Tubig Para sa Barangay at Mga Impormal na Grupo (TUBIG) (Water for the Barangay and Informal Groups) Analysis

+ PEF commitment to provide financing for the project;

+ FEDI Counterpart for project management

- The members have no regular or viable sources of income to enable them to pay for a private water connection.

- Residents buy one drum of water for PhP 20-30, which they stretch to last a day.  In both barangays, families who earn only about  PhP 100 a day spend as much as PhP 20-40 a day for water

+ Existence of NGOs willing to assist the communities like FEDI, SPECS Foundation, and the Peace and Equity Foundation (PEF);

+ Prior experience of FEDI in water project implementation which would be helpful in the project implementation;

+ LGU is working with MBCNA in facilitating the land tenurial issues; 

+ Presence of water concessionaires: MWSI and Maynilad;

- Status of occupancy. The current Impermanent status of their residence in the community, being informal settlers, may put the project sustainability in question:

- Violation of the law by illegally connecting their water pipes..  Most households, including the MBCNA leader, get a free water by resorting to illegal water connections. However, there is always  the danger of  being caught and sued.

+ The availability of water at Angat, Ipo and La Mesa Dams which supply water to Metro Manila

+ Existence of community organizations that can serve as direct conduit for delivering the water project to the poor households—MBCNA in Mandaluyong and KPK in Pasay City;

-  Mauway BLISS Compound Neighborhood Association (MBCNA) in Mandaluyong or Kaagapay sa Pag-unlad ng Kababaihan (KPK) did not have any experience with water projects.

-  The existing community organizations were at their infancy stage. They still need to install and develop their systems and policies, specifically for water services delivery.

+ MBCNA had thirty members and KPK had forty members who can be mobilized for the project.;

+ Existing community leadership can also be further developed or enhanced. The MBCNA Leader was a charismatic leader while the KPK leaders have some experience in managing projects like the education of their children and their livelihood;

+ Expertise within and outside the community can be tapped to deal with the technical requirements of the project. A

- Sanitation and hygiene were compromised due to lack of water.  Houses were dirty, particularly their kitchen and comfort rooms.  The women had to forego personal hygiene in favor of the children who go to school or their husbands who go to work.  Moreover, water was prioritized for cooking and livelihood

-  Compromising Productive and Personal Time. Adults have to forego their leisure and personal development because they have to line up for the water vendors, while the children have to sacrifice their study time because they were forced to help their parents in fetching water.

-  Leaders and members need further training on water project development and management.

+ Dedication to community service of the organizations.  MBCNA was very strong with their advocacy on housing and delivery of some basic services, while KPK was strong in education and livelihood projects;

+ Willingness to implement and social acceptance of a water project by the community;

+ Openness to providing counterpart in the project in the form of labor or financial contributions, as well as paying for the water services;

+ The expressed need of the community to implement a water project;

+ If given the resources and opportunities, they would abandon their illegal water connections and embrace the legal framework for the sake of the project;

+ “Palabra de Honor” or credibility that they can pay the loan for the water project.

-  Culture of “panlalamang” or taking advantage among the members of the community to be able to survive.

+ Existing distribution technologies as well as the improvement in the efficiency of the water project  structure and maintenance by the Manila Water Company and Maynilad.

-  There was no available public faucet in the two communities

• Existence of NGOs willing to assist the communities like FEDI, SPECS Foundation, and the Peace and Equity Foundation (PEF);
• Prior experience of FEDI in water project implementation;
• LGU is working with MBCNA in facilitating the land tenurial issues;
• Presence of water concessionaires: MWSI and Maynilad;

• Addressing the legal blocks
• Seeking the help of the LGU;
• Guaranteeing the project;
• Values formation activities in the community;
• Dialogue with the water vendors.

• Violation of the law by illegally connecting their water connections. Most households, including that of the MBCNA leader, get free water by resorting to illegal water connections. However, they were always on the lookout lest they are caught and sued.
• Presence of a syndicate (water vending operators) in the area that would prevent them from project implementation

• PEF commitment to provide financing for the project;
• FEDI Counterpart for project management;

• Sought loan and grant from PEF;
• Community Counterpart (MBCNA) in the application for water installation.

• The members have no regular or viable sources of incometo enable them to have a private water connection.

• Existence of community organizations that can serve as direct conduit of delivering the water project to the poor householdsMBCNA in Mandaluyong and KPK in Pasay City.

• Strengthening and developing organizational systems and procedures;
• Creation of water committee;
• Development of Financial System;

• MBCNA AND KPK did not have any experience with water projects;
• The existing community organizations were at their infancy stage. They still need to install and develop their systems and policies, specifically for water services delivery.

• MBCNA had thirty members and KPK had forty members, who can be mobilized for the project;
• Existing community leadership:
  • The MBCNA leader was a charismatic person;
  • The KPK leaders have some experience in managing projects like the education of their children and their livelihood;
• Technical Expertise within and outside the community can be tapped to deal with the technical requirements of the project.

• Development of human capital through training and community facilitation focusing on:
• Skills development;
• Leadership development;
• Leadership decentralization.

• Sanitation and hygiene were compromised due to lack of water.
• Loss of productive and personal time.

• Dedication to community service of the organizations;
• Willingness to implement and social acceptance of a water project by the community;
• Openness to providing counterpart inthe project in the form of labor and financial contributions, as well as paying for the water services.
• The expressed need of the community to implement a water project;
• Expressed intention to abandon their illegal water connections and embrace the legal framework for the sake of the project;
• "Palabra de Honor" or credibility that they can pay the loan for the water project.

• Tapping and developing social and cultural capital through:
• Community mobilization;
• Maximizing smooth interpersonal relationship.

• Dependence on Water Vendors. They buy water from private water vendors and private households who took advantage of the poor by their unreasonable water pricing;
• Culture of "panlalamang" or taking advantage among the members of the community to be able to survive;

• Existing distribution technologies as well as the improvement in the water structure efficiency and maintenance by the Manila Water Company and Maynilad.

• There was no available public faucet in the community.

• Additional learning experience for FEDI and PEF;
• Enforcement of laws related to water service delivery;

• Additional community funds from the PEF through FEDI;
• Increased purchasing power of members/ savings due to lower expenditures for water;
• Financial counterpart was put up by the MBCNA for obtaining the legal water connection;
• For KPK, the labor counterpart of their husbands, if monetized, can also be considered as a financial counterpart;
• Both KPK and MBCNA were able to generate group funds;

• MBCNA became a more cohesive organization manifested by their financial counterparting scheme, as well as designing systems and procedures appropriate for the project;
• KPK gained organizational popularity in the community, making them more visible in the place
• Additional organizational skills for MBCNA and KPK members, especially when engaging in water projects;

• Both organizations, although they still needed more improvements, have been exposed and learned practical lessons on project management such as planning, implementation and monitoring skills;
• Community leaders and group members have become more knowledgeable about water systems technology;
• Leadership in MBCNA was further enhanced;
• Parents, especially mothers became more conscious about some health and sanitation measures in the households;
• Developed a sense of urgency among the organization leaders and members to provide services;

• Community compliance to legal frameworks. Households who have become more aware of the legal implications of water system installation have become more law-abiding and no longer wanted to resort to illegal activities pertaining to water systems;
• Increased sense of pride and dignity as a community was developed after obtaining their legal water connection;
• Their dependence on the private water vending enterprises was stopped;.
• Increased sense of pride and dignity by having legal water connections.

• Easier access to a water sourceresidents no longer have to queue for water because water is either delivered to their doorstep (i.e., KPK) or they already have faucets right inside their households (MBCNA);

• Level II and Level III water systems;