Preliminary estimates for 2023 show that the region of Zamboanga Peninsula had the highest poverty incidence among families in the Philippines at 24.2 percent. In comparison, the National Capital Region (NCR) had the lowest poverty incidence among families during this period. Overall, the total poverty incidence of families in the Philippines was 10.9 percent.

Philippines Per Capita Poverty Threshold: Cagayan Valley data was reported at 21,860.000 PHP in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 19,125.000 PHP for 2012. Philippines Per Capita Poverty Threshold: Cagayan Valley data is updated yearly, averaging 10,739.000 PHP from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 21,860.000 PHP in 2015 and a record low of 4,573.000 PHP in 1988. Philippines Per Capita Poverty Threshold: Cagayan Valley data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Abstract

This study is an impact evaluation of the KALAHI-CIDSS (KC) program. The impact evaluation's key research questions can be divided into the following four themes:

1. Socio-Economic Effects: Does KC increase household consumption? Does KC increase labor force participation?
2. Governance Effects: Does KC increase government leader responsiveness to community needs? Does KC reduce corruption and increase transparency?
3. Community Empowerment Effects: Does KC increase participation in local governance? Does KC increase collective action and contribution to local public goods?
4. Social Capital Effects: Does KC build groups and networks? In what ways are these networks applied? Does KC enhance trust?

In order to isolate KC's effects, a randomized control trial evaluation design was chosen. The impact evaluation sample consists of 198 municipalities (with 33 to 69 percent poverty incidence), spread over 26 provinces and 12 regions. The 198 municipalities were paired based on similar characteristics (99 pairs) and then randomly assigned into treatment and control groups through public lotteries. The sample size is large enough to be able to detect MCC's projected eight percent change in household income as well as other smaller effects. As part of the impact evaluation, baseline quantitative data were collected in the study area from April to July 2012. The quantitative data came from 5,940 household surveys in 198 barangays (one from each municipality) and 198 barangay surveys implemented in these same barangays

Geographic coverage

National coverage: The sample consists of 5,940 households in 198 barangays in 198 municipalities in 26 provinces in 12 regions. The sample is representative of the KALAHI-CIDSS target population across the nation.

Analysis unit

Individuals, households, community

Universe

The study population consists of barangays (villages) from the Philippines' poorest provinces. Survey respondent were barangay captains (village captains) and randomly selected households (30 randomly selected per barangay) from the sample of 198 barangays (villages).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The impact evaluation focuses on municipalities with between 33-69% poverty incidence. A total of 198 eligible municipalities were matched on poverty incidence, population, land area, and number of barangays. The paired municipalities were then randomly assigned into treatment and control groups through public lotteries. This resulted in the final sample of 198 municipalities (when determining the number of treatment and control municipalities, we used sample size of 30 households per municipality, ensuring an 8% (positive) change in income would be detectable at 95% significance and 80% power). The large number of municipalities included in the evaluation will provide a sufficient level of precision to estimate KC's impacts nationwide in municipalities with a poverty incidence between 33-69%. One barangay within each of the 198 municipalities participating in the evaluation was randomly chosen, with a weighted probability favoring barangays with the highest poverty rates. Within each municipality, IPA divided barangays into quintiles based on poverty and dropped the quintile with the lowest poverty incidence. For each municipality, the barangay to be surveyed for the sample was then randomly selected from the remaining barangays. Within each barangay, 30 households were randomly selected from among all households to comprise the household surveyed sample.

Sampling deviation

N/A

Research instrument

The baseline study included a barangay (village) questionnaire and a household questionnaire implemented in the following four different languages: Tagalog, Bisaya, Cebuano, llongo and llocano.

1. Household questionnaire: This questionnaire was composed of modules on education, labor income sources, household assets and amenities, expenditures, social networks, and other topics.

2. Barangay questionnaire: The barangay captains (village leaders were the principal respondents. The questionnaire collected data on the barangay's development projects, budget, demographics, the relationship between the existing barangay captain and its previous leadership, and other topics.

Cleaning operations

In the field, the field supervisor and data editor checked the questionnaires before the first data entry. The survey firm then conducted the second data entry in the main office and then checked the discrepancies between the first and the second data entry. The data cleaning process implemented by the survey firm included the following: 1. Naming and labelling the data 2. Checking the unique identifiers 3. Range checks and setting variable bounds 4. Check skip patterns and misisng data 5. Check logical consistency 6. Standardize string variable coding

After receiving the clean datasets from the survey firm, IPA conducted a second stage of data cleaning needed to construct variables for the analysis. This process involved carefully creating, summarizing and cross-checking key indicators.

Response rate

100 percent

Sampling error estimates

N/A

Philippines Per Capita Poverty Threshold: Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) data was reported at 21,770.000 PHP in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 19,483.000 PHP for 2012. Philippines Per Capita Poverty Threshold: Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) data is updated yearly, averaging 13,471.500 PHP from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 21,770.000 PHP in 2015 and a record low of 5,116.000 PHP in 1988. Philippines Per Capita Poverty Threshold: Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: CALABARZON data was reported at 6.700 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 8.300 % for 2012. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: CALABARZON data is updated yearly, averaging 8.800 % from Dec 1991 (Median) to 2015, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 19.100 % in 1991 and a record low of 6.700 % in 2015. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: CALABARZON data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Descriptive summary statistics for dengue cases, temperature, population, and dengue incidence across the 61 Provinces in the Philippines from 2010–2019.

Abstract

The 2003 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) had the following primary objectives:

1) to gather data on family income and family expenditure and related information affecting income and expenditure levels and patterns in the Philippines;

2) to determine the sources of income and income distribution, levels of living and spending patterns, and the degree of inequality among families;

3) to provide benchmark information to update weights for the estimation of consumer price index; and

4) to provide information for the estimation of the country's poverty threshold and incidence.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Household Consumption expenditure item Income by source

Universe

The 2003 FIES has as its target population, all households and members of households nationwide. A household is defined as an aggregate of persons, generally but not necessarily bound by ties of kinship, who live together under the same roof and eat together or share in common the household food. Household membership comprises the head of the household, relatives living with him such as his/her spouse, children, parent, brother/sister, son-in-law/daughter-in-law, grandson/granddaughter and other relatives. Household membership likewise includes boarders, domestic helpers and non-relatives. A person who lives alone is considered a separate household.

Institutional population is not within the scope of the survey.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2003 MS considers the country's 17 administrative regions as defined in Executive Orders (EO) 36 and 131 as the sampling domains. A domain is referred to as a subdivision of the country for which estimates with adequate level of precision are generated. It must be noted that while there is demand for data at the provincial level (and to some extent municipal and barangay levels), the provinces were not treated as sampling domains because there are more than 80 provinces which would entail a large resource requirement. Below are the 17 administrative regions of the country:

National Capital Region Cordillera Administrative Region Region I - Ilocos Region II - Cagayan Valley Region III - Central Luzon Region IVA - CALABARZON Region IVB - MIMAROPA Region V - Bicol Region VI - Western Visayas Region VII - Central Visayas Region VIII - Eastern Visayas Region IX - Zamboanga Peninsula Region X - Northern Mindanao Region XI - Davao Region XII - SOCCSKSARGEN Region XIII - Caraga Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao

As in most household surveys, the 2003 MS made use of an area sample design. For this purpose, the Enumeration Area Reference File (EARF) of the 2000 Census of Population and Housing (CPH) was utilized as sampling frame. The EARF contains the number of households by enumeration area (EA) in each barangay.

This frame was used to form the primary sampling units (PSUs). With consideration of the period for which the 2003 MS will be in use, the PSUs were formed/defined as a barangay or a combination of barangays with at least 500 households.

The 2003 MS considers the 17 regions of the country as the primary strata. Within each region, further stratification was performed using geographic groupings such as provinces, highly urbanized cities (HUCs), and independent component cities (ICCs). Within each of these substrata formed within regions, the PSUs were further stratified, to the extent possible, using the proportion of strong houses (PSTRONG), indicator of engagement in agriculture of the area (AGRI), and a measure of per capita income (PERCAPITA) as stratification factors.

The 2003 MS consists of a sample of 2,835 PSUs. The entire MS was divided into four sub-samples or independent replicates, such as a quarter sample contains one fourth of the total PSUs; a half sample contains one-half of the four sub-samples or equivalent to all PSUs in two replicates.

The final number of sample PSUs for each domain was determined by first classifying PSUs as either self-representing (SR) or non-self-representing (NSR). In addition, to facilitate the selection of sub-samples, the total number of NSR PSUs in each region was adjusted to make it a multiple of 4.

SR PSUs refers to a very large PSU in the region/domain with a selection probability of approximately 1 or higher and is outright included in the MS; it is properly treated as a stratum; also known as certainty PSU. NSR PSUs refers to a regular too small sized PSU in a region/domain; also known as non-certainty PSU. The 2003 MS consists of 330 certainty PSUs and 2,505 non-certainty PSUs.

To have some control over the sub-sample size, the PSUs were selected with probability proportional to some estimated measure of size. The size measure refers to the total number of households from the 2000 CPH. Because of the wide variation in PSU sizes, PSUs with selection probabilities greater than 1 were identified and were included in the sample as certainty selections.

At the second stage, enumeration areas (EAs) were selected within sampled PSUs, and at the third stage, housing units were selected within sampled EAs. Generally, all households in sampled housing units were enumerated, except for few cases when the number of households in a housing unit exceeds three. In which case, a sample of three households in a sampled housing unit was selected at random with equal probability.

An EA is defined as an area with discernable boundaries within barangays consisting of about 150 contiguous households. These EAs were identified during the 2000 CPH. A housing unit, on the other hand, is a structurally separate and independent place of abode which, by the way it has been constructed, converted, or arranged, is intended for habitation by a household.

The 2003 FIES involved the interview of a national sample of about 51,000 sample households deemed sufficient to gather data on family income and family expenditure and related information affecting income and expenditure levels and patterns in the Philippines at the national and regional level. The sample households covered in the survey were the same households interviewed in the July 2003 and January 2004 round of the LFS.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Cleaning operations

The 2003 FIES questionnaire contains about 800 data items and a summary for comparing income and expenditures. The questionnaires were subjected to a rigorous manual and machine edit checks for completeness, arithmetic accuracy, range validity and internal consistency.

The major steps in the machine processing are as follows: 1. Data Entry 2. Completeness Check 3. Matching of visit records 4. Consistency and Macro Edit (Big Edit) 5. Generation of the Public Use File 6. Tabulation

Steps 1 to 2 were done right after each visit. The remaining steps were carried out only after the second visit had been completed.

Steps 1 to 4 were done at the Regional Office while Steps 5 and 6 were completed in the Central Office.

After completing Steps 1 to 4, data files were transmitted to the Central Office where a summary file was generated. The summary file was used to produce the consistency tables as well as the preliminary and textual tables.

When the generated tables showed inconsistencies, selected data items were subjected to further scrutiny and validation. The cycle of generation of consistency tables and data validation were done until questionable data items were verified.

The FAME (FIES computer-Aided Consistency and Macro Editing), an interactive Windows-based application system was used in data processing. This system was used starting with the 2000 FIES round. The interactive module of FAME enabled the following activities to be done simultaneously. a) Matching of visit records b) Consistency and macro edit (big edit) c) Range check

The improved system minimized processing time as well as minimized, if not eliminated, the need for paper to generate the reject listing.

Note: For data entry, CSPro Version 2.6 was used.

Response rate

The response rate for this survey is 95.7%. The response rate is the ratio of the total responding households to the total number of eligible households. Eligible households include households who were completely interviewed, refused to be interviewed or were temporarily away or not at home or on vacation during the survey period.

Sampling error estimates

As in all surveys, two types of non-response were encountered in the 2003 FIES: interview non-response and item non-response. Interview non-response refers to a sample household that could not be interviewed. Since the survey requires that the sample households be interviewed in both visits, households that transferred to another dwelling unit, temporarily away, on vacation, not at home, household unit demolished, destroyed by fire/typhoon and refusal to be interviewed in the second visit contributed to the number of interview non-response cases.

Item non-response, or the failure to obtain responses to particular survey items, resulted from factors such as respondents being unaware of the answer to a particular question, unwilling to provide the requested information or ENs’ omission of questions during the interview. Deterministic imputation was done to address item nonresponse. This imputation is a process in which proper entry for a particular missing item was deduced from other items of the questionnaire where the non-response item was observed. Notes and remarks indicated in the questionnaire were likewise used as basis for imputation.

Data appraisal

Refer to the