Version as of March 2025 PHILIPPINES DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE AND DEVELOPMENT ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ PANAHON NG PAGKILOS: PH COMMUNITY RESILIENCE PROJECT (Pagkilos) [P506594] ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN (SEP) March 2025 Version 1 Version as of March 2025 Executive Summary Environmental and Social (E&S) Safeguards have been integral to the implementation of Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan - Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services (KALAHI-CIDSS) modalities, including the National Community-Driven Development Project (NCDDP). These safeguards ensure compliance with the E&S legal and regulatory framework of the Government of the Philippines and development partners. Following the closure of the NCDDP, the World Bank will support the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) in implementing the Panahon ng Pagkilos: Philippine Community Resilience Project (Pagkilos or the “Project”). The development objective of the Project is to strengthen community capacities for participatory resilience planning and deliver resilience investments in vulnerable areas. The Project aims to contribute to the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) goal to “achieve economic and social transformation for a prosperous, inclusive, and resilient society”. ​ ​ Pagkilos will cover 500 municipalities in 49 Provinces across regions, except for the National Capital Region (NCR) and the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM). Target municipalities were selected primarily based on poverty incidence, with additional considerations on exposure to environmental hazards, stunting rates, and the presence of indigenous peoples (IP). This Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) is developed in accordance with the World Bank’s Environmental and Social Framework (ESF), specifically Environmental and Social Standard 10 (ESS10), and complies with the stakeholder engagement regulations of the Government of the Philippines (GOP). The SEP aims to define a structured approach to stakeholder engagement, including public information disclosure and consultations throughout the entire project cycle. It outlines the ways in which DSWD will communicate with stakeholders and provides mechanisms for raising concerns, providing feedback, or lodging complaints related to the project. The project will also utilize DSWD-developed stakeholder engagement processes and tools such as community consultations, public forums, surveys and assessments and grievance redress systems. Stakeholder identification and analysis are integral to SEP preparation. This process includes identifying all potentially affected people, key project implementation partners at central, regional, and local levels, and other interested parties. A review on previous and ongoing consultations are conducted to understand stakeholders’ concerns, expectations and feedback regarding the Project. These insights inform plans for continuous engagement with all stakeholders, including Indigenous People (IPs) and other vulnerable groups. The SEP emphasizes inclusive engagement methods to ensure that vulnerable groups benefit from the Project. It guides the consultative process and promotes a two-way communication, starting from the project preparation stage. Key principles and engagement methods include:​ ●​ Respect for Stakeholder Rights and Traditions: Engagement will be culturally appropriate, respecting stakeholders traditions and legal rights, particularly for vulnerable groups like IPs, women, Persons with disabilities (PWDs) and youth; ●​ Meaningful and Inclusive Engagement: Stakeholders’ views will be treated with respect, ensuring transparency and responsiveness. Vulnerable groups will be included to assess differential needs; ​ 2 Version as of March 2025 ●​ Timely and Transparent Disclosure: Information will be accessible through various channels (newspapers, radio, social media) with clear disclosures on project benefits, impacts, and risks; ●​ Communication Methods: Multiple tools (e.g., meetings, workshops, brochures, website) will be used for effective and interactive communication.​ ●​ Engagement with Indigenous Peoples: Coordination with the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) and support from Indigenous Peoples organizations (IPOs) will be prioritized; and ●​ Regular Consultations: Engagements will occur at national, regional, and local levels with key stakeholders, including government agencies, academic institutions, civil society organizations, and vulnerable groups. ​ The SEP outlines a comprehensive approach to stakeholder engagement throughout the project preparation, implementation, and monitoring stages. It ensures the involvement of relevant parties in key decisions and processes, fostering transparent communication, effective collaboration, and improved outcomes related to resilience and disaster preparedness. All levels of project consultations will include and amplify the voices of project-affected persons, particularly the vulnerable groups. In addition to broader community consultations, separate dialogues will be conducted with IPs, women, and youth to encourage participation and mitigate potential intimidation from other sectors. Through SEP, Pagkilos will adopt differentiated approaches for IP communities, including (a) community and IP outreach activities; and (b) affirmative actions for IP communities such as adoption of tribal-decision making processes and specific allotment for IP subprojects. Efforts will be made to ensure participation and engagement of indigenous communities, addressing potential project-related risks. Coordination with the NCIP and partnerships with the IPOs or NGOs supporting IPs will be pursued to strengthen engagement. As part of its stakeholder engagement strategies, the Project will utilize the existing DSWD feedback and grievance redress system (FGRM) to capture grievances, queries, suggestions, and positive feedback. The FGRM will ensure that project-affected parties' concerns about the Project’s environmental and social performance are addressed in a timely manner. It will be publicly disclosed along with the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and widely disseminated to ensure awareness among all stakeholders, including vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. 3 Version as of March 2025 Table of Contents Executive Summary​ 2 Table of Contents​ 4 Abbreviations and Acronyms​ 5 1. Introduction/Project Description​ 6 2. Objective and Description of SEP​ 6 3. Stakeholder Identification and Analysis​ 7 3.1. Overview​ 7 3.2. Affected People​ 7 3.3. Other Key Stakeholders and Interested Parties​ 8 3.4. Disadvantaged/Vulnerable Individuals or Groups​ 10 4. Stakeholder Engagement Program​ 12 4.1. Summary of Stakeholder Engagement during the Project Preparation​ 12 4.2. Proposed SE for the Project, Strategy and Methods for Effective SE​ 30 4.3. Proposed Strategy to Incorporate the Views of Indigenous People and other Vulnerable Groups​ 39 5. Grievance Redress Mechanism​ 41 5.1. Overview​ 41 5.2. Grievance Handling Process​ 41 Step 1: Intake​ 41 Step 2: Verification and Action​ 44 Step 3: Feedback​ 47 Step 4: Follow-Up​ 47 5.3. Monitoring and Reporting of GRM​ 48 6. Monitoring and Reporting of SEP​ 49 6.1. How will SEP be monitored?​ 49 6.2. Reporting​ 49 7. Resources and Responsibilities for Implementing Stakeholder Engagement​ 50 7.1. Implementation Arrangements​ 50 7.2. Budget and Resources​ 50 Annexes​ 51 Annex 1: Template to Capture Stakeholder Engagement​ 52 Annex 2: Grievance Redress System Municipal/ Barangay Installation Checklist​ 53 Annex 3: Grievance Intake Form​ 54 Annex 4. Sample Table: Monitoring and Reporting on the SEP​ 56 Annex 5: Overview of the Indigenous Peoples (IP) Facilitation Guide for FPIC​ 58 4 Version as of March 2025 Abbreviations and Acronyms ACT Area Coordinating Team CDD Community-Driven Development CERC Contingent Emergency and Response Component CSPMC Community Sub-Project Management Committee CST Community Safeguards Team ESS Environmental and Social Standards ESCOP Environmental and Social Codes of Practice ESSC Environmental and Social Screening Checklist ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan FPIC Free, Prior, and Informed Consent DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development GPH Government of the Philippines GTWA Geo-Tagging Web Application IP Indigenous Peoples IPRA Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act KALAHI-CIDSS Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan – Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services LARRP Land Acquisition, Resettlement, and Rehabilitation Plan LGU Local Government Unit LMP Labor Management Procedure MCT Municipal Coordinating Team MOV Means of Verification NAP National Adaptation Plan NCIP National Commission on Indigenous Peoples NIPAS National Integrated Protected Areas System NPMO National Project Management Office MIT Monitoring and Inventory Team OMG Operations and Maintenance Group PDP Philippine Development Plan PEISS Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System PIMS Project Information Management System PIT Project Implementation Team Pagkilos / PH Community Resilience Project Pagkilos PPAs Program, Projects, and Activities PPT Project Preparation Team PSA Philippine Statistics Authority PT Procurement Team RPMO Regional Project Management Office SEP Stakeholders Engagement Plan SPP Social Protection Plan WB World Bank 5 Version as of March 2025 1. Introduction/Project Description The World Bank will support the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) in implementing the Panahon ng Pagkilos: Philippine Community Resilience Project (Pagkilos). The development objective of Pagkilos is to strengthen community capacities for participatory resilience planning and deliver resilience investments in vulnerable areas. The Project will contribute to the PDP goal to “achieve economic and social transformation for a prosperous, inclusive, and resilient society”. The Project is also congruent with the SPP’s strategy to implement and operationalize the Adaptive and Shock Responsive Roadmap (Chapter 3.2 of PDP 2023-2028). The project will support several activities under four (4) components, namely: ●​ Component 1: Community Resilience ●​ Component 2: Institutional Support for Local Resilience ●​ Component 3: Project Monitoring, Evaluation and Management, and, ●​ Component 4: Contingent Emergency Response Component. The project activities will take place in 500 targeted municipalities across 49 Provinces in 16 Regions nationwide (excluding the National Capital Region and BARMM). Generally, the municipalities are selected based on the following criteria: (i) Poverty incidence; (ii) Exposure to Environmental/Natural Hazards; (iii) Stunting Rates Among Children; and, (iv) Indigenous Peoples (IP) Population Fraction. This SEP has been developed in compliance with World Bank’s Environmental and Social Framework (ESF), specified in the Environmental and Social Standard 10 (ESS10) and the regulations of the Government of the Philippines (GOP) on stakeholder engagements. The project shall also utilize the stakeholder engagement processes and tools developed by the DSWD such as: community consultations, public forums, surveys and assessments and grievance redress systems. 2. Objective and Description of SEP The overall objective of this SEP is to define a program for stakeholder engagement, including public information disclosure and consultation throughout the entire project cycle. The SEP outlines the ways in which the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) will communicate with stakeholders and includes a mechanism by which people can raise concerns, provide feedback, or make complaints about the project and any activities related to the project. The SEP specifically emphasizes methods to engage groups considered most vulnerable and that are at risk of being left out of project benefits. The SEP being a consultative process shall adopt a two-way communication process and feedbacking such that it will: a.​ Begin early during the project preparation phase to allow affected parties to input in the project’s design and strategy including identification of risks mitigation and management; b.​ Provide platforms for stakeholders to encourage continuous engagement and feedbacking during the Project’s implementation timeframe; c.​ Encourages consultations that are informed through prior disclosure and dissemination of relevant information (including documentation of the consultation proceedings) in an easily accessible and culturally appropriate format (i.e. language and communication dissemination), transparent and in a time frame that enables meaningful consultations of all stakeholders; and 6 Version as of March 2025 d.​ A robust Grievance Redress Mechanism that is transparent and accessible, well-documented and managed, provides timely resolution of issues raised and efficient feedback mechanism. 3. Stakeholder Identification and Analysis 3.1. Overview For the Panahon ng Pagkilos: PH Community Resilience Project, the following key stakeholders have been identified and analyzed. Summary of the identified key stakeholders include affected parties (as defined in section 3.2), other interested parties (as defined in section 3.3) and disadvantaged/vulnerable individuals or groups (as defined in section 3.4). 3.2. Affected People Affected parties include local communities, community members, and other parties that may be subject to direct impact from the Project. Specifically, the following individuals and groups fall within this category: Table 1. Identified Affected People and Context in Relation to the Project No. Identified Description of Stakeholder Context of Stakeholder Stakeholder Profile Relation to the Project (Key (Affected Party) Issues and Concern) 1 Land acquisition Individuals or families of owners Directly affected land to be and resettlement of the land to be utilized for the acquired or affected by the (LAR)-affected project (e.g. site of the project may reduce their people sub-project, right of way, etc.) productivity and income. 2 Indigenous Individuals or families belonging Directly affected, the Project Peoples to indigenous peoples groups may require the relocation of through self-ascription and indigenous communities, which ascription by others. can disrupt their social structures, cultural practices, and livelihoods. 3 Directly affected People and households living in Directly affected, the project local areas identified to be high risk needs to ensure that the communities, areas due to their exposure to intended beneficiaries are including project slow and fast onset natural correctly identified and that the beneficiaries disasters (such as typhoons, project benefits align with the needs and expectations of the floods, and earthquakes) and target communities. climate change impact. 4 Barangay LGU The BLGU is the “basic political Directly affected by land (BLGU) unit” acting as the main body acquisition, it is expected that responsible for planning and most of the project investment implementing government which requiring land will be policies, plans, programs, obtained from donation from the Barangay LGU’s land projects, and activities within the community.1 1 THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES BOOK III 7 Version as of March 2025 No. Identified Description of Stakeholder Context of Stakeholder Stakeholder Profile Relation to the Project (Key (Affected Party) Issues and Concern) 5 Disadvantaged, Include persons with disabilities Directly affected, vulnerable vulnerable and (PWD), senior citizens, women, groups as those who may be marginalized children, and other marginalized more likely to be adversely Groups communities – as further affected by project impacts described in Section 3.4 and/or more limited than others in their ability to take advantage of a project's benefits. These groups may also be more likely to be excluded from or unable to participate fully in the mainstream consultation process and may require specific measures and assistance to do so. 3.3. Other Key Stakeholders and Interested Parties The projects’ stakeholders also include parties other than the directly affected communities, including as follows: Table 2. Identified Interested Party and Context in Relation to the Project No. Identified Description of Context of Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Profile Relation to the Project (Key (Affected Party) Issues and Concern) 1 Local Government Provincial LGUs provide Interested party. The Project Unit (LGU), oversight and support to needs to be consistent with local including: municipal LGUs to ensure development plans, such as 1.1 Provincial that the Pagkilos Project is Comprehensive Land Use Plans LGU implemented effectively (CLUPs), Local Climate Change across different municipalities Action Plan (LCCAP)and Local within the province. Development Plans (LDPs). 1.2 Municipality The municipal local Interested party. Municipal LGU government is responsible for LGUs are directly responsible executing the Pagkilos for the implementation of the Project at the local level. This Pagkilos Project at the includes implementing community level. Municipal program activities, managing LGUs coordinate with resources, and ensuring that barangays to implement the project objectives are met project effectively, providing guidance and support where needed. 2 Academic These institutions can Interested party. These Institutions and contribute expertise, data institutions can contribute Researchers analysis, and research to expertise, data analysis, and inform locally led climate research to inform locally led action strategies. climate action strategies. 8 Version as of March 2025 No. Identified Description of Context of Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Profile Relation to the Project (Key (Affected Party) Issues and Concern) 3 Regional Regional agencies play a Interested party. They act as a Government critical role in supporting local bridge between national Agencies government units (LGUs) and programs and local facilitating the implementation, ensuring that implementation of various national initiatives are effectively programs and policies, translated into local actions. including those related to They provide guidance, climate change, technical assistance and development, and social support to LGUs to ensure services. consistency of the project with broader regional and national goals. 4 National Agencies Department of Interior and Interested party. These with mandates Local Government (DILG), agencies provide inputs in related to Department of Environment identifying target areas & Adaptation and Natural Resources beneficiaries of the project and Programs of the (DENR), Department of provide enabling environments Government Agriculture (DA), National for locally led climate action by Commission on Indigenous providing support, policies, and Peoples (NCIP), Department technical assistance, while NCIP of Human Settlements and is a key agency with IP policy Urban Development making and oversight. (DHSUD), Climate Change Commission (CCC) 5 World Bank and The World Bank will provide Interested party. The World other funding financial support to the Bank provides funding, technical institutions Pagkilos Project through a assistance, and expertise to loan. The Bank also offers enhance DSWD's capacity in technical assistance in addressing social welfare and designing and implementing disaster management the Pagkilos Project. This challenges. includes providing expertise in project management, planning, and execution. 6 Local and Local and regional media are Interested parties. Local and Regional Media crucial in spreading regional media are vital for information about the disseminating information about Pagkilos Project to the public. issues, initiatives, and events They help raise awareness related to Pagkilos. They can about the project’s goals, also help raise awareness about activities, and benefits. topics such as climate change, social justice, health, and community development. 7 Broader public Public involvement is Interested party. The public can essential for the project’s provide valuable feedback on effectiveness, sustainability, project implementation and and overall impact outcomes. This includes attending public meetings, surveys, and consultations to express their views and suggest improvements on Pagkilos. 9 Version as of March 2025 3.4. Disadvantaged/Vulnerable Individuals or Groups2 Within the Project, the vulnerable or disadvantaged groups may include the following. Table 3. Identified Disadvantaged and Vulnerable Group No. Identified Characteristic and Context of Stakeholder Stakeholder Description Relation to the Project (Key (Affected Party) Issues and Concern) 1 Indigenous IPs in the Philippines have Language barrier may result in Peoples unique cultures and ways of difficulty in relaying the important life different from the information regarding the mainstream society. project; social structures as well as cultural norms and traditions in holding community consultations may also hinder meaningful participation ex: gender dynamics, and deference to seniority 2 Women and girls Some rural communities are Challenges in the meaningful still very patriarchal in the participation and representation decision-making structures, of women and girls in negatively impacting PAGKILOS representation in women’s agency and level of PAGKILOS decision-making participation in community bodies and activities. development activities. Ensuring that women and girls benefit from the PAGKILOS project and activities and services provided are gender sensitive. 3 Persons with Consultative Activities, such There may be a lack of adaptive disabilities (PWD) as public meetings, may not technologies or equipment that be accessible to people with allow PWDs to engage in mobility impairments. climate-related activities Inaccessible transportation effectively. and facilities can prevent Ensuring that meeting venues, PWDs from participating. transportation, and public spaces are accessible to all individuals, including those with disabilities to meaningfully participate in the meaningful representation of PWDs. 4 Senior Citizens Physical spaces and Reduced mobility or reliance on infrastructure might not be assistive devices and health designed with the needs of conditions can make it difficult 2 It is particularly important to understand whether project impacts may disproportionately fall on disadvantaged or vulnerable individuals or groups, who often do not have a voice to express their concerns or understand the impacts of a project and to ensure that awareness raising and stakeholder engagement with disadvantaged or vulnerable individuals or groups are adapted to take into account such groups or individuals particular sensitivities, concerns and cultural sensitivities and to ensure a full understanding of project activities and benefits. The vulnerability may stem from a person's origin, gender, age, health condition, economic deficiency and financial insecurity, disadvantaged status in the community (e.g., minorities or fringe groups), dependence on other individuals or natural resources, etc. Engagement with the vulnerable groups and individuals often requires the application of specific measures and assistance aimed at the facilitation of their participation in the project-related decision making so that their awareness of and input to the overall process are commensurate to those of the other stakeholders. 10 Version as of March 2025 senior citizens in mind, for seniors to take part in making it challenging for dialogues and access them to participate in information. activities or access information. Ensuring that facilities, transportation, and public spaces are designed to be accessible to senior citizens, including those with mobility issues so they can take part in the PAGKILOS consultations. 5 Non-titled land Occupants of non-titled land Non-titled landholders face holders who may potentially be several risks such as affected by land acquisition displacement, lack of for the project. compensation, insecurity of tenure, loss of livelihood, and social disruption. These issues make them vulnerable, especially without formal ownership or proper safeguards in place. 11 Version as of March 2025 4. Stakeholder Engagement Program 4.1. Summary of Stakeholder Engagement during the Project Preparation During project preparation, several stakeholder engagements and public consultation meetings were conducted. The following table presents a further detailed summary of the previous engagement and consultations that have been undertaken to date, including a series of ESMF public consultations which were conducted in hybrid arrangement per island cluster in February 2025. Table 4. Summary of SE during Project Preparation No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants 1 LCE Forum held 8 November 80 participants, all Participants emphasized the need for targeting Geographically Isolated for Local Chief 2023 at Clark, of which are Local and Disadvantaged Areas (GIDA), coastal regions, and highlands in terms Executives Pampanga Chief Executives of physical areas to enhance climate resilience, and then extends to socially vulnerable groups, including fisherfolk, farmers, and Indigenous Peoples (IPs). Participants highlighted existing initiatives that align with this program, notably the implementation of projects under the Local Climate Change Action Plan (LCCAP) and other strategic plans of the municipalities Participants identified the possible sub-projects that they think are responsive to climate change Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern are the initial institutional arrangements and targeting considerations in the targeting of municipalities 2 RPMO 16 November 56 participants It was discussed that there is a need to continue the CDD in addressing Consultation 2023, Great from Regional climate change, resiliency is integrated in the CDD process. Meeting during Eastern Hotel, Project The proposed new design is appropriate for DSWD’s mandate. There are PREW Quezon City Management limitations to developing large infrastructure subprojects since it’s under Office (DRPM, DPWH’s mandate, but KC focuses on the most basic services and CDO, TS, RIO, community infrastructure projects. and FA) Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern relate to the alignment of the proposed project to the mandates of the DSWD. 3 CDD Congress 27 November 120 participants Community Volunteers expressed that resources for disaster and 20th 2023, Sequioa including preparedness and response are quite limited Anniversary community 12 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants Celebration for Hotel, Pasay volunteers and They believe that they need to have access to training to implement RPMO Staff and City RPMO Staff subprojects that are responsive to climate change Community Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern are: capacity building Volunteers needs for the Pagkilos project and the possible sub projects that are needed in their respective areas to help address the impacts of climate 4 Consultation 10 November, 30 participants Participants discussed the possible Indicators for most vulnerable to Meetings 2023, Joy including natural hazards and climate change impact. facilitated with Nostalg Hotel, Technical Staff It was identified that the CCC cannot mandate the LGUs to include all other national Pasig City from Technical barangays in the approval of the LCCAPs. government Staff from DENR, agencies CCC, DPWH, During the session, the possible roles of the national agencies on social DOST PAG-ASA, preparation and mobilization, strengthening local structures, supporting DOST climate-smart local planning and subproject development and Adaptive/ PHIVOLCS, DOF shock resistant systems and technologies were deliberated. and NEDA Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern relate to considerations and criteria for identifying the target areas and concerns about LCCAP formulation at the barangay level to ensure that the communities are consulted and involved in local planning 5 Consultation 22 December 13 participants The existing climate change program of the DSWD Disaster Response Meeting with 2023, DSWD from various Management (DRMG) shall be considered along with the proposal DSWD Offices/ Central Office, DSWD offices: development. Potential duplication of components shall be checked. Bureaus/ Quezon City SLP NPMO, It was discussed that the proposal should consult with NCIP, since if the Units Social Technology project is intended to be implemented up to the barangay or community Bureau (STB), level, practicing the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) need to be Project ensured Management Bureau (PMB), Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern are: existing climate 4Ps NPMO change program of the DSWD Disaster Response Management (DRMG) and how it should be considered along with the proposal development and that potential duplication of components should be checked. 6 Consultation 21 March 9 participants CCC identified that 3 prioritization criteria: (1) Poverty Incidence, (2) Meeting with the 2024, online from the DSWD Presence of multiple hazards, (3) presence of key biodiversity areas Climate Change KALAHI CIDSS 13 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants Commission and the Climate It was cited that the PAGKILOS can assist in the localization and (CCC) Change implementation of the national adaptation plan Commission Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern are: LCCAP formulation, and the mechanisms to access the People Survival Fund 7 Consultation 3 April 2024, 10 participants It was agreed that manuals of LGA related to the CC shall be shared to the Meeting with the LGA Office, from the Local KALAHI-CIDSS. Local Government Ortigas Government It was discussed that LGA has a program called Operation L!sto Program: Academy (LGA) Academy Enhancement of LG’s Capacity on DRRM-CCAM which is a whole-of-government approach to strengthening local government units' capabilities and preparedness. The primary goal of this program was to assess current local governments’ capacities and align them with the L!STO Checklist Standards. Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern are: how the LCCAP relates to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) and the Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP). 8 RPMO 24 April 2024, 100 RPMO Staff It was discussed that for the selection of target areas municipalities with Consultation Cebu City participants Local Climate Change Action Plans (LCCAPs) should be selected because Meeting during these plans consider or reflect everything necessary to addressing climate the change. KALAHI-CIDSS The inclusion of Poverty incidence should be considered, mainly because National Summit the poor are vulnerable to climate change risks and impacts. Having the MLGUs as entry points would be great because it will provide the overall context and climate change issues that are crossing the boundaries of barangays. Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern are: The criteria for the selection of target municipalities for the implementation of Pagkilos were selected, and the advantages and disadvantages of covering urban areas 9 Consultation 23 May 2024, 12 participants The KC NPMO shall include the eighteen (18) provinces with ‘high Meeting with DENR Office, from the Climate exposure’ to climate change risks as reported in the National Adaptation DENR Quezon City Plan (NAP) Undersecretary 14 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants for Finance, Change Service The DSWD KALAHI-CIDSS to coordinate with DENR for the details as Information of the DENR inputs to the Pagkilos Proposal. Systems, and Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern are: targets, project Climate Change, components, institutional arrangements, mechanisms for Pagkilos Usec. Analiza R. implementation, and needed support from the DENR Teh 10 Consultation 30 May 2024, 15 participants The CCC currently has no review mechanism to check the quality of the Meeting with online from the Climate LCCAP at the LGU level. Climate Change Change The review was merely based on the “presence or absence of” the LCCAP Commission Commission per LGU. The CCC has an ongoing project with the DILG and the Local Government Academy (LGA) on the development of a review system that will include checking the quality and monitoring the implementation of the LCCAP. Some of the stakeholder’s feedback and concern are: possible collaboration between the DSWD, CCC, and WB. Some of the gaps that the CCC and the DSWD may address through the Pagkilos Project were also identified. 11 2024 National August 12-16, 143 participants Reviewed and discussed the Negative List during the Engineering Technical 2024, Hotel from the different Breakout session. Few discussions on the use of solar panels, the Workshop for Lucky sectors at the minimum age for children’s participation in paid labor, DENR/PAMB Policy Chinatown, NPMO and requests and certifications, and prohibited areas as outlined in the IPRA. Enhancement Binondo RPMO Manila 12 Preparation August 8-9 Community Discussed the perceptions of climate change impacts among the CVs. Mission for and 12-13, Volunteers They shared that they have been experiencing worsening floods, loss of Panahon ng Leyte livelihood, class disruptions, power outages, damage to infrastructure, and Pagkilos Province, food scarcity. The CVs recommended flood control subprojects and Municipality of expressed their willingness to collaborate with other barangays in the Tolosa project’s implementation. (Region VIII) and Albay Province, 15 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants Municipality of Poulangi (Region V) 13 Meeting with the September 17, NEDA ANRES It was discussed during the meeting that climate finance concerns whether Department of 2024 AND Social the Philippines should not loan for climate-related activities which will Finance (DOF) Development potentially undermine its position to the International Community on and the National DOF Office, Team, accessing Loss and Damage Funds. It was then discussed the funding Economic Roxas DOF IFG Team arrangement with the World Bank to avoid excessive commission fees Development Boulevard with Usec charged against the Philippines, which was agreed to consider tranching Authority (NEDA) Balbosa and Asec the total amount loan through batching of target municipalities during the Dona implementation. 14 Meeting with September 15, NCIP Office on During the meeting, bottlenecks in securing FPIC during the NCIP and DSWD 2024 (virtual) Socio-Economic implementation of KALAHI CIDSS NCDDP-AF were discussed. To address re: Pagkilos Services and these issues, it was recommended that the next project facilitate validation Project Special Concerns either per ancestral domain or per cluster. Furthermore, the issuance of (OSESSC), World CP/CNO should remain under the jurisdiction of the NCIP regional offices. Bank project team, KALAHI CIDSS NPMO 15 Safeguards November Community The CVs in both municipalities raised during the FGDs that the existing Mission 26-29, 2024, Volunteers from E&S tools appear too technical and should be simplified and translated Caraga Municipality of into the local vernacular for better understanding. The facilitation guide is Jabonga and recommended to be translated as well. Tubay, Agusan del Norte 16 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants 16 PH Community December 10, Rice Watch The workshop aimed to gather tools, experiences, and insights from NGAs Resilience 2024, 9:00 Action Network, and CSOs in their work related to community-based resilience planning. A Project: Panahon AM-4:00 PM Climate Conflict participant from DHSUD presented the Climate and Disaster Risk ng Pagkilos KALAHI Action, DHSUD, Assessment (CDRA), PDPD shared the Social Protection (SP) Preparatory Conference DSWD-PDPB, Vulnerability and Adaptation Manual (VAM), CCA introduced their Risk and Meeting for Room World Bank, Resource Use Management Planning (RUMP), and RWAN presented the Developing the KALAHI CIDSS results of the pilot implementation of Participatory Climate Training and Community-based NPMO Planning. Additionally, some challenges and strategies for enhancing Resilience community involvement were shared by the agencies and CSOs present, Planning which can provide valuable insights for the Pagkilos project. 17 PCRP December 16, 50 participants An overview of the ESMF for the Pagkilos project was presented to the Consultation with 2024 (virtual) (27 males and 23 KALAHI CIDSS RPMOs, including discussions on the Stakeholder the RPMOs females) Engagement Plan (SEP), Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM), and Labor Management Procedure (LMP). Some of the queries, comments, recommendations, and corresponding NPMO responses during the meeting were as follows: 1.​ Will the process of securing the CP be the same for Pagkilos? -For Pagkilos, we intend to request a blanket certification. If this does not materialize, we will adhere to the existing policy. 2.​ Clarification on whether we will hire one regional Environmental Focal, one Social Focal, and one Grievance Officer for the Pagkilos project. -For Pagkilos, we will hire one regional Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer. The Social Safeguards Officer will also handle roles related to the GRM. 3.​ Query on the competency requirements for the Environmental and Social Safeguards Focals and a request for a clear regional organizational structure reflecting the E&S staff. -The existing qualification standards for the E&S focal positions are already available and will be shared with the RPMO for their feedback. 4.​ Request for a copy of the presentation materials to be shared with the FOs. -A copy of the presentation materials will be provided to the FOs. 17 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants 18 PCRP February 18, 170 participants The consultations were conducted in a hybrid arrangement where the Stakeholders’ 2025 from all regions in National Program Management Office presented online the Pagkilos Consultation Luzon and project design and the draft environmental and social safeguards (Luzon Cluster) Mindanao documents including the ESMF, SEP, LMP, and LARPF. At the municipal comprising of and community levels, participants gathered in one venue, with M/BLGU Officials RPMO/ACT staff facilitating in-person discussions and ensuring active and staff, IP participation from LGU representatives and community members. Mandatory Representatives Summary of questions and responses provided during the stakeholders (IPMR), consultation are categorized as follows: Community Volunteers, 1.​ Environmental Compliance and Permits Community Question: Is there any update on the pending application for the members/ general Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) for subprojects public, funded through the current KALAHI modalities (PAMANA and Non-Government KKB)? al Organizations Response: Despite continuous follow-ups with the DENR, no (NGOs), RPMO response has been received. Additional layers of review for staff, and ACT subprojects within Protected Areas are being conducted by DENR. staff NPMO intends to send a Secretary-level communication to expedite the issuance. Question: Can we use the ESMP in lieu of the EIA? Response: No, DENR-prescribed formats must still be followed. A site-specific ESMP is mandatory for all subprojects not covered by the PEISS. Question: If a Water Permit is required as part of the environmental safeguards, is it included in the Pagkilos policy for the request for fund release (RFR)? Response: Yes, the requirement for water permits is already included in the draft ESMF, and other project manuals will ensure this is covered. 2.​ Funding and Contributions 18 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants Question: Can Land Acquisition be included as part of the required Local Counterpart Contribution (LCC)? Response: Yes, land acquisition can be considered part of the LCC. Question: How much or what percentage is the LGU's counterpart, and which component of the program will it be used for? Response: The LGU's counterpart is set at 20% of the total project cost, which can be in cash or in-kind for Components 1 and 2 of the program. Question: Can donated lands be considered as part of the Local Counterpart Contribution (LCC)? Response: The NPMO will evaluate the feasibility of including donated land as part of the LCC based on relevant guidelines and regulations. 3.​ Project Implementation Process Question: In terms of the implementation process, what is the difference between LGU-funded and World Bank-funded subprojects? Response: LGU-funded subprojects comply with Philippine regulations, while WB-funded subprojects comply with both Philippine laws and the World Bank’s Environmental and Social Standards (ESS). Question: What can the NPMO do to help expedite the clearances, particularly for the Certificate of Non-Coverage (CNC), water permits, and other applicable clearances? Response: NPMO is working with relevant agencies to develop guidelines for community-based subprojects to address delays in clearance processes. Question: Who is responsible in case of accidents involving community volunteers? 19 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants Response: The NPMO is researching the availability of insurance for community volunteers as part of the development of the Operations Manual. 4.​ Project Targets and Timeline Question: As one of the participants in the consultation, can we be assured that our municipality will be included in the target areas for the Panahon ng Pagkilos? Response: Yes, all municipalities participating in the consultation are potential targets for the Pagkilos Project, pending approval by NEDA. Question: When is the Pagkilos project expected to start? Response: The project is under review for approval and is projected to start by the third or fourth quarter of 2025. Question: How early can we be notified regarding the final targets, considering that funds have already been allocated for the Panahon ng Pagkilos project? Response: The final targets can be confirmed once approval is obtained, with the social process expected to begin by the fourth quarter of 2025. 5.​ Training and Capacity Building Question: Will there be training/workshops for the community on identifying resilient subprojects? Response: Yes, training will be provided to equip the community with knowledge and tools for identifying and developing resilient subprojects. 6.​ Subproject Eligibility and Costing Question: During the eligibility screening of subprojects, it was observed that the cost of mitigating measures is higher than the total subproject cost. Would this be included in the negative list? 20 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants Response: The cost of mitigating measures should be prioritized, even if it exceeds the budget, as ensuring community safety and well-being is essential. Question: What subprojects or activities would be considered as “resilient investments”? Response: The Pagkilos Project will use an open menu system, focusing on activities that build community resilience against environmental, economic, and social shocks. 7.​ Stakeholder Engagement and Consultation Question: Clarification on Stakeholders Engagement Plan: Should consultation start alongside the needs identification process, rather than just one consultation before implementation? Response: The participatory situational analysis and needs assessment are considered a form of consultation. The plan indicates that consultations should occur before subproject implementation. 8.​ General Recommendations and Comments Comment: The FO IVA Technical Staff is open to discussing recommendations on how donated land can be valued as part of the LCC. Response: The NPMO will evaluate the feasibility of including donated land in the LCC based on relevant guidelines. 19 PCRP February 20, 170 participants 1.​ Land Due Diligence and LCC Stakeholders’ 2025 from all regions in Q: Can Tax Declarations be used instead of land titles in Consultation Luzon and Sarangani? (Mindanao Mindanao A: Yes, tax declarations can be used with a Deed of Donation if Cluster) comprising of land titles are unavailable. M/BLGU Officials and staff, IP Q: Can donated land be part of the Local Counterpart Contribution Mandatory (LCC)? Representatives 21 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants (IPMR), A: Yes, donated land can be considered as part of the 20% LCC Community contribution. Volunteers, Community Q: Can the MLGU or BLGU avail of the 99-year land lease members/ general provisions under the CREATE Act for its subproject? public, A: No, the 99-year land lease provisions are for corporate entities Non-Government and foreign investments, not local governments. al Organizations (NGOs), RPMO Q: Can the project provide technical assistance in preparing the staff, and ACT Land Acquisition and Resettlement Action Plan (LARAP)? staff A: Yes, technical assistance will be provided through the Area Coordinating Teams (ACT). 2.​ Project Implementation and Coordination Q: Will municipalities and barangays be prioritized for Pagkilos funding? A: Yes, municipalities and barangays will be prioritized based on the municipal income class, with 4th to 6th class municipalities receiving larger grants. Q: Will women and Indigenous Peoples (IPs) be prioritized for workforce participation? A: The program will continue to ensure inclusion of women and IPs, but it will depend on the labor needs of the subprojects. However, efforts will be made to ensure opportunities for these groups. Q: Can municipalities propose a Research Center as a subproject? A: Research centers can be proposed depending on the components and alignment with the project’s goal of building community resilience. Q: How will grants be allocated to the barangays and municipalities? 22 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants A: Grants will be allocated to municipalities based on income class. The funds will be transferred at the barangay/community level, and prioritization will be based on the needs of the municipalities. 3.​ Environmental and Social Safeguards Q: Can donated land be considered part of the LCC? A: Yes, donated land can contribute to the 20% LCC. Q: Can the process for securing environmental permits be expedited, especially in protected areas? A: The NPMO is actively working with the DENR to streamline the process and expedite the issuance of environmental permits for subprojects, especially in protected areas. Q: Can the project waive certain permits or fees, such as the Special Land Use Permit fee (Php 100,000)? A: The NPMO intends to send a communication to the DENR to address concerns related to permit fees, particularly in cases like this one. Q: Is it required to secure a Certificate of Non-Overlap (CNO) in non-IP areas? A: CNO is only required in ancestral domains. For non-IP areas, the requirement does not apply. 4.​ Gender and Social Inclusion Q: Is it possible to include gender-specific training programs, such as masonry and carpentry for women? A: The program will consider providing training for women based on the community’s needs. The inclusion of gender-focused training programs will be evaluated. Q: Will there be training for community volunteers and staff/officials? 23 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants A: Yes, training will be provided to ensure community members are equipped to identify and develop resilient subprojects effectively. Q: Is there a designated desk for handling gender-based violence (GBV) or sexual exploitation, abuse, and harassment (SEAH)? A: The LGU is responsible for handling SEAH cases, with the RPMO involved only in cases between employees. The LGU should have a designated women’s desk for this purpose. 5.​ Local Counterpart Contribution (LCC) Q: Is there a required Local Counterpart Contribution (LCC) from the LGU? A: Yes, the LCC is set at 20%. This applies whether the project is at the barangay or municipal level. Q: Can the minimum LCC requirement be waived due to high poverty rates in certain municipalities? A: No, the LCC requirement cannot be waived. Q: What does the LCC cover? A: The LCC can cover administrative costs and other related expenses, not just the subprojects. 6.​ Subproject Eligibility and Community Needs Q: What subprojects can be proposed under the Pagkilos project? A: Subprojects must align with the goal of enhancing community resilience. The program follows an open menu system, offering flexibility in subproject selection. Q: Are nutrition-sensitive subprojects, such as child development centers, eligible for funding? A: While nutrition-related subprojects are not mandatory, they are eligible as long as they align with the project’s goal of building community resilience. 24 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants Q: Can disaster response subprojects, especially in coastal areas, be proposed? A: Yes, subprojects related to disaster response will be considered if they align with the objective of building resilience. 7.​ Project Scheduling and Start Date Q: What is the tentative start date for the Pagkilos Project? A: The project is currently awaiting approval and is expected to begin by the third or fourth quarter of this year. Q: Can the project help speed up the issuance of environmental clearances, especially for Protected Areas? A: The NPMO plans to send communications to the DENR to expedite the clearance process, especially in protected areas. 8.​ Special Use Permits and Protected Areas Q: Can a Special Use Agreement (SAPA) be applied during pre-implementation for subprojects in protected areas? A: Yes, environmental permits, including SAPA, will be secured for subprojects in protected areas, with coordination required from the MENRO office and other relevant agencies. 20 PCRP February 26, 93 participants The consultations were conducted in a hybrid arrangement where the Stakeholder’s 2025 from all regions in National Program Management Office presented online the Pagkilos Consultation Visayas project design and the draft environmental and social safeguards (Visayas Cluster) comprising of documents including the ESMF, SEP, LMP, and LARPF. At the municipal M/BLGU Officials and community levels, participants gathered in one venue, with and staff, IP RPMO/ACT staff facilitating in-person discussions and ensuring active Mandatory participation from LGU representatives and community members. Representatives (IPMR), Summary of questions and responses provided during the stakeholders Community consultation are categorized as follows: Volunteers, Community 1.​ Project Eligibility members/ general 25 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants public, Q: Is it possible to propose sub-projects for communities within Non-Government GIDAs, ADs, and PAs, specifically for Madalag? al Organizations R: Yes, sub-projects can be proposed in ADs and PAs, provided (NGOs), RPMO that consent from IPs is obtained in ADs, and necessary staff, and ACT environmental permits are secured for PAs. staff Q: Can community-based conservation projects, reforestation, and sustainable tourism initiatives be proposed? R: Yes, these sub-projects are allowed if they align with the development objectives and are not in the negative or exclusion lists. Q: Can the establishment of critical habitats or municipal biodiversity conservation areas be proposed? R: Yes, as long as the location is outside PA's Strict Protection Zone, and the project aligns with development objectives, clearance from the PAMB is necessary. Q: How will the exclusion list impact proposals that align with barangay needs? R: The NPMO acknowledges concerns regarding the exclusion list. They will explore possible adjustments while ensuring appropriate safeguards are in place. 2.​ Environmental Permits and Clearance Process Q: Who can help expedite the issuance of environmental permits and clearances (CNC, ECC, GSUP, water permits)? R: While the DSWD does not have jurisdiction over environmental permits, they are working on enhancing coordination with DENR to expedite permit issuance. Regional offices are also encouraged to strengthen partnerships with local bodies like PAMB. 3.​ Sub-Project Types and Funding Eligibility 26 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants Q: Are certain sub-projects eligible for funding under the Panahon ng Pagkilos Project, such as emergency vehicles, senior citizen centers, and evacuation centers? R: Emergency Vehicles-Not eligible, as they are part of the Negative List. Senior Citizen Centers-Not eligible since they are considered government buildings. Maintenance Medicine for Senior Citizens-Not eligible, as consumables are excluded. Chainsaws-Allowed for disaster response operations. Rescue Vehicles-Not eligible, but ambulances may be funded by other agencies. Evacuation Centers-Further review is required for eligibility. 4.​ Local Counterpart Contribution (LCC) Q: Can land acquisition or donated lots be considered part of the LCC? Does the LCC apply if a barangay has a separate project? R: Yes, land acquired via negotiated settlements or donated lots can be considered part of the LCC. A minimum 20% LCC is required for clustered subprojects. Separate projects by a barangay will also require a 20% LCC. 5.​ Land Acquisition and Resettlement Q: What are the acceptable forms of land acquisition for Pagkilos? R: Only voluntary donations and negotiated settlements are allowed. Involuntary donations are not permitted. The project accepts deeds of donation, usufruct agreements, and similar arrangements for voluntary donations. 6.​ Inclusivity and Roles of Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) Q: How can PWDs be involved in the implementation of the project? R: PWDs can participate in subproject activities such as situational analysis, ensuring accessibility and inclusivity in project designs, facilities, and training programs. 27 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants 7.​ Coordination with Other Agencies Q: Can NPMO coordinate with NCIP for logistics in validation and consultation? R: Yes, the NPMO maintains coordination with the NCIP Central Office. Guidelines are being developed to clarify when projects may not require a Certificate Precondition (CP) or Certificate of Non-Overlap (CNO). Q: How can the Panahon ng Pagkilos strengthen its partnership with the Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (MDRRM) and other relevant agencies? R: The NPMO acknowledges the importance of strengthening partnerships and will incorporate necessary strategies in the project’s manual. 8.​ Gender Inclusion Q: Will 35% women in paid labor be included as a KPI for the project? How will this apply to contract-based subprojects? R: Yes, the 35% KPI for women in paid labor will remain. The NPMO is revising the procurement manual to address challenges for contract-based subprojects. 9.​ Grievance Redress Mechanism Q: Is there training for communities regarding the Grievance Redress System (GRS)? R: Yes, the NPMO has identified training for GRS, with allocated funding for its implementation. 10.​ Financial and Administrative Considerations Q: Can professional fees and building permits be charged to the grant? 28 Version as of March 2025 No. Consultation/ Date and Number and Summary of Disclosed Information, Discussed Issues, Stakeholder Meeting Title and Venue Summary of Input and Concern Description/ Stakeholder/ Objective Participants R: Professional fees will be assessed based on the specific needs. This will be further reviewed during the development of the infrastructure manual. Q: Should the Municipal Assessor’s Office waive fees for documents related to local and LGU projects? R: KALAHI-CIDSS appreciates the LGU’s commitment to waiving fees and considers it a best practice that supports community-driven development. Q: Are donated lots subject to taxes, and if so, who covers the tax payment? R: The local government unit (LGU) will cover taxes on donated lots, which will be part of their LCC. 11.​ Miscellaneous and Specific Inquiries Q: When will the Pagkilos project begin? R: The implementation is projected to start in the 4th quarter of 2025, following the endorsement by the NEDA Investment Coordination Committee. Q: Is the Municipality of Balamban included in the target municipalities for the project? R: Yes, the Municipality of Balamban is part of the target municipalities. 29 Version as of March 2025 4.2. Proposed SE for the Project, Strategy and Methods for Effective SE The Stakeholder Engagement Plan below outlines the engagement process, methods, including sequencing, topics of consultations and target stakeholders. The World Bank and the Borrower do not tolerate reprisals and retaliation against project stakeholders who share their views about Bank-financed projects. ​ This SEP is based on the following principles and methods of engagement: a.​ the culture, fundamental human rights, values and traditions of stakeholders are respected in accordance with established legal precedent and accepted practice in the Philippines; b.​ stakeholders are treated with sensitivity and respect in terms of their issues, views and suggestions; c.​ interaction with stakeholders is meaningful, culturally appropriate (including language, as needed), and is timely, transparent and responsive; d.​ vulnerable groups are included in the engagement to assess differential needs and perceptions of stakeholder groups (i.e. men, women, youth); e.​ data from stakeholder engagement is incorporated into assessments site-specific environmental and social management and mitigation plans as needed; f.​ access to information and disclosure will be ensued to ensure stakeholders are informed about the Project, its potential benefits, impacts and risks, PAPs' entitlements, GRM channels; and g.​ informed consultation without coercion to ensure that communities can share their feedback effectively Further to enhance effective engagement, a suite of communication methods will be used to promote easy, transparent, direct, open and interactive communication with all stakeholders, and to elicit feedback in the project preparation and implementation phases. Public disclosure will be done through any of the following means: ●​ Newspapers, posters, radio, television; ●​ Information centers and exhibitions or other visual displays; ●​ Brochures, leaflets, posters, nontechnical summary documents and reports; ●​ Office correspondence, meetings; ●​ Website, social media Stakeholder engagement will be done through any of the following means: ●​ Regular meetings with relevant government agencies at central, regional and provincial/municipal levels; ●​ Stakeholder workshops at national, regional, provincial levels; ●​ Public meetings (e.g. barangay assemblies, tribal consultations); and ●​ Use of support organizations when needed (e.g. to support vulnerable communities/households) Public information materials to enable wider access to project information as well as the progress of project activities will be developed. This includes the types and forms of information dissemination, as well as timing which will be determined during project implementation based on assessments of communities' access to such information and barriers. Stakeholders' communication and consultation preferences, particularly those of target communities, will also be carefully assessed to promote greater participation and social inclusion. Indigenous Peoples. Efforts will be made to ensure participation of, and engagement with, indigenous communities and households. Coordination and facilitation of the NCIP will be pursued and partnering with indigenous peoples' organizations (IPO) or NGOs that support them will be undertaken in the furtherance of engaging with indigenous peoples. 30 Version as of March 2025 Intermittent Interaction with Stakeholders at the Regional, Provincial and Municipal Levels. Regular coordination meetings will be carried out as needed. Interactions with Stakeholders at the Community Levels. At the community level, the Project Team shall interact with the primary stakeholders regularly from information validation to actual implementation, and subsequent monitoring and evaluation phase. These consultations can be done at least twice at the community level and more as needed, especially in areas where there are issues with inclusion/exclusion as well as in communities identified to have projects with higher E&S risks and impacts. In all levels of Project consultations, the project affected persons especially the vulnerable groups shall be included and heard. In addition to the bigger community consultation, a separate dialogue shall be made with the vulnerable groups, like the IPs, women and young people to encourage their participation and avoid possible intimidation from other sectors. ​ 31 Version as of March 2025 Table 5. Proposed SEP for the Project Project stage Target Topic of consultation / message or Method and Responsibilities Frequency/Timeline stakeholders information to be disclosed Tools Municipal LGU ●​ Discussion on the goals, objectives, Meeting, Focus DSWD One assembly/ design, and implementation process Group KALAHI-CIDSS meeting before SP of PAGKILOS, as well as roles, Discussion RPMO, Area implementation and responsibilities and functions of the Coordinating continuous LGU. Teams engagement ●​ Solicit feedback on LGU commitment throughout the project and implementation arrangements. preparation stage ●​ Discussion on the baseline resilience profile of the municipality and relevant plans ●​ Presentation and validation of community risks and vulnerability assessment results to be used for the preparation of municipal resilience plan and criteria-setting for SP Project selection Preparation Community ●​ Discussion on the goals, objectives, Meeting, Focus DSWD ●​ One assembly/ Stage Volunteers and design, and implementation process Group KALAHI-CIDSS meeting and at community of PAGKILOS, as well as roles, Discussion, RPMO, Area least one learning members, responsibilities and functions of the Workshop, and Coordinating session before SP Indigenous community volunteers. culturally Teams, and implementation, People, women ●​ Solicit feedback on resilience and tailored involvement of and continuous groups, and other adaptation needs of the community approach for NCIP for FPIC engagement disadvantages ●​ Solicit feedback on the capacity consultation implementation throughout the and vulnerable building needs for the Pagkilos with Indigenous project groups project and the possible subprojects People and preparation stage that are needed in the area to help other vulnerable ●​ For indigenous improve resiliency groups (see 4.3 peoples, one ●​ Discussion on the criteria selection of and Annex 5) meeting which Community Resilience Teams. may be separate from the ●​ Identification of risks and mitigation community measures before subproject assembly, before implementation 32 Version as of March 2025 Project stage Target Topic of consultation / message or Method and Responsibilities Frequency/Timeline stakeholders information to be disclosed Tools ●​ Presentation and validation of SP community risks and vulnerability implementation assessment results Barangay LGU ●​ Discussion on the goals, objectives, Meeting, Focus DSWD One assembly/ design, and implementation process Group KALAHI-CIDSS meeting and at least of PAGKILOS, as well as roles, Discussion, RPMO, Area one learning session responsibilities and functions of the Workshop Coordinating before SP BLGU. Teams implementation, and ●​ Solicit feedback on resilience and continuous adaptation needs of the barangay engagement ●​ Solicit feedback on the capacity throughout the project building needs for the Pagkilos preparation stage project and the possible subprojects especially before Project that are needed in the area to help every milestone Preparation improve resiliency activity. Stage ●​ Discussion on the baseline resilience profile of the barangay, risk and vulnerability assessment, and relevant plans ●​ Discussion on the criteria selection of Community Resilience Teams. ●​ Presentation and validation of community risks and vulnerability assessment results ●​ Presentation of municipal resilience plan ●​ BLGU’s role in land acquisition for SPs requiring land Provincial LGU ●​ Discussion on the goals, objectives, Meeting, Focus DSWD One assembly/ design, and implementation process Group KALAHI-CIDSS meeting before SP of PAGKILOS Discussion RPMO, Area implementation, and continuous 33 Version as of March 2025 Project stage Target Topic of consultation / message or Method and Responsibilities Frequency/Timeline stakeholders information to be disclosed Tools ●​ Solicit feedback on resilience and Coordinating engagement adaptation needs of the province, Teams throughout the project resilience plans available, and preparation stage existing PPAs National/ Regional ●​ Discussion on the goals, objectives, Meeting DSWD Semestral meeting for Government design, implementation KALAHI-CIDSS the members of the Agencies arrangements, and coordination for NPMO/ RPMO National Steering (DILG, DENR, PAGKILOS Committee, DA, NCIP, continuous Project DHSUD, CCC, ●​ Provide support, policies, and engagement Preparation etc.) technical assistance throughout the project Stage preparation stage Academic Project needs, requiring expertise, data Meeting DSWD As need arises institutions and analysis, and research to inform resilient KALAHI-CIDSS researchers strategies. NPMO and RPMO Civil Society Discussion on the goals, objectives and Meeting DSWD As need arises Organizations design of PAGKILOS, for possible support KALAHI-CIDSS (CSOs) of the CSOs. NPMO and RPMO World Bank and Project needs, requiring funding, Meeting DSWD As need arises other funding technical assistance, and expertise to KALAHI-CIDSS institutions enhance DSWD's capacity in addressing NPMO social welfare and disaster management challenges. Community ●​ Implementation arrangement of the Meeting, FGD, DSWD One meeting/ Volunteers, project, as well as roles, workshop, KALAHI-CIDSS workshop before the beneficiaries, responsibilities and functions of conference, and RPMO, ACT, and actual subproject including community volunteers. culturally involvement of implementation and LAR-affected ●​ Subproject planning, implementation tailored NCIP for FPIC continuous Implementation people, and monitoring arrangements approach for implementation engagement Stage Indigenous consultation throughout the project People, women with Indigenous implementation stage groups, and other People and disadvantages other vulnerable groups (see 4.3 34 Version as of March 2025 Project stage Target Topic of consultation / message or Method and Responsibilities Frequency/Timeline stakeholders information to be disclosed Tools and vulnerable and Annex 5 on groups FPIC). Barangay LGU ●​ BLGU’s role in processiong permits/ Meeting DSWD One meeting/ certifications, specifically on land KALAHI-CIDSS workshop before the acquisition, which may not be RPMO, ACT actual subproject completed before subproject implementation and implementation continuous ●​ Other technical assistance needs of engagement the project throughout the project implementation stage Municipal LGU/ Technical assistance needs and other Meeting DSWD Provincial LGU support needed by the project during KALAHI-CIDSS implementation RPMO, ACT National/ Regional Technical assistance needs and other Meeting DSWD Semestral meeting for Government support needed by the project during KALAHI-CIDSS the members of the Agencies implementation NPMO and RPMO National Steering (DILG, DENR, Committee, Implementation DA, NCIP, continuous Stage DHSUD, CCC, engagement etc.) throughout the project implementation stage Academic Technical assistance needs and other Meeting DSWD Meetings conducted institutions and support needed by the project during KALAHI-CIDSS as need arises researchers implementation NPMO and RPMO World Bank and Funding, technical assistance, and Meeting DSWD Semestral meeting other funding expertise needed by the project during KALAHI-CIDSS and continuous institutions implementation NPMO engagement throughout the project implementation stage Broader public ●​ Subproject title, funding, and timeline, Subproject DSWD One marker/ safety for transparency purposes marker, safety KALAHI-CIDSS warning sign before or ●​ Safety precautions, regulations and warning signs RPMO, ACT during subproject policies during civil works and other safety implementation tools/ instruments 35 Version as of March 2025 Project stage Target Topic of consultation / message or Method and Responsibilities Frequency/Timeline stakeholders information to be disclosed Tools Community ●​ Indicators/metrics of the Functionality Meeting, ACT At least one meeting Volunteers, Audit (FA) tool, Accountability plenary, FGD, during the project beneficiaries, Reporting (AR), and Sustainability and culturally monitoring stage including Evaluation Test (SET) tailored LAR-affected ●​ Pending actions based on the result approach for people, of the FA, AR and SET consultation Indigenous with Indigenous People, women People and groups, and other other vulnerable disadvantages groups (see and vulnerable Annex 5) groups Barangay LGU ●​ Technical assistance and monitoring Meeting, ACT At least one meeting needs of the subproject workshop during the project ●​ Indicators/metrics of the Functionality monitoring stage Monitoring and Audit (FA) tool, Barangay Evaluation Accountability Reporting (BAR), and Sustainability Evaluation Test (SET) ●​ Pending actions based on the result of the FA, AR and SET Municipal LGU ●​ Technical assistance and monitoring Meeting, ACT At least one meeting needs of the subproject workshop during the project ●​ Indicators/metrics of the Municipal monitoring stage Accountability Reporting (MAR) ●​ Result of the Functionality Audit and Barangay Accountability Reporting (BAR) for the possible integration of CDD in the local planning process Provincial LGU ●​ Technical assistance needs to Meeting DSWD At least one meeting address the experienced challenges KALAHI-CIDSS during the project and issues of the project, and RPMO monitoring stage feedback/inputs for project improvement, ●​ Other support/ arrangements at the provincial level to ensure that the 36 Version as of March 2025 Project stage Target Topic of consultation / message or Method and Responsibilities Frequency/Timeline stakeholders information to be disclosed Tools subprojects are integrated into the provincial development plans. National/ Regional ●​ Technical assistance needs to Meeting DSWD Semestral meeting for Government address the experienced challenges KALAHI-CIDSS the members of the Agencies and issues of the project NPMO and RPMO National Steering (DILG, DENR, ●​ Feedback and inputs for project Committee, DA, NCIP, improvement continuous Monitoring and DHSUD, CCC, engagement Evaluation etc.) throughout the project monitoring stage Academic Research, assessment, and impact Meeting DSWD Meetings conducted institutions and evaluation needs of the project. KALAHI-CIDSS as need arises researchers NPMO World Bank and Project effectiveness, challenges and Meeting DSWD Semestral meeting other funding issues in implementation, feedback and KALAHI-CIDSS and continuous institutions inputs for project improvements NPMO engagement throughout the project monitoring stage 37 Version as of March 2025 4.3. Proposed Strategy to Incorporate the Views of Indigenous People and other Vulnerable Groups The project will seek the views of PWDs indigenous peoples, women, senior citizens and poor communities and households through local consultation and FGDs. The following measures will be taken to remove obstacles to full and enabling participation / access to information, such as: ●​ Ensure that vulnerable groups are represented in meetings and barangay assemblies including during the identification and implementation of PAGKILOS sub-projects and initiatives. This can involve appointing representatives from these groups or supporting their capacity to participate effectively. ●​ Use accessible and culturally appropriate communication strategies to reach vulnerable groups. This may include using local languages, visual aids, and formats suitable for different literacy levels, disabilities, or cultural contexts. ●​ Provide training and capacity-building opportunities to empower vulnerable groups to participate meaningfully in climate discussions. This can include workshops on climate change impacts, adaptation strategies, advocacy skills, and leadership development. ●​ Actively engage vulnerable groups in consultations and decision-making processes related to climate action. This can include holding community meetings, workshops, focus groups, and utilizing participatory methods that accommodate diverse needs and perspectives. In compliance with the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA), the project shall follow the existing rules or policy guidelines to ensure the Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC)3 of indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs). The process of securing FPIC shall be in coordination with the NCIP and shall be conducted during the social preparation phase or before project implementation of all subprojects located or implemented within an ancestral domain, or for sub-projects that will have adverse impacts to IP communities as per World Bank’s ESS7. Consultations with the ICCs/IPs as part of the FPIC shall be conducted culturally sensitive, as specified in the program’s IP Facilitation Guide (Annex 5). The facilitation guide specifies the guiding principles for engaging indigenous communities, necessary qualities of program staff assigned to IP areas, practical tips on what to do and to avoid ensuring effective consultation, and facilitation guide and training for non-IP program implementers working with communities where IPs are the minority. In summary, the guide specifies the following: ●​ Effective consultation with the indigenous peoples can be achieved through building trust and rapport, understanding the local language, allocating enough time for seamless facilitation of activities, respecting cultural values and protocols, and ensuring gender inclusion and responsiveness. ●​ Cultural barriers that hinder IP participation should be analyzed, and consultation/ participation mechanisms should be designed in accordance with local customs and cultural norms. ●​ Project implementers should establish rapport with the indigenous communities they work with and treat them as co-equals. Approaches for engaging indigenous peoples should be tailored to their unique contexts and should aim to guide the community to critically analyze their problems and identify their own solutions. ●​ A tailored-fit approach based on the unique situation of indigenous peoples is necessary as different situations call for different strategies or approaches. IP participation varies in areas where IPs are the majority as compared to when IPs are the minority. Similarly, approaches differ between IP and non-IP project staff. 3 The consensus of all members of the ICCs/IPs to be determined in accordance with their respective customary laws and practices, free from any external manipulation, interference, coercion, and obtained after fully disclosing the intent and scope of the activity, in a language and process understandable to the community. 38 Version as of March 2025 ●​ Respect for the cultural traditions and practices of indigenous peoples must be upheld throughout all stages of decision-making processes, project planning, implementation, and monitoring. However, it is essential that this respect is maintained without romanticizing or idealizing these traditions. ●​ IPs shall have the right to give or withhold consent to proposed sub-projects that may affect their communities based on full disclosure of project details. ●​ Capacity-building shall be provided among project staff to ensure culturally sensitive project implementation. The program shall enhance this IP facilitation guide to tailor-fit to the needs of Pagkilos, as necessary. 39 Version as of March 2025 5. Grievance Redress Mechanism 5.1. Overview A Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM)is a system that allows not only grievances, but also queries, suggestions, positive feedback, and concerns of project-affected parties related to the environmental and social performance of a project. This shall be submitted and responded to in a timely manner. The grievance handling process involves four major steps, namely: 1.​ Intake 2.​ Verification and Action 3.​ Feedback 4.​ Follow-up 5.2. Grievance Handling Process The GRM for this project involves four sequential steps namely; Step 1: Intake; Step 2: Verification and Action; Step 3: Feedback; and Step 4: Follow up. Hereunder is the detailed description for each of the steps. Step 1: Intake This is the first step in the process whereby a grievance, comment, suggestion or query is filed. Who may file? Anyone with a complaint against the Program, its implementation, the project staff, local personalities in the areas of operation and others may file grievances. This includes: ●​ Any or all residents of the barangay and municipality where the project is being implemented, ●​ Officials of local and national government agencies, ●​ Staff of non-government organizations, faith-based institutions, consultants, media representatives and local business groups, ●​ Non-residents of the barangay or municipality who stand to gain or lose from the project. How is a grievance or comment filed or initiated? A grievance or comment may be channeled or initiated through the following channels. Table 6. Grievance Channels Grievance Channel Details Letters Addressed to regional or central offices of the DSWD (details can be found in their respective websites), which oversees the Kalahi-CIDSS program E-mails Send via official DSWD website (https://www.dswd.gov.ph/feedback/), to DSWD regional (https://www.dswd.gov.ph/directory-of-officials-field-office/)o r central office (https://www.dswd.gov.ph/directory-central-office/) emails provided in the official DSWD directory Phone call Hotline number 8931-8172 of the DSWD Agency Operations Service that oversees the Integrated Grievance 40 Version as of March 2025 Grievance Channel Details Redress Management System (IGRMS) or through national Citizens' Complaint Hotline at Hotline number 8888 Verbal narration from walk-in Shared to DSWD Staff at the national and regional level to complainants DSWD Office Suggestion boxes At the Barangay to be placed in non-political/religious institutions and safe places Reports of consultants, NGOs, Shared to project offices and sites by project staff, LGUs and journalists independent monitors, supervision teams, government officials, or any interested persons or special groups like IPs, elderly, etc. Findings During the World Bank preparation and supervision missions Media Feedback Shared newscasts, newspaper articles, and other publications Complaints and other feedback Sent to KALAHI-CIDSS social media accounts (KC Official Facebook account either Regional or/and National (DSWD KALAHI-CIDSS and other official social media accounts) Community Grievance Officer Grievance shall be received and documented in the PIMS WebApp by the community grievance officer The comment or grievance can be filed through the grievance form attached in this SEP as Annex 3. In addition, the grievance submitted can be: ●​ in writing or given orally ●​ it can be in hard copy or in the form of emails or text messages ●​ it may or may not be signed by the sender ●​ it may be sent anonymously ●​ it may be online Where should the grievance be filed? A concerned individual or group may file a complaint or address queries/comments at any level of the Project’s implementation structure (DSWD Central and Regional Offices, Municipal and Barangay levels) using any of the means identified above. In addition, it may also be coursed through other complaint centers (e.g. 8888 Citizen’s Charter Complaint Center, Presidential Complaint Center) and KALAHI-CIDSS official social media accounts. Who may receive grievances, comments, or queries? The following are the project staff authorized to receive and intake the grievance. 41 Version as of March 2025 Table 7. Grievance Monitors per Level Level Grievance Monitor Barangay Grievance Committee volunteers,Community Barangay Empowerment Facilitator (new areas) and Area Coordinator and Municipal Area Coordinator (former areas) Municipal Grievance Committee volunteers, Area Coordinator, Municipal MCT Regional Regional Grievance Focal National National Grievance Focal The Grievance Focals will accomplish the intake form to record the complaints they received. They are also responsible for determining the type of grievance filed and how it should be addressed. The RPMO and AC shall conduct proper orientation to the MCT and community volunteers in using the forms. On accomplishing, the GRM intake forms for each Grievance and problems, issues, needs, concerns, and observations (PINCOs) captured from the BDRRMC/ MDRRMC meetings, barangay assemblies (BA) and other activities. Generally, there is no need to accomplish a separate intake form. The Minutes shall already serve as the MOV for these entries, especially if the entries are simple queries and do not require additional information or further action. For complaints/grievances received from social media, this shall be properly captured and documented. All complaints/ grievances/ feedback/ PINCOs shall be recorded to PIMS. However, if the issue raised is more than a query and will need more information or further action to arrive at a resolution, an Intake Form (paper form) must be accomplished and filed together with corresponding means of verifications (MOVs). The complaints/ grievances received via online/ social media shall be forwarded to the concerned offices. The Officer-in-Charge in Grievances shall properly document and address the grievances either offline or online. For queries received through other channels/other complaint centers, it shall be assessed by the designated grievance officer at the national office then endorsed to the concerned unit, personnel or Field office whichever is applicable to the issue for appropriate action/resolution. Regarding grievances that are unreported because ‘it is already resolved’, proper documentation shall be done. It is a safety measure if future problems/issues still arise related to the said grievance. Table 8: Types of Grievance TYPES DESCRIPTION This type is non-contentious and merely requests for Type A – Non Contentious information/updates, seeks clarification or a response and queries, comments, and suggestions to enhance the project design, improve operations suggestions and facilitate administrative/logistical support to the project. 42 Version as of March 2025 TYPES DESCRIPTION Type B - Compliance with This type of grievance results from the nonperformance of project processes, obligation of any of the parties involved to project processes and Memorandum of Agreement documents. Primarily addressed by the Grievance Committee at (MOA) and other the barangay and municipal level the community level but there KALAHI-CIDSS are cases, especially those involving project staff, when implementation RPMO/NPMO action is required. arrangements. Type C - Conformance with This includes grievances or offenses pertaining to conformance KALAHI-CIDSS with KALAHI-CIDSS government procurement and finance procurement and finance guidelines such as misuse of funds, allegations of corruption, guidelines. falsification of public documents. Step 2: Verification and Action This second step in the grievance handling process covers two activities, namely: Verification/Fact Finding and Action Verification This activity includes gathering facts and clarifying information to have a clear picture of the circumstances surrounding the grievance or complaint. The following specifies the verification/ fact-finding process: ●​ Analyze issues that need to be validated, and the persons/parties involved. ●​ Determine facts to be verified and how to gather them. Validation methods include site visits, review of documents, interviews and meetings with concerned individuals/groups ●​ Secure all documents/means of verifications (MOVs) that will support the findings. ●​ Ensure that whole procedure is properly documented (such as minutes of meeting, recordings or photos), fair and transparent ●​ Present findings/results of validation to BDRRMC/BDC/MDRRMC /MIAC as applicable or head of office for their decision. The following constitute the verification or fact-finding body at the different levels: Table 9. Responsibilities for Fact Finding LEVEL FACT-FINDING BODY Barangay Barangay Grievance Committee Municipal Municipal Grievance Committee, MIAC Regional RPMO Fact-finding Body National NPMO Fact-finding Body In case the members of the fact-finding committee are involved in grievances/ complaints the head of BDRRMC/BDC (barangay) and MDRRMC (municipal) shall take lead in designating the fact-finding committee. 43 Version as of March 2025 Action This step reflects the steps towards the resolution of the case. Actions to a grievance include openly discussing the issues to the community, arriving at agreements and decisions, and imposition of sanctions if needed. In general, the process is kept simple, and all grievances will be dealt with at the lowest level possible – at the barangay or municipal level. The GRM ultimate users are the residents of the barangay participating in the project. Therefore, be kept informed and involved in determining actions to be taken. The Grievance Resolution Sheet and PINCOs Resolution Sheet shall be documented to summarize the complainant's steps and response. The COVID-19 protocols and other guidelines on emerging communicable diseases will be strictly followed and supervised by the BHERTs when conducting fact-finding on the ground. Table 10 shows the process of each type of grievance. Due to the remote and GIDA areas' location and background, technical difficulties, and personnel availability, timelines may need to be changed with prior information on the change in turn-around time provided to the complainant and other key stakeholders involved. To ensure the effectiveness of the GRM, the Grievance Handling Procedure must adhere to the Ease of Doing Business (EODB) and Efficient Government Service Delivery guidelines provided by the program offices. Republic Act No. 11032's Implementing Rules and Regulations (also known as the "Ease of Doing Business and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act of 2018"). However, the type and context of grievances must always be considered and correspond to the KALAHI-CIDSS grievance process. Depending on the existence and severity of grievances/complaints, they may be processed outside the EODB's processing timeframe. Table 10. Type of Grievances and Processing Timeline TYPE OF GRIEVANCE PROCESSING TIMELINE Type A: Non-contentious Responded to at the point of Should be addressed within queries/Clarifications on the intake at any level of the 3-7 days from the date of project project or referred to receipt. Examples: appropriate office/person who ●​ Positive comments/ can address the inquiry. appreciation on the project; ●​ Clarification on roles and responsibilities of volunteers; ●​ inquiry on schedule and timeline of project Type B: Compliance with CEF/AC/MCT will endorse Should be addressed within project processes, MOA and grievances to the Grievance 15-20 days from the date of other KC implementation committee. receipt. arrangements Grievance committee may Scope: Only one barangay conduct initial fact-finding or call for community consultations where involved 44 Version as of March 2025 TYPE OF GRIEVANCE PROCESSING TIMELINE Example: Elite capture in parties will arrive at decision making for proposed decision/consensus/ sub-project. agreement. Grievance committee will gather/secure MOVs (ex. Minutes of the meeting) and coordinate with CEF/AC on the status of resolution. Type C: Compliance with The ACT/MCT will endorse Should be addressed within project processes, MOA and grievances to the Municipal 15-20 days from the date of other KC implementation Grievance Committee/ MIAC. receipt. arrangements The Municipal Grievance Committee with Scope: More than one representatives from barangay Barangay Grievance Sample: Collusion in Committee to conduct Municipality fact-finding and discuss grievances in the municipal forum. Municipal Grievance Committee/MIAC to decide on the grievance. Any decisions made by the body should be contained in a minutes-of-meeting or proceeding. This would serve as a supporting document to the resolution of the case. A grievance case is considered resolved when: ●​ An inquiry or clarification regarding the program/project has been responded to and the person who raised the concern is satisfied with the response provided. ●​ When unfulfilled obligations/commitment of one of the parties involved had been complied with and all parties are satisfied with the actions taken. ●​ When violations committed had been corrected in accordance with program policies and guidelines. ●​ Appropriate sanction to the group/individual involved in the case has been imposed when necessary. Sanction Depending on the gravity of the act or omission, sanctions may be imposed by the BDC/BDRRMC, MDRRMC or the concerned head of agency. Sanctions can be imposed only when there is a majority vote of the BDRRMC/BDC or MDRRMC/MIAC members. In cases where sanctions are not within the scope of the BDRRMC/BDC or MDRRMC/MIAC, the Regional Project Manager (as the Regional Grievance Officer) and the National Project Manager will decide on the matter. Sanctions may be imposed on an individual, group of individuals, sitio, group of sitios, barangay, and group of barangays, cluster, or municipality. 45 Version as of March 2025 Any sanction shall be without prejudice to the penal, civil or administrative sanctions that may be imposed by pertinent laws or guidelines. The DSWD Retainer lawyer shall conduct proper investigation and legal advice about sanctions in the case. Possible sanctions that may be imposed by the BDC and MIBF are as follows: ●​ Compromise agreement ●​ Warning ●​ Reprimand Sanctions that may be imposed by the Regional Program Manager and National Project Manager are as follows: ●​ Suspension from KALAHI-CIDSS NCDDP for one or two cycles and from proposing certain types of projects for one or two cycles ●​ Disqualification for the entire project duration from proposing certain types of sub-projects ●​ Non-renewal of project staff Step 3: Feedback This refers to the process of replying to the grievance sender and informing the complainant or aggrieved party of the status of their complaint. If the complainant is unknown, the status or the redress documents covering the complaint will be posted in the municipal and barangay bulletin boards and KALAHI-CIDSS official social media accounts. Response to grievances under Type A must be presented to assemblies/ BDRRMC/MDRRMC meetings to provide clear and complete information to people about their queries. The grievance shall be properly documented and submit a written report to the concerned people. Step 4: Follow-Up This involves determining the result/outcome of resolved grievances. Follow-up must also be done to all resolved grievances immediately upon the feedback was provided to the complainant to determine if the final resolution yielded positive result to the aggrieved party and to the community in general. This involves asking the complainant whether he/she was satisfied or not satisfied with the resolution of the issue. The grievance shall be submitted to the next level if no consensus has been reached between the two parties. All the grievances resolved or unresolved shall be encoded to PIMS. The National and Regional Grievance Focal should also conduct an audit to review if handling of grievances was in accordance with the GRM process. Any person who does not agree with the decision on a complaint or grievance may file an appeal with the next higher level of the grievance redress system or to any appropriate office. The appeal shall be resolved by the receiving office within 30 working days. Figure 1 illustrates the Grievance Handling Procedure for the project. 46 Version as of March 2025 Figure 1: Pagkilos Project Grievance Handling Procedure. It should be noted that if grievances come from employees/staff, then the grievance shall be forwarded to be processed following with the LMP, which is attached in the ESMF for the Pagkilos. 5.3. Monitoring and Reporting of GRM There are two forms used in GRM monitoring. The Grievance Intake Officers fill-out the installation forms and the intake and redress forms at the barangay and municipal levels. a.​ The Barangay and Municipal Installation Form - checklist to monitor the status of the grievance system’s installation in the barangay and municipality (Annex 2) b.​ The Intake Form - used to record reported and unreported grievances and PINCOs. It is accomplished every time a grievance/concern has been filed and must be updated until the case is resolved. (Annex 3) All supporting documentation (such as meeting minutes, online reports, motions, financial records, accounts, information, and so on) must be attached to the intake form and filed in a safe area at the KALAHI-CIDSS office. The Installation forms, Intake forms, and Grievance/ PINCOS (problems, issues, needs, concerns, and observations) resolution forms will be uploaded and encoded to the GRM Database's PIMS’ Deskapp or Web Application. Both grievances and complaints must be promptly uploaded and reported to the regional offices. All GRM data is subject to the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (RA 10173). 47 Version as of March 2025 The project's commitment to GRM is reflected in its Key Performance Indicators (percent of Grievances registered related to the delivery of project benefits addressed). As a result, at all levels, oversight of the status of all recorded complaints should be improved. 6. Monitoring and Reporting of SEP Subject to monitoring and reporting results, the SEP can be revised and updated as necessary during project implementation. 6.1. How will SEP be monitored? The SEP will be monitored based on both qualitative reporting (based on progress reports) and quantitative reporting linked to results indicators on stakeholder engagement and grievance performance. 6.2. Reporting SEP reporting will include the following: a.​ Documentation for each consultation meeting and to keep a SE log/register to track engagement (see Annex 1). b.​ Progress reporting on the ESS10-Stakeholder Engagement commitments under the Environmental and Social Commitment Plan (ESCP). c.​ Cumulative qualitative reporting on the feedback received during SEP activities, in particular (a) issues that have been raised that can be addressed through changes in project scope and design, and reflected in the basic documentation such as the Project Appraisal Document, Environmental and Social Assessment, Resettlement Plan, Indigenous Peoples Plan, or SEA/SH Action Plan, if needed; (b) issues that have been raised and can be addressed during project implementation; (c) issues that have been raised that are beyond the scope of the project and are better addressed through alternative projects, programs or initiatives; and (d) issues that cannot be addressed by the project due to technical, jurisdictional or excessive cost-associated reasons. Minutes of meetings summarizing the views of the attendees can also be annexed to the monitoring reports. d.​ Quantitative reporting based on the indicators included in the SEP. An illustrative set of indicators for monitoring and reporting is included in Annex 4. Quarterly summaries and internal reports on public grievances, enquiries, and related incidents, together with the status of implementation of associated corrective/preventative actions will be collated by responsible staff and referred to the project managers. Specific mechanisms to report back to the stakeholders shall be done through progress reports, meetings, dashboards, newsletters, emails, workshops, forums, documentations, social media and implementation support missions. This reporting back to the stakeholders will be provided as the need arises. 48 Version as of March 2025 7. Resources and Responsibilities for Implementing Stakeholder Engagement 7.1. Implementation Arrangements The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) will lead stakeholder engagement activities. The entities responsible for carrying out stakeholder engagement activities are the National Program Management Office (NPMO), Regional Program Management Office (RPMO) and other partner agencies. The overall responsibility for SEP implementation lies with the National Program Manager (NPM). The project’s stakeholder engagement implementation arrangements are as follows:4 a.​ Periodic Consultation. During project implementation, project management will conduct consultations with stakeholders particularly the principal beneficiaries and other project-affected persons in the community. Community consultations shall adhere to the KC-NCCDP CEAC process. In addition, consultations will be held with other stakeholders, such as government partners and CSOs. During these consultations, the progress of the project implementation will be presented to key partners, the press and interested CSOs at the national level and at selected regions, and province/s. Members of the press and representatives of CSOs will be invited during these consultation sessions. b.​ Documentation. The stakeholder engagement activities will be documented through documentation templates utilized by the DSWD in documenting activities and meetings. Feedback reports shall also be prepared by the assigned personnel/staff, as needed. c.​ For subprojects in which FPIC is required, responsible entities for implementation are the Technical Facilitators and Area Coordinator at the municipal level, and Social Safeguards Focals at the regional and national level. 7.2. Budget and Resources The budget estimate for the implementation of the regional-level SEP is specified and included in the ESMF budget outlined in the monitoring and reporting section of the ESMF document. Specifically, the stakeholder engagement activities are incorporated into the allocations for community sessions/assemblies, SEP training and National and Regional Coordination Meetings with other Stakeholders and Oversight Agencies. Meanwhile, the FPIC implementation budget will be covered by the local counterpart contributions of the LGUs. 4 Integrate provisions for the mobilization of technical expertise for safe consultations with vulnerable groups, and/or on sensitive topics, as and when needed. 49 Version as of March 2025 Annexes ●​ Annex 1. Template to Capture Stakeholder Engagement ●​ Annex 2: Grievance Redress System Municipal/ Barangay Installation Checklist ●​ Annex 3: Grievance Intake Form ●​ Annex 4. Sample Table for Monitoring and Reporting on the SEP ●​ Annex 5. Overview of the Indigenous Peoples (IP) Facilitation Guide for FPIC 50 Version as of March 2025 Annex 1: Template to Capture Stakeholder Engagement Location and Date of Engagement Engagement Activities and Approach Participants / Stakeholder (Group or Individual) Topics and Summary of Community/ Stakeholder Feedback (Key Notes from the Engagement) Project Feedback/ Response (toward the issues discussed during the consultation) Follow-up Plan, if relevant Remarks (insert documentation such as photos) 51 Version as of March 2025 Annex 2: Grievance Redress System Municipal/ Barangay Installation Checklist CDD A-12: ​ Form GRIEVANCE REDRESS SYSTEM MUNICIPAL / BARANGAY INTILLATION CHECKLIST REGION : PROVINCE : MUNICIPALITY / BARANGAY : PROGRAM / PROJECT : PHASE / CYCLE : Requirement Date Complied MOVs 1 MO Minutes of the Information dissemination on GRS Meeting 2 MO Minutes of the Municipal GRS Committee Identified Meeting Resolution 3 Training of ACT/MCT on handling grievances Training Attendance conducted Sheet 4 Information materials available with grievance hotline (at least one (1) of the Inspection following: manual at the ACT Office, pamphlets/brochures, posters) 5 Means of reporting grievances available (at least one (1) of the following: grievance / Inspection suggestion box, phone numbers, office address) Signature over Printed Name Area Coordinator 52 Version as of March 2025 Annex 3: Grievance Intake Form CDD A-12: ​ Form GRIEVANCE REDRESS SYSTEM (GRS) INTAKE FORM Date Received : Date Resolved : GRS : ​ PINCOS ​ Filed Grievance Intake Level : ​ Central ​ Region ​ Municipal Grievance Location : Region: ________ Province: _________ Municipality: ___________ Barangay : Mode of Filling : ​ Mail/Letter ​ Walk-in / Verbal ​ Phone/Fax ​ BA ​ Reports Narration (specify) ​ Email ​ Text Message ​ Suggestion ​ Media ​ Others Box (specify) I. Complainant / Sender’s Information Name (Optional) : IP Group : Sex : ​ Male ​ Female ​ ​ Email ​ Text Message ​ ​ Media ​ Ot GroupSug her gestion s Box (specify) I.​ Complainant/Sender’s Information Name (optional) : __________________ IP Group:________________________ Sex​ :​ Male Female Unknown Group/Organization/Institution (specify): ____________ Designation/Position MLGU Official/Staff BLGU Official/Staff DSWD/KC-NCDDP Personnel Volunteer Ordinary Resident Contractor Service provider/Supplier Other Participating Agencies (specify): ______________ Others(specify)___________ 53 Version as of March 2025 Contact Information (Address/Tel/Fax/Cel./Email):___________________________________________________________ I.​ Details of the Issue/Concern Nature of Issue/Concern: Type A: Queries, Comments and Suggestions (non-contentious) Type B: Compliance with project processes, MOA and other KC-NCDDP implementation arrangements (non-performance of obligations) Type C: Conformance with KC-NCDDP/government procurement and finance guidelines (violation of law) Subject of Complaint: MLGU Official/Staff BLGU Official/Staff DSWD/KC-NCDDP Personnel Volunteer Ordinary Resident Contractor Service provider/Supplier Other Participating Agencies (specify): ______________ Others(specify)_____________ Category of Concerns Administrative CEAC Schedule/Timeline Community Participation Delivery of LCC Delivery of Materials Financial Mgmt Gender Concerns Graft and Corruption KC-NCDDP Process/Design/Guidelines LGU Participation O&M/Sustainability Positive Comments Procurement Quality and Operations of SP RFR Processing Salary and allowances Social and Envt’l Safeguards SP Imple. TA/support, information dissem. and capability building Other concerns specify)____________ .Details of Concern (if PINCOs, indicate if Community and/or Operation and Management Concern): 54 Version as of March 2025 Details/Narrative Summary Actions Taken/Resolution of the FOR PINCOs ONLY (Use additional sheet if table is not enough.) Issue Recommendations (Action needed from RPMO/NPMO/Other agencies) II.​ Complainant’s Feedback on Resolution of Grievance No comment ​ ​ Not Satisfied ​ ​ Satisfied ​ Very Satisfied Name of Intake Office : Designation : List of Categories Concerns Cases/Examples Administrative •​ Misconduct (includes HR concerns - (recruitment, •​ Tardiness/absences hiring, staffing, behavior of staff) •​ CF should smile more •​ Schedule of MIBF CEAC Schedule/Timeline •​ Community participation (functionality •​ Volunteers not attending trainings of committees, volunteers’ responsibility, •​ Resignation of volunteers etc.) •​ Low participation in BAs •​ LCC Cash commitment not yet downloaded to community Delivery of LCC account •​ Contractor failed to deliver gravel and sand Delivery of materials •​ Delivery of substandard materials •​ Pay roll padding Financial Management •​ Inconsistent signatories in vouchers •​ Misuse of funds •​ Sexual harassment Gender concerns •​ Gender discrimination •​ Bribery of contractor Graft and corruption •​ Pilferage of materials •​ Collusion in MIBF •​ Intervention to community decisions KC-NCDDP Process/design/guidelines •​ Non-inclusion in selection of volunteer •​ Tedious KC-NCDDP process •​ Fraudulent filing up of attendance sheet by CF LGU Participation •​ Barangay Captain does not support KC-NCDDDP activities O&M/Sustainability •​ Water system association not active (includes financial management issues, •​ No funding from barangay to maintain SP functionality of SPs and ODM) •​ The community expressed appreciation to the entry of Positive Comments KC-NCDDP in their barangay. 55 Version as of March 2025 List of Categories Concerns Cases/Examples •​ Can shopping be conducted in lieu of bidding? Procurement •​ No bidding conducted •​ Unfinished footbridge Quality and operation of SPs •​ POW/design of SP not followed •​ Reason why RFR not downloaded RFR Processing •​ Delay in salary of staff Salary and allowances •​ Travel allowances not enough •​ No deed of donation Social and environmental safeguards •​ IP not consulted •​ Delays in subproject implementation due to weather Subproject implementation •​ Labor issues •​ Non-provision of technical assistance by LGU staff TA/support, information dissemination •​ Non-consistency of information during KC-NCDDP and capability building implementation Annex 4. Sample Table: Monitoring and Reporting on the SEP Key Specific Evaluation questions Potential Indicators Data Collection evaluation Methods questions GM. To what ●​ Are project affected parties ●​ Usage of GM and/or Records from the extent have raising issues and feedback implementing agency project-affected grievances? mechanisms and other relevant parties been ●​ How quickly/effectively are ●​ Requests for agencies provided with the grievances resolved? information from accessible and relevant agencies. inclusive ●​ Use of suggestion means to raise boxes placed in the issues and villages/project grievances? communities. Has the ●​ Number of implementing grievances raised agency by workers, responded to disaggregated by and managed gender of workers such and worksite, grievances? resolved within a specified time frame. ●​ Number of Sexual Exploitation, and Abuse/Sexual 56 Version as of March 2025 Harassment (SEA/SH) cases reported in the project areas, which were referred for health, social, legal and security support according to the referral process in place. (if applicable) ●​ Number of grievances that have been (i) opened, (ii) opened for more than 30 days, (iii) resolved, (iv) closed, and (v) number of responses that satisfied the complainants, during the reporting period disaggregated by category of grievance, gender, age, and location of complainant. Stakeholder ●​ Was there interest and ●​ Active participation Stakeholder engagement support for the project? of stakeholders in Consultation Attendance impact on ●​ Were there any adjustments activities Sheets/Minutes project made during project design ●​ Number of actions design and and implementation based taken in a timely Evaluation forms implementati on the feedback received? manner in response on. ●​ Was priority information to feedback Structured surveys How have disclosed to relevant parties received during engagement throughout the project cycle? consultation Social media/traditional activities made sessions with media entries on the a difference in project affected project results project design parties. and ●​ Number of implementatio consultation n? meetings and public discussions where the feedback and recommendation received is reflected in project design and implementation. ●​ Number of disaggregated engagement sessions held, focused on at-risk 57 Version as of March 2025 groups in the project. Implementation ●​ Were the activities ●​ Percentage of SEP Communication Strategy effectiveness. implemented as planned? activities (Consultation Schedule) Were Why or why not? implemented. stakeholder ●​ Was the stakeholder ●​ Key barriers to Periodic Focus Group engagement engagement approach participation Discussions activities inclusive of disaggregated identified with effective in groups? Why or why not? stakeholder Face-to-face meetings implementation? representatives. and/or Focus Group ●​ Number of discussions with adjustments made Vulnerable Groups or in the stakeholder their representatives engagement approach to improve projects’ outreach, inclusion and effectiveness. 58 Version as of March 2025 Annex 5: Overview of the Indigenous Peoples (IP) Facilitation Guide for FPIC A.​ Legal bases of the FPIC 1.​ NCIP Commission En Banc (CEB) Resolution No. 08-083-2021 (Nov. 24, 2021): Resolution approving the Guidelines on the Validation and Assessment Process of Government Projects for the Delivery of Basic Services to be undertaken within or affecting Ancestral Domain/s Based on the NCIP CEB 08-083-2021, applications for validation/ assessment of government projects should include the project profile, proponent profile and documentation. 2.​ NCIP Administrative Order No. 3 Series of 2012: The Revised Guidelines on Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) and Related Processes of 2012 Based on section 44 of NCIP Administrative Order No. 3 Series of 2012, “where the conduct of plans, projects or activities of the government or any civic, religious, or similar organizations within ancestral domains is in response to emergency situations involving public order, health, security or safety including military operations within ancestral domain areas when made in connection with hot pursuit operations, securing vital government installations, programs and projects against clear and imminent danger, FPIC shall not be required.” B.​ Principle and Approach In the Philippines, the experience of using the CDD strategy in Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan- Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services (KALAHI-CIDSS) has proven it to be an effective poverty alleviation strategy. During the implementation of KALAHI-CIDSS, special emphasis was given to the participation of vulnerable sectors, which includes the indigenous people. KALAHI-CIDSS, as implemented by the Department of Social Welfare Development (DSWD), will be scaled up and called the National Community Driven Development Program (NCDDP). The expanded program will ensure the active participation of communities in addressing poverty issues. KC-NCDDP employs the Community-driven development (CDD) strategy in addressing poverty. CDD operates on the principles of transparency, participation, local empowerment, demand- responsiveness, greater downward accountability, and enhanced local capacity. The strategies, principles, and approaches used in CDD fit well in a culture-sensitive framework for strengthening the capacity of indigenous peoples. Principles of CDD as they relate to a Culture Sensitive Framework for Mobilizing Indigenous Peoples include: ●​ Respect communities’ indigenous knowledge systems and practices, which includes their governance and decision-making processes. ●​ Do not exclude the possibility of addressing issues of land tenure, such as supporting ancestral domain claims. ●​ Incorporate a process of free, prior and informed consent by undertaking a comprehensive consultative process with indigenous communities. ●​ Ensure IP representation during the CEAC. ●​ Provide an easily accessible venue for indigenous peoples to voice their concerns in public meetings. ●​ Guarantee that subprojects fit specific community contexts. 59 Version as of March 2025 C.​ Steps in Obtaining FPIC Certification All subprojects implemented in areas with indigenous peoples, especially within ancestral domains are required to secure Certification Precondition (CP) or Certificate of Non-Overlap (CNO) from the NCIP before sub-project implementation. Requirements shall follow the NCIP Commission En Banc (CEB) Resolution No. 08-083-2021 Series of 2021. In securing the CP/ CNO, any of the following may be undertaken ●​ Assessment Process - This is conducted when the ICCs and/ or IPs are involved during the development stage of the proposed SPs or when the sub projects are initiated by the community members. ●​ Validation Process - This is conducted when the ICCs and/ or IPs are NOT involved during the development stage of the proposed SPs. The application for CP/CNO should include a complete submission of the required documents per NCIP CEB Resolution No. 08-083-2021. The required documents are as follows: 1.​ Project profile: Includes the project proposal, location of the SP (sitio/barangay that will be affected), timeline, persons who will be involved in the implementation, program of works, indicative budget, map showing the actual location of the subproject, Environmental and Social Screening Checklist (ESSC) and Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) 2.​ Proponent Profile: Includes the details of the community members who are proposing the subproject. The list and details of community volunteers, specifically the Project Preparation Team (PPT), and the community members who will benefit from the subproject. 3.​ Documentation: Should show that the ICCs/IPs participated in the conceptualization of the proposed project, such as minutes and attendance sheets during the participatory situational analysis, barangay assemblies, and other relevant meetings; tribal resolutions from the ICCs/IPs soliciting the project(s) addressed to the concerned government agencies; and photo documentation of meetings or assemblies. Should the documentation fail to show that the IPs are the main proponent of the sub-project, the NCIP shall conduct a validation process (i.e., a field-based investigation). In this case, the proponent profile should instead include the details of the ACTs and MCTs handling the subproject and the KALAHI CIDSS representative(s) who will assist the NCIP in the validation process. The program recognizes the constraints on the part of the NCIP in responding to the demands for validation; hence, tribal resolutions as an attachment to the request for funding may be secured while waiting for the release of certification from the NCIP. The tribal resolution should attest that the proposed sub-projects were initiated by the indigenous peoples themselves or undergo consultations with the indigenous peoples groups in the community. Further detailed mechanisms for FPIC consultation will be provided in the POM. Guide to ensure culturally-sensitive facilitation is provided in the Indigenous Peoples (IP) Facilitation Guide. 60 Version as of March 2025 D.​ Implementation Arrangement for Implementation and Reporting The NCIP shall be part of the National Steering Committee (NSC) at the national level to provide technical assistance in promoting the rights of Indigenous Peoples (IPs), ensuring Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC), and fostering culturally sensitive implementation of the project. At the regional level, a Regional Technical Working Group (RTWG) comprising the NCIP and the DSWD Regional Program Management Offices (RPMOs) shall be formed to ensure continuous coordination in processing CP/CNO applications through data reconciliation, ensuring the completeness of requirements, and addressing challenges. 61