through its own legislative agenda. A case in point is the

passage of the Valuation Reform Act (VRA) that has a good chance of being passed in the

next Congress.

(g) The work for the approval of legislation cannot be limited only to technical presentation

and arguments by the implementation agencies. Other non-technical means, i.e. political

networking, sustained support to partner advocates and stakeholders, and media/social

marketing activities also have to be applied.

(h) It is best that the commitment and ability of stakeholders, especially from NGOs/CSOs,

and basic sector groups, to pursue advocacy activities be translated into a clearly

determined agenda and activities of these groups, and internally resourced. Contracting of

services for consensus building or provision of grant fund mechanisms to support

stakeholder activities needs to be carefully managed, so as not to lose the essence of

partnership.

(i) In parallel with the development of the policy agenda committed political champions,

preferably a Committee Chairperson in the Senate and Congress, needs to be identified as

well as other key officials and gatekeepers of the legislative process.

(j) Sustained support to these champions and their staff are critical during the final approval

processes (i.e. 2nd/3rd reading deliberations and bicameral conference) of the bill in order

to maintain momentum.

(k) Working closely with technical staff of key legislators facilitates and guides the

marshalling and internal processing of proposed bills and drafts.

(l) Once a Bill is passed every effort must be taken to ensure the key implementation

agencies have sufficient resources to implement and roll-out the approved policies

throughout the organization and their field staff.

4.3 Institutional Development and Capacity Building

(a) There are critical HR elements that must be present at the start of a Project to ensure its

efficient and effective implementation:

• First is to have clearly defined, competency-standards based HRMD systems and

procedures, particularly for recruitment/selection, performance assessment and training,

to ensure that the right type of human resources are available at the right time to

implement Project activities. Having and implementing a good recruitment and selection

system becomes more cost-effective for the Project as staff need little or no training

before being able to produce as expected.

• Second is to have Managers that are also recruited based on the D systems and procedures.

In the absence of such process, detailed personnel have to undergo standardized Project

Management and Human Resource Management training programs before even

implementing any Project activity. While a Project Management training does include

modules in managing human resources, it has been the experience in LAMP that some

managers and supervisors are more conscious of control measures for financial and

physical resources as part of over-all operations; while human resource management is

largely left to the HR staff (or addressed only when performance or staff problems are

present). In most cases, staff detailed to managerial or supervisory positions in Projects

comes from technical units/positions with little or no managerial/supervisory

background. Such initiatives will ensure that management of the Project activities and

control of Project resources is standard/consistent across the sites.

(b) In a Project where the sector under study is as complex as LAM and institutional

development and capacity building is a major component, it is important to have an

implementation structure that looks at both the strategic and operation levels. An inter-

agency Technical Working Group represented by all possible categories of organizations

comprising the institution will be able to provide the needed oversight and strategic

directions to ensure that component interventions are appropriate to the requirements of

the sector. A small, dedicated group of staff at each site to handle implementation is also

necessary to ensure continuity and standard delivery of services.

(c) The use of detailed staff in a Project is preferable over contract staff. In this manner,

government is assured that any capacity that is built for these detailed staff will accrue to

government when the staff returns to their stations/mother units. Sustainability of gains

achieved during Project life will then be built into the process. It is recognized, however,

that detailed staff may not be available in all cases and that Projects would need to resort

to hiring contract staff. In such cases, Projects must, as far as possible, make sure that: (a)

detailed staff work along-side contract staff, preferably in managerial or supervisory

positions; and (b) contract staff are asked to participate as trainers in technology/

knowledge transfer initiatives for other government staff not assigned to the Project.

(d) Good human resource management practice dictates that staff should be compensated

well and on time. In the case of GOP Projects, compensation levels are controlled and

cannot be changed. However, the Project should at least ensure that whatever amount has

been set is given on time, especially for contract staff who do not have security of tenure

nor any of the benefits of their detailed counterparts. Delays and uncertainties in terms of

salaries have led to staff turnover in the Project and, consequently, loss of developed

capacities. This has proved to be inefficient as new staff have to be re-trained (drawing on

more training monies) and learning curves have to be hurdled (resulting in some loss in

productivity).

(e) Any institutional development and capacity building component within an over-all

sector reform project is primarily a support component to those that are tasked to develop

the actual systems and technological changes. Its work commences by first preparing the

organizations that will adopt the systems and technologies; then progresses to supporting

them in the actual adoption of the systems and technologies; and finally looks at the

continued use and further development of these systems and technologies through other

support structures. So, long after the systems and technological changes within a Project

structure have been developed, tested and completed, a support component like IDCB will

still only be half-way done to completing its task and confirming the effects of its

interventions.

(f) Interventions that relate to establishing new qualifications, formal or non-formal, take

time. Education and training authorities, and even managers of academic and training

institutions, must first be convinced that there is a viable, long-term demand for the new

qualifications being supported. In the case of LAMP where the demand is actually being

created along-side reforms to the sector, education authorities and institutions usually take

a more conservative stance and, more often than not, expect that development costs for the

new qualifications are front-ended by a third party such as the Project. Developing new

qualifications also have to follow set systems and timetables within education authorities

and institutions. All these must be taken into consideration when planning for similar

interventions in the future.

(g) Developing and expanding the body of knowledge on a given sector through research

also takes time. Support for small research grants during the life of a Project would only

start the process of generating interest in LAM as a researchable area among a small group

of people. Sustained support over the medium term for researches in the sector, managed

by a known research institution such as DOST, would bring this a step further.

4.4 Tenure Security

(a) The current approach to systematic titling of rural lands has been proven effective.

Experience (Bohol) has shown that targets can be achieved provided adequate levels of

resources are made available, and there is commitment to follow procedures with strong

management of operations.

(b) There are opportunities for broadening the reach and further reducing the cost to

national government of titling through the following models: (i) LGU led initiatives as

demonstrated through the ISF experience (Bayawan); (ii) direct engagement with LGUs in

funding the systematic adjudication and titling process (Bohol); and (iii) cost sharing with

LGUs (Bukidnon and Bohol).

(c) Related to the above, experience has shown that greater efficiency is achieved in

municipalities where LGUs are actively involved in titling. In planning for the roll out

therefore, it is important to consider the LGU commitment to partner as a priority over the

need to cover all the municipalities in the province with high proportion of untitled parcels.

(d) The OSS model of co-locating DENR and LRA services to expedite the issuance and

roll-out of the titling process, while improving the performance of agency service delivery,

has not proven successful as an interagency administrative model because of the lack of

LRA support. The OSS experience is, however, being adapted through the development of

LGU front desks and information offices under the ISF for the purpose of assisting clients

improve their access to national LAM agency information and services (refer Bayawan,

Olongapo, Nabunturan).

(e) The issuance of Mother CLOAs by DAR is a constraint to tenure security given

ownership is vested with the occupying group rather than at an individual household level.

The linkage with DAR in the next roll out of titling should be strengthened to ensure there

is alignment of activities and value added through titling and other services offered by

LAMP.

(f) As demonstrated in the ISF LAM Sector Medium Term Development Plans (refer

Bayawan), achieving convergence between the process of land titling and enhanced social

and economic development for title holders is more likely to be facilitated through LGU

led LAM initiatives than through the functional activities of the principal LAM agencies

(DENR, DAR and the LRA). The reason being – LGUs have a vested interest in increasing

title coverage within their constituencies to enhance RPT collection. Increased RPT

collection enables LGU investment in social and economic infrastructure, which may

benefit titleholders directly.

(g) The assumption that titling will result in increased incomes of title holders through

increased investments in property development; stimulate the land market, and thereby

contribute to economic growth; may not hold true for rural agricultural parcels which are

very small, are under shared ownership, have imperfect rights39, and in rural economies

where public investments on agricultural development is low. In these areas, the social

benefits of secure rights are valued higher compared to the expected financial and

economic benefits. Future roll out of titling will have to carefully consider the relative

importance of social vs. economic objectives in order to give priority to sites, which will

bring about these expected benefits.

4.5 Property Valuation and Taxation

(a) Legislative processes take considerable time and sometimes reforms cannot wait before

the enactment of the law. In such cases when sector reforms require the establishment of

institution to shepherd the reform process, the use of administrative statutes such as EO,

DAO at the time the legislation is being processed, provide significant foothold to pursue

reforms.

(b) Continuing and regular communication with stakeholders and advocates is needed to

address problems as they appear. Face to face interaction proved to be the most effective

approach to getting support for reform proposals. In addition, good advocacy requires:

Acquaintance with the legislative procedures and with the officials involved in the

processing of the legislation.

Expert knowledge on the subject (valuation and taxation, VRA, RESA,

practitioners).

Effective linkage with agencies and offices involved in the subject early on

(oversight agencies).

Stakeholders to be convinced that what is advocated is beneficial to them directly

– they must be informed that they are participating in the reform process; must have

ownership of the reform process.

Need to document agreements especially during consultations, hearings.

(c) Simulation Study and SRP activities have highlighted the major inequities in the current

systems and disparity in the tax burden and have demonstrated appropriate solutions in line

with international best practices. The studies show that it is possible to demonstrate how

inequities can be rectified. The program also provided the evidence to support the

development of tax policy options for LGUs through tax compliance and tax impact study

procedures developed by NTRC. The decision of Component 4 to mainstream lessons

learned from the simulation activities in Iloilo and Naga led to the development of more

insights on improved SMV revision. The Mandaue experience which is more diverse in

terms of property types benefited from the experiences in Naga and Iloilo.

(d) There is a need for coordinated local and national taxation efforts in respect to the

application of reforms in valuation, particularly on SMV revision. To date, while the issue

has been addressed in an individual case (Naga) the broader national issue remains to be

resolved.

(e) When reforms benefits are clearly demonstrated, demand for capacity development

soars and it should be responded to avoid loss of motivation from key supporters.

(f) The success in delivering the Naga revision highlighted the critical importance of

developing a coordinated strategy to inform the community of imminent changes

incorporating a combination of tax compliance, valuation, tax impact, outcomes and the

development of appropriate tax policy options. A coordinated strategy to cover the tax

implications of SMV revision should therefore be integrated into the reform process.

(g) Public hearings and consultations are critical activities to build community awareness

and seek feedback, on the valuation and taxation reforms. Adequate understanding in turn

engenders support and greater compliance to the proposed measures. Examples of these

include Information caravans and local networking interventions which have exposed the

reforms to a wide audience, and increased awareness. These efforts have generated new

partnerships and adopters of reform technologies.

(h) The valuation and taxation systems and procedures developed by the Project have been

demonstrated to benefit LGUs with higher level incomes. Future roll out of SRP would

need to customize these tools to work in settings in lower income LGUs.

(i) In some municipalities, titling activities in Leyte did not lead to the expected increase

in local revenues through greater tax compliance, and updating of LGU tax maps. The

study on revenue impacts of titling in Leyte suggest that efforts at tenurial security would

need to be accompanied with strengthening capacities of Assessors’ Offices, amendment

of BIR policy requiring payments of capital gains taxes before LGU tax records can be

updated, and parallel efforts on intensified tax collection.

4.5 Lessons related to the development of the ISF approach:

(a) Not all LGUs are suitable candidates for pursuing LGU led LAM initiatives. Some

Mayors and their administrations are not highly motivated by the prospect of LAM reform

while some national LAM agencies rigidly interpret their mandated roles and

responsibilities and are reluctant to collaborate and share information with the LGU and

each other. Screening of LGUs and their LAM agency partners to determine their

preparedness and capacity to collaborate in the LAM reforms process is essential prior to

offering any formal assistance in promoting LGU led LAM initiatives.

(b) While many LGUs see benefit in leading and resourcing LAM initiatives most don’t

know where and how to start. In response to this situation the ISFGU developed a graduated

modular approach for the development and roll-out of LAM initiatives at the LGU level

(refer ISF Strategy and Implementation Plan 2009-2010). This approach has greatly

assisted LGUs and national LAM agencies in reaching agreement on the LAM priorities,

and allocation of resources. The modular approach has also assisted in maximizing LGU

returns on investment by initially concentrating on improving tax mapping and revenue

generation before moving on to tackle the more complex issues of titling, property

valuation and land use planning. This approach has engendered cooperation, confidence

and revenues for further LGU investment in LAM related systems and technologies.

(c) The adoption of LAM systems and technologies does not come without cost to the

LGU. Initial LGU investment in LAM through a single agency such as the City Planning

and Development Office is relatively simple and manageable. However, as the LGU seeks

to extend connectivity to other agencies the management of IT systems becomes more

complex and costly and can only really be effectively managed within the framework of

an LGU Information Systems Strategic Plan (ISSP) which addresses the long-term

technical and D requirements to sustain the network. A number of LGUs (Puerto Princesa,

Olongapo, Nabunturan and Bayawan are already investing in the development of ISSP to

consolidate and develop their initial LAM investments in the belief that the returns from

increased property and business taxes will more than offset additional investment in ISSP.

(d) Unlike the National Steering Committee (NSC) which gave special status to the DENR

and the DOF in the implementation of LAMP II, the establishment of ISF sponsored LGU

LAM Steering Committees (LSC) under the chair of the Mayor places all LAM agencies

(DENR, ROD, DAR) on an equal footing. In this context the relationship between the

national LAM agencies operating at the LGU level is more manageable than at the national

level.

(e) Initially, LGUs require significant management and technical support to mobilize their

LAM initiatives. Any attempt to sponsor the roll-out of LGU led LAM initiatives nationally

will have to be accompanied by adequate management and technical support.

4.6 Project Management

(a) The experience of LAMP II under the TA has proven the benefits of having built in

flexibility to re allocate resources in the face of challenges, and yet produce the desired

outcomes through other means.

(b) It is essential that Project Managers are appointed based on their competencies and

merits. The Project’s existing HRMD policies and guidelines should be strictly adhered to

in order to ensure there is always a team of high quality staff to support LAMP sites.

(c) Establishment of independent M&E has been valuable in providing information to

management, enables timely remedial actions, and generally supports project transparency

and accountability. Management appreciation of the importance of M&E is important for

this function to contribute to improving performance and accountability.

(d) A number of important activities and outputs were not achieved by the Project due to

issues with interagency cooperation. Design of future projects in the LAM sector should

be built around conservative assumptions of agency cooperation so as not to compromise

achievements. Adjustments can then be made in project implementation strategy and

objectives as relevant agencies become ready and willing to cooperate.

(e) Effective management of large operations can be achieved if there is timely and

sufficient cash flow and good procurement performance. The Project’s deficiencies in these

two areas have hampered the achievement of titling targets, and the efficiency of

implementation. Addressing these two key functions will be pre requisite to a successful

roll out.

(f) Executive management cannot operate effectively if it is constantly changing. The lead

agency should ensure that some stability in management is in place, to sustain momentum

in implementation.

5. Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1 Overall Assessment of Performance

Even with the startup difficulties and the inability to step up and gain momentum midway

in the implementation that led to a restructuring, LAMP II clearly recovered in the other

half of implementation and was able to finish strong and in a satisfactory manner.

Component 1 was able to deliver important policies and advocacy support to the passage

of R.A. 10023 that helped in setting up the new directions and future strategies in achieving

reforms in the land sector. Putting an estimated 3 million residential for titling potentials,

adopting LGU partnership supported by computerized LAMS for DENR that will enable

future linkage with computerized registration made some “next steps” clear for the

government. Capturing all these and other initiatives of the government in a 20-year

development framework practically gave our land administrators a blue print to follow.

Component 2, on the other hand, was able to provide the necessary capacity building

support throughout project operation and even beyond with the partnership with academe

and establishment of CLAMP.

Component 3 provided a major discovery in improving the fragmented and tedious work

in land titling through the more transparent and effective ‘LGU partnership’ approach

which is seen to potentially reduce the remaining work by more than half the time required.

In spite of the clearly unsustainable co-location of offices in the OSS approach (until

LARA is passed), the highly possible linking of systems provided an interim solution that

will also deliver the needed improvement of records management and delivery of land

related services.

Component 4 was able to put in place successful demonstration of reforms in valuation

with the experience of Naga City and the adoption of standards and improved guidelines.

The offering of online Masters Course on Land Valuation and Management also paved the

way for more opportunity to develop experts in the field of valuation, having RESA already

in place.

Whilst the pursuit of Valuation Reform bill continues to be an uphill battle, organizational

strengthening of BLGF have put it in a strong position to support local government units

in improving overall land governance.

5.2 Sustainability of Outcomes

The last two extension of LAMP II enabled the further strengthening of efforts to make

LAMP II innovation more sustainable. This can be seen in the following;

The clear replication of LGU partnership in almost the entire of Ilocos Norte and

other LGUs. The approach is being adopted in both CARP and regular titling

activities for residential lands.

The allocation of more than 100 million to support records inventory, sorting and

grooming activities in all DENR land records, the updating and installation of

LAMS in all 16 Regions and the building of new record facilities.

The use of LSDF as key document in the preparation of PDP 2010-2016

5.3 Validity of Project Hypotheses Based on Outcome from LAMP II

While some (Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the project design may take longer to

take place and with others even appearing to be not directly impacted by the reforms

instituted by the project, the important role of good land tenure governance in poverty

alleviation and socio economic development is clearly recognized, particularly at the

municipal level (Stories of Our Land). The importance of access to land and cadastral

information is critical not only for security of tenure but for revenue generation and

development and investment planning purposes of local governments.

The project also proved that a systematic, decentralized approach to land titling contributes

to a more transparent, effective and participatory process that lessens time and cost to

secure title. It can however expand opportunities for fixers if not monitored closely.

5.4 Major Recommendations

The Philippines population continuous to grow and has now breached the 100 million mark.

Housing remains a big challenge with still backlog to deliver for its rapidly urbanizing

cities and municipalities. This will surely impact on its continuing quest for rice sufficiency

even as farmers clamor for security of tenure and more subsidy and support. The threat of

climate change related disasters is not likely to leave to country but is expected to put an

even stronger challenge given our country’s geographical situation and archipelagic nature.

On the other side however, our economy is moving positively, with strong governance and

potential investments that will require better access to land information and balanced

development planning. LAMP II has provided tools and strategies that can help the

government address both these.

Hence, the government should continue to pursue the reform directions and strategies set

forth in the Land Sector Development Framework. The current funding of Cadastral survey,

data conversion activities for DENR land records as part of the full operationalization of

LAMS and eventual paperless transaction, the mainstreaming of LGU partnership in land

titling and the updating of schedule of market values are all in the right directions as these

are helpful in developing spatially enabled national and local land governance that are

environmentally sensitive.

Land governance however has broad dimension, a continuing effort to analyze, assess and

monitor appropriate indicators of improvement should be made.

Annex 8. Comments of Co-financiers and Other Partners/Stakeholders

The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Co-financier) provided the

following comments:

1. The Australian Government congratulates the World Bank and the Philippine

Government for a comprehensive Independent Completion Report on LAMP II. The

coverage of the report is extensive and appropriately covers the various elements of the

project.

2. Overall, we are pleased to note that the report reflected the achievements made by

the Philippines government in addressing the centuries-old and highly complex issues in

land management and governance. It reflects our perspective that the program has

achieved considerable outcomes amidst a complex sector and a fluid political

environment.

3. We are encouraged by the report’s findings. The Australian Government

(formerly AusAID) has significantly contributed to developing the technical knowledge

and capacity-building elements of the LAMP II in close coordination with the Philippine

Government and in collaboration with the World Bank. Much of the lessons of the

Innovations Support Fund, funded entirely through Australian grant, have and continues

to provide valuable lessons in forging partnerships with local governments as a feasible

alternative to move the reforms within policy, structural and organisational

limitations. We also note that the Philippine Government has fully taken on board

lessons which they have highlighted in their own completion assessment.

4. The intended outcomes of LAMP II is as relevant now as it was when it started. It

is worth noting that the Government has invested its own resources to fully mainstream

some of the systems that we have developed in LAMP II. This augurs well for the

continued engagement of the government and of other stakeholders in improving land

governance in the country.

B. Borrower’s Comments on the Draft ICR Report.

Detailed edits were receive from both DENR and DENR in the format of “track changes”

to the draft ICR Report. These edits were adopted and the submissions placed on the

Bank’s project files.

Annex 9. Lessons Learned

1. . Project Design and Preparation Lessons

Project Baseline. The Baseline should be completed prior to, or during project preparation

to ensure that factors identified in the Baseline study can influence the areas to be addressed

in the project design and implementation. The Baseline needs to be appropriately

enumerated, enabling impacts to be evaluated effectively.

Project assumptions need to be validated. The hypothesis that removing the constraint

of land tenure insecurity would somehow lead to increased investment and/or

diversification of incomes poverty alleviation was not conclusively proven under the

project. Certainly, this requires a longer-term view, beyond the duration of project

implementation. Furthermore, it cannot be assumed that all poor people, just because they

have land title, will either seek to, or even know how to use their small land holdings

productively. The social and psychological benefits of certainty and peace of mind, and not

having to deal with conflicts, are the primary concerns for many. For rural lands, there is

probably no place in the world where small holders prosper without subsidies and/or off-

farm income. Thus, it is not surprising that until constraints to agriculture and the realities

of life in rural areas (for example, lack of infrastructure, policy biases against agriculture,

information problem and covariant risks) are overcome the process of registering land,

which takes time and is expensive, may not be a high priority for the poor. LAMP II has

demonstrated that giving people private property rights in land is not the catalyst everyone

expected.

2. Reform Lessons

Champions for Reform. In parallel with the development of the policy agenda committed

political champions, preferably a Committee Chairperson in the Senate and Congress,

needs to be identified as well as other key officials and gatekeepers of the legislative

process.

The reform initiatives that have been achieved by LAMP II have largely come about

through partnerships between Change Agents recruited by the project from the private

sector, advocacy groups and the academe and Executive Champions located in the national

LAM agencies and in the Congress and the Senate. The change agents, whether national or

international, have played a central role in: (i) introducing the reforms to the executive of

the national LAM agencies and in shepherding the policy reform bills through the Congress

and the Senate; and (ii) developing the Executive and Administrative Orders in support of

the reforms and the systems, and technology and training programs for the improvement

of LAM service delivery.

For their part, the Executive Champions have taken responsibility for ensuring the reforms

progress through the bureaucracy and, if required, through the Congress and the Senate.

Without capacity to continue to engage external change agents in any future program of

LAM reform, Executive Champions will find it difficult to sustain the current reform

momentum. The reform process is only in its infancy and national LAM agencies still have

a long way to go in addressing the issues of institutional inertia and vested interest

ingrained in their organization and management structures.

Legislative enactment as precondition of projects creates operational risk. Enabling

legislation and institutional reform, while critical to achieving reform goals, is an internal

government matter and seldom driven by the needs of external projects. Projects like

LAMP II that weave into their project design the enactment of certain laws or a change in

institutional arrangements creates an operational risk for project implementation. With

LAMP II, for example the LRA was willing to cooperate with the project but only if this

cooperation did not lead to its demise. A project as complex as LAMP II should develop

effective risk management measures that anticipate and manage all types of project risks,

including those relating to legislation and institutional reform. The failure to past he LARA

Bill is clear evidence of this. It stymied efforts to establish the LAA—the institution that

was to bring together various functions of several land agencies under one umbrella to

speed up the provision of land administration services.

Future project designers need to work within current legal frameworks, especially if the

project being designed is relatively short-term. At the same time as using existing

government institutions, agencies and units, the project designers must also work with

government to ensure that donor funding is protected from political intrusion or caprice.

Pursuit of Non-legislative Approaches to Reform. While the LAM reform agenda has

generated wide support among stakeholders and developed champions among legislators,

there are no guarantees that Bills will be passed. Law making in the Philippines is a highly

political process that can only be influenced to some degree by external players. Without

abandoning the legislative track, it is prudent to consider alternative means of introducing

reforms through administrative measures such as Departmental Administrative Orders

(DAO), which while achieving more modest results at least advance the reform process

administratively. Improvement of existing titling approaches through amendments of

existing procedures and harmonizing LAM agency programs should be explored to the

fullest extent.

The LAMP II experience has shown that policy and legislative reforms that target the

rationalization of several government agency functions under a single authority such as the

LAA is a long and difficult process. Partners must be prepared to sustain advocacy and

address the interests of those to be affected. The reform process is more easily expedited

through rationalization of the systems and procedures of a single agency as demonstrated

by the passage of the Free Patent Amendment through DENR and the RESA through the

DOF- BLGF. Other forms of harmonizing and integrating the systems are alternatives that

can be explored in the short term to progressively achieve results.

Fiscal Reform is Highly Politically Sensitive. Updating of current Schedules of Market

Values (SMV) is politically sensitive. Mandaue City, with SMV now 25 years outdated,

has to date been unable to implement the reform. LGU politicians are very much

challenged in approving increases as it directly impacts their relationships with local

constituents. Passage of the bill for the Valuation Reform Act (VRA), would place this

responsibility under the national government through the DOF, thereby correctly casting

the LGU as the implementer rather than the decision maker.

3. Sustainability and Governance Lessons

Mainstreaming of projects into regular activities of government is crucial for

sustainability. The Project must be designed so that activities can be integrated into the

regular activities of the government with dedicated funding and staff after the project is

closed. This makes it difficult to, if not impossible for, government to integrate the project

once it is completed and to continue with the technical and managerial capacity required

to sustain what has been accomplished. Hired contractual staff paid for with project money

are not absorbed by the government because of lack of budget and also because their

salaries are way above standardized government salaries. Also, the government staff

trained or involved with the project go back to their original units unless a new unit is

created, which involves DBM approval and has an impact on the government’s fiscal

consolidation plan. This approach, in other words, almost guarantees non-sustainability.

Successful Approaches to Systematic Land Titling. The current approach to systematic

titling of rural lands has been proven effective. Experience (Bohol) has shown that targets

can be achieved provided adequate levels of resources are made available, and there is

commitment to follow procedures with strong management of operations. There are

opportunities for broadening the reach and further reducing the cost to national government

of titling through the following models: (i) LGU led initiatives as demonstrated through

the ISF experience (Bayawan); (ii) direct engagement with LGUs in funding the systematic

adjudication and titling process (Bohol); and(iii) cost sharing with LGUs (Bukidnon and

Bohol).

Partnership approaches are vital to LAM. Mass or nationwide land titling requires a

large amount of resources and expertise from implementers and as such is difficult to be

managed by national government alone. If the government desires to further accelerate its

completion, it will do well to develop partnership with local government units with

aggressive and development oriented leaders.

Broader reform of land administration and management recognizes that land-related law

and institutions are solidly within national agencies. However, LAMP II also recognized

the major beneficiary of an efficient system would be local government and therefore

explored such partnerships. The experience under LAMP II has shown that greater

efficiency is achieved in municipalities where LGUs are actively involved in titling. In

planning for the roll out therefore, it is important to consider the LGU commitment to

partner as a priority over the need to cover all the municipalities in the province with high

proportion of untitled parcels.

On management and implementation, a major lesson learned is that a partnership approach

is the way to go for future land reform projects. This means engaging sub-national

governments (provinces, municipalities, cities) as lead institutions, but partnering with

NGAs, academic institutions and the private sector in the effort. This approach of allowing

LGUs to successfully implement reform at their level will stimulate a rolling demand for

reforms and eventually create a local constituency for land administration. The ground

swell for more land administration reforms needs to start at local level, in other words.

Their widespread adoption at that level will build the platform for greater success at

national level. This approach means that the economic agent with the largest incentive for

attaining project objectives should be ‘in charge’ and that action has to concentrate on the

level where improved land administration services will be more pronounced and effective.

LGUs face different land administration issues and have different land administration

needs than do the national government and donors. The ISF has shown that a much more

modest goal of getting support to those LGUs that are able to clearly define and put their

own resources into meeting their land administration priorities works well. There should

be recognition that a demand-driven project, which emphasizes that local people and LGUs

have views that might well be different from those of the national government and donors,

is a more sensible approach. If this had been the case with LAMP II, there may not have

been such a heavy emphasis on land titling, which—in the end—was not the main issue for

LGUs

The demonstration effect of successful programs by LGUs will stimulate a rolling demand

for land administration reforms and eventually create a local constituency for reforms. The

widespread adoption of land administration reforms that have been motivated by earlier

successes could form the platform for a wider-based land administration reform effort at

the national level.

Related to the above, experience has shown that greater efficiency is achieved in

municipalities where LGUs are actively involved in titling. In planning for the roll out

therefore, it is important to consider the LGU commitment to partner as a priority over the

need to cover all the municipalities in the province with high proportion of untitled parcels.

Fiscal reform and decentralization are essential for good governance. LGUs’ neglect

of their mandate to ensure market-based, regular, and fair valuation cannot continuously

go unbridled. Perpetuating a faulty system is, in plain and simple terms, bad governance,

as issues in property valuation and taxation are key development issues. Even if the status

quo or lack of reforms offer convenience in some respects, it is unsustainable, and the

undesirable consequences will be systemically complex. It is in this context that puts the

good intentions of decentralization and devolution in jeopardy. Improving fiscal

governance is vital to make decentralization work so that LGUs can attain economic

viability and for them to enjoy genuine and meaningful local autonomy, as envisioned

under the LGC. Within the LAM program, property valuation and taxation reforms have

all the dimensions of good governance regime that contribute to improving public finance,

socio-economic development, fostering transparency and investor confidence, and

promoting a vibrant land market. The professionalization of appraisal practice, coupled

with the standards and new tools to ensure uniformity in valuation, is a good starting point

towards this objective. To attain significant results, rollout to more LGUs and replication

of successful solutions are necessary.

The fundamental importance of cadastral data (mapping). A core end product of land

titling under LAMP II, and the current national cadastral surveying project (under DENR)

is a digital cadastral data base which can be utilized for a wide range of purposes which

include: tax mapping and revenue collection and the related activities of real property

valuation and taxation; business processing licensing and taxation; survey and titling;

social mapping and analysis, asset/infrastructure mapping, geo hazard mapping and land

use planning and management. Progress in the development of these applications has been

very encouraging particularly in the area of tax mapping and revenue generation. The

government’s One Nation One Map initiative, led by NAMRIA and launched in June 2013,

clearly articulates the fundamental importance of the cadastral data base in the country’s

national spatial data infrastructure strategy and that it should be nationally consistent and

provided on an authorities basis for all government agencies and other stakeholders to use.

Annex 10. List of Supporting Documents

Eleazar, F., Garcia, B., Guiang, E., Herrera, A., Isorena, L., Ravanera, R. and Serote, E.

(2013), Improving Land Sector Governance in the Philippines, Land Governance

Assessment Framework, August 2013, Manila.

Government of the Philippines, (2014) Second Phase Land Administration and

Management Project (LAMP2) Project Completion Report, July 29, 2014, Manila.

LEI (2010 a), Study on the Cost and Time to Issue and Secure Free Patent Titles under

LAMP II and DENR-CARP Funded Titling Procedures, Report E59, June 29, 2010,

Manila.

LEI (2010 b), Study on Market Values of Titles and Untitled Lands, Land Administration

and Management Project Phase 2, Report E58, June 2010, Manila.

LEI (2010 c), Land Administration and Management Project Phase 2, Technical

Assistance Team Activity Completion Report, Report E38, June 2010, Manila.

Llanto, G., Riddell, J. and Orbeta Jr., A. (2010), Land Administration and Management

Project - Phase 2 Independent Completion Report, AidWorks Initiative Number:

ING041, October 10, 2010, Barton.

Orient Integrated Development Consultants, Inc. – OIDC (2013), Second Land

Administration and Management Project: Development Impact Study – Final Report,

Bohol, Bukidnon, Leyte and Naga City, September 2013, Manila.

World Bank (2005-2014), Philippines - Land Administration and Management II Project,

Implementation Status and Results Reports 1-18, Washington, D.C.

World Bank (2012), Philippines - Land Administration and Management II, Project

Paper Restructuring (Vol. 1, 2), Report No. 66613, March 13, 2012, Washington,

D.C.


Paper Restructuring (Vol. 1, 2), Report No. 74136, Dec. 4, 2012, Washington, D.C.

World Bank (2011), Amendment to the Agreement for Loan 7298-PH Conformed

Agreement, May 4, 2011, Washington, D.C.


Paper Restructuring (Vol. 1, 2), Report No. 59689, March18, 2011, Washington,

D.C.


Restructuring Paper (Vol. 1, 2), Report No. 56767, Oct. 21, 2010, Washington, D.C.

World Bank (2005), Philippines - Land Administration and Management IILoan

Agreement, L7298-PH, Conformed Loan Agreement, June 30, 2005, Washington,

D.C.


Appraisal Document, Report No. 28273, May 4, 2005, Washington, D.C.

http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2005/06/6203126/loan-agreement-l7298-ph-conformed

http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2005/06/6203126/loan-agreement-l7298-ph-conformed

Annex 11. People Consulted as Part of the ICR Mission

Department of Finance

Salvador M. del Castillo, OIC-Executive Director, DoF - Bureau of Local Government

Finance (BLGF)

Jose Arnold Tan, Director, DoF – BLGF

Divina M. Corpuz, DoF – BLGF

Teresita Solomon, OIC – Deputy Director, National Tax Research Center

Niño Alvina, Project Management Specialist, DoF – BLGF

Andrito C. Mendoza, Development Management Officer, DoF – BLGF

Erwina Grace Morales, PM and ETL - BLGF

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

Edwin Domingo, DENR Director, National Program Steering Committee

Ralph C. Pablo, Director, DENR – Land Management Bureau and LAMP II

Henry P. Pacis, National Coordinator and LAMP II Deputy Executive Director, DENR

– Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program and LAMP II

Alex Pascua, Chief of Staff and LAMP II Deputy Executive Director, DENR – Office

of the Undersecretary for Policy, Planning and Foreign-Assisted Projects / LAMP II

Warlito Quirimit, LAMS-NCD Head, DENR - LMB LAMS National Coordinating

Desk

Alicia Robles, Manager, DENR – LMB Center for Land Administration and

Management Philippines

Rolly Carbon, Project Officer, DENR – Foreign Assisted and Special Projects Office

Lorizel Montealegre, Project Development Officer / IEC Specialist, DENR – LMB

CLAMP and LAMP II

Evangeline Limyoco, Accountant III, DENR – Financial Management Service,

Accounting Division

Isidora Pontillas, Senior Administrative Officer, DENR – Financial Management

Service, Budget Division

Maybell Mangubos, Administrative Officer V, DENR – Financial Management

Service, Budget Division

Bohol Province

Glicerita Racho, Patent Coordinator, PENRO, BoholProvince

Jea Alei Saligan, Records Assistant, PENRO, BoholProvince

PENRO Nestor Canda , PENRO, BoholProvince

Wilfredo C. Lee, Regional Technical Director (Region 7), PENRO

Lemuel Pogos, Sangguniang Bayan/Municipal Environmentand Natural

ResourcesOfficer, PENRO

Rhudyl Marvin Ferniz, Land ManagementOfficer, PENRO

LucifenaB ardoquillo, LAMS Coordinator, PENRO

Maridel Salud, Administration Officer, PENRO Bohol

Leonides Abor,MPDC, PENRO

Lily M. Villones, GIS Operator, Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office

(PENRO), BoholProvince

Edgardo P. Orig, Provincial Assessor, Bohol

Leoncio D. Evasco, Jr., Municipal Mayor, Maribojoc

Elpidio R. Palma, CENRO, Talibon

Carmencita P. Mar, OIC-LAMS Chief, CENRO Tagbilaran

Benjamin Torrefrancia, Assessor, Tagbilaran

Emilano Shomachs, Engr. III, PENRO Bohol

Eusalem Quiwag, OIC-CENRO

John Ochavillo, NPDC, Bohol

Florante Evasco, Sangguniang Bayan Councillor

Lily Villones, PENRO Staff

Melissa Bonganciso, ExecutiveAssistant, Garcia-Hernandez City

Rodrigo Galendez, Municipal Planning Development Coordinator, Garcia-Hernandez

City

Juliet Dajaros, Office Clerk, Garcia-Hernandez City

Desideria Sagujay, Municipal Assessor, Garcia-Hernandez City

Cebu Province

Jonas C. Cortes, Mayor, Mandaue City

Regal M. Oliva, Treasurer, Mandaue City

Avita C. Mendoza, City Assessor, Mandaue City

Diosdado P. Suico, SP Member, Mandaue City

Glenn Bertoge, SP Member, Mandaue City

Julia Ballesteros, City Treasurer’s Office, Mandaue City

Giovanni Madero, Legal Office, Mandaue City

James Abadia, City Administration, Mandaue City

Mary Therese S. Cho, Vice Mayor, City of Cordova

Nazario Sumaline, Jr., Municipal Assessor, City of Cordova

Joel Baguio, Municipal Assessor, City of Cordova

Ferdinand de Los Reyes, Municipal Assessor, City of Cordova

Winifredo Munez, Municipal Assessor, City of Cordova

Jose Duque A. Tumulak, Assessor, City of Cordova

Wirlbert Tañeca, BLGF Region 7

Xerxes Resuena, BLGF Region 7

Leyte Province

Leonardo R. Sibbaluca, Regional Executive Director, DENR, Region VIII, Tacloban

City

Ramon S. Unay, Regional Technical Director for Lands, DENR, Region VIII

Winston N. Solite, Chief Regional Surveys Division (former Deputy Project Manager

of PPIO1), DENR, Region VIII

Ranulfo Q. Arbiol, Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office (PENRO) –

Leyte

Carlito Castañares, former Operations Chief, LAMP II-Provincial Project

Implementation Office (PPIO1)

Patrick A. Katada, former Systematic Adjudication Team (SAT) Leader, LAMP II -

PPIO 1

Emeterio Villanoza, LAMP II One Stop Shop (OSS) Manager

Annabel Tuyak, LAMS System Administrator, One-Stop-Shop (OSS)

Naga City

John G. Bongat, City Mayor

Ramon Albeus, City Assessor, Naga City

Gregoria Abonal-Boncodin, OIC City Treasurer, Naga City

Esteban. G. Abonal, City Councilor, Committee Chair on Ways & Means, Naga City

Beth Silava, Assistant Revenues District Officer, Bureau of Internal Revenues, RPO

65, Naga City

Johann De La Rosa, Naga City People’s Council (NCPC)

Other meetings

Nelson E. Pareño, Presidet, Phillipine Assossication of Assessing Officers (PAAO),

City Assessor, City of Iloilo

Cesar Luna, , University of the Philippines Open University

DFAT Staff

Erika Geronimo, Portfolio Manager, Development Corporation, Australian Embassy

John Alikpala, Portforlio Manager, Development Corporation, Australian Embassy

Joji Abot-Camelon, Program Officer, Development Corporation, Australian Embassy

LAMP II TA (LEI)

Floradema Eleazar, Planning and M&E

Brian S. Garcia, Innovation Support Fund

World Bank Staff

Keith Clifford Bell, TTL

Maria Theresa Quiñones, Co-TTL

Noel Sta. Ines, Senior ProcurementSpecialist