ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

PROVINCE NAME: LEYTE

A. REFERENCE
Payment Voucher Number
Date of PV
Program
Basic Health Emergency and Disaster Management Training Course
Project
Evidence-based Planning for Resilient Local Health Systems
Implementing Agency University of the Philippines Manila, College of Public Health
Activity Reference Number
Cash Requisition (CRQ) Reference Number
B. DETAILS OF IMPLEMENTATION
Dates of Implementation From: June 17
To: June 20, 2015

The second batch of the BHEDMTC for Leyte municipalities commenced in the afternoon of June 17,
2015 and was concluded in the afternoon of June 20, 2015, for a total of three days. The content and
activities were similar to the course design implemented for the first batch of Leyte municipalities.
Below outlines the organization of the topics and course-related activities per day.

The initial day, June 17, served as Day 0. Parallel to the Day 0 of first batch, the registration, opening
ceremony, expectations check, pre-test and Session 1 on the overview of health emergency and
disaster in the Asia Pacific region were conducted on this day. Day 0 for Batch 2 was more successful
in terms of attendance than Batch 1 as all, except two participants who signified their presence, were
able to come on Day 0.

The major part of the course was delivered by Ms. Florinda Panlilio, in lieu of the inability of Dr.
Marilyn Go, Chief of the Preparedness Division of HEMB-DOH to conduct the course due to a very
important DOH activity at the national office. Ms. Panlilio has served for almost 10 years at HEMB-
DOH. She was ably assisted in the delivery of the lectures and facilitation of workshops and short
learning exercises by Asst. HEMS Coordinator, Mr. Craig Lawrence Diaz, Development Management
Officer, Ms. Mae Analyne Marquez and City Health Officer, Dr. Joedina Gumagay.

Day 0 - June 17
Registration
Opening Ceremony
Course Orientation
Expectations of the participants from the course
Pre-test
Session 1 Health Emergency Management in Asia and the Pacific and the Philippines
Day 1 - June 18
Session 2 Philippine Risk Reduction and Management Framework
Session 3 Introduction to Health Emergency and Risk Management
Session 4 Public Health Emergency Manager: Challenges, Roles, Effective Leadership in
Health Emergency
Session 5 Risk Reduction and Emergency Management Planning
Day 2 - June 19
Session 6 Command, Control, Coordination/Networking and Operation Center (OPCEN)
Management
Session 7 Part 1: HEMs Information System

ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

Session 7 Part 2: Guidelines on Reporting during Emergencies and Disasters
Session 8 Logistics and Supply Management
Day 3 - June 20
Session 9 Part 1: Introduction to Public Health in Emergencies and Disasters
Session 9 Part 2: Table Top Drill in Public Health in Emergencies and Disasters
Course Evaluation
Post Test
Closing Ceremony and Awarding of Certificates

Table 1 provides a detailed list of participants according to their designation and workplace
assignment. Based on the list, there were 10 municipalities represented during Batch 2 of BHEDMTC.
These were Burauen, Dagami, Dulag, Julita, La Paz, MacArthur, Palo, Tabontabon, Tacloban City and
Tunga with 4, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 5, 1, 5 and 1 participant respectively. Out of the 10 municipalities, only 6
had attendees that represent the target participants namely, MHO, MLGOO, MDRRMO and MSWDO.
None of the LGUs had a MPDO in attendance during the training course. A number of staff (5) from
the Regional DOH Office also participated in the course.

TABLE 1. List of Participants According to Designation and Municipality

# NAMES
DESIGNATION
MUNICIPALITY
1
Manuel Que
MAYOR
Dulag




2
Allan Alvarez
MHO
Dulag
3
Rosal C. Caimoy
MHO
Tabontabon
4
Leo Calonia
MHO
Palo

5
Mia Margallo
MLGOO
Dulag
6
Virginia Ortega
MLGOO
Palo
7
Edna Lumbre
MLGOO
Tacloban City

8
Joeban Plaza
MDRRMO
Burauen
9
Eric Borlaza
MDRMO Staff
Burauen
10 Jerome B. Astorga
MDRRMO
Tunga
11 Albino Negradas
MDRRMO
Palo

12 Rosalina R. Balderas
MSWDO
Palo

13 Floradima Bud-oy
RHM
Dagami
14 Norman Delos Reyes
DSWD
Dagami
15 Aida Macaso
RHM
Julita
16 Edilberta Leona
RHM
Julita
17 Diomedes Yepez
Nurse 1 HEMS Coord La Paz
18 Imelda Mostales
RHM
La Paz
19 Helen Lomahan
DCW I
Burauen
20 Julius Sam Venezuela
NDP
Burauen
21 Sarah Montano
Asst. CHO
Tacloban City

ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

Richard Solilap
Maria Rose R. Jecino
Maria Lourdes G. Sabate
Eumelia Creer
Ofelia Malasaga (From batch1)
Christopher Pelingon (from batch1)
Ivy Carmen
Mario Severino
Princess Debbi Garcia
Shermaine Jose Carcueva
Jocelyn Tinaya

Sanitary Inspector
CPDO
SWO III
Zoning Officer
Sanitary Inspector
Nurse
HEMS
HEMS
HEMS
HEMS
DMO

Tacloban City
Tacloban City
Tacloban City
Palo
MacArthur
MacArthur
DOH RO VIII
DOH RO VIII
DOH RO VIII
DOH RO VIII
DOH RO VIII

Number of Participants: 32
Type of Participants: Municipal level
government officials
Trainer
Facilitators

Number of Beneficiaries: 10 Municipalities

DOH Regional/Provincial
Type of Beneficiaries: Public servants
1
2

Mayors

MHOs

MPDO

MDRMMO

MLGOO

MSWDO

Others
DOH VIII, DMOs, RHM, NDP,
Representatives
C. RESULTS

23

Indicators
80% of the 9 target
municipalities from Leyte
province are trained
during Batch 1 of the
Basic Health Emergency
and Disaster
Management (BHEDM)
At least 5 representatives
from each municipality
(Mayor, MHO, MDRRMO,
MLGOO, MPDO, MSWDO)

Planned

Actual

All 10 targeted municipalities

from the province of Leyte will
attend Batch 2 of the BHEDMTC

100% of the expected

municipalities attended the
BHEDMTC Batch 2

5-6 members of each LGU will

attend the BHEDMTC

20% or 2 out of 10
municipalities had 5
participants while the rest
had 4 or less.

ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

will participate in the

BHEDMTC

Additional Comments on the Result:

Participants were asked to evaluate the training sessions everyday in terms of the following
parameters: (1) clarity and relevance of the objectives, (2) whether discussion of topics was
stimulating, interactive and/or comprehensive, (3) effectiveness of resource persons and facilitators,
(4) appropriateness of audiovisual aids, and (5) adequacy of training course to address issues on health
emergency and disaster management. In the first part of the evaluation tool, participants were
instructed to indicate if they strongly agree, agree, disagree or strongly disagree to the achievement of
the parameters. The second part provided more insights on how the participants actually viewed the
training as they gave specific responses on their general reaction to the course, facilitating factors,
hindering factors and recommendations. The tool was able to capture the variety of answers
furnished by the participants.

The general pattern of feedback to the training sessions on the aspect of course objectives clarity and
relevance was strongly agree (52 % - 71%) specifically for sessions 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 and 9. Majority of the
participants likewise strongly agreed that the resource speakers and facilitators were effective and
engaging during sessions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 9. For most of the sessions, the major rating assigned on the
areas of topic discussion, audio-visual aids and sufficiency of training to address issues obtained only
an agree response. The session that earned a number of disagree answers to all five parameters
evaluated was session 7 on reporting during emergencies and disasters. Overall, the participants
collectively showed their agreement, whether strongly or not, that the training course was able to
meet the desired outcomes set in the evaluation tool. This generalization was strongly supported by
the qualitative answers provided by the participants.

The course was viewed by one as the proper forum to enhance his knowledge on disaster
management with his recognition that mitigating measures are needed at the earliest possible time to
prevent effects of hazards from becoming a disaster. He added that the training would be helpful in
ensuring that application of disaster management in the field will be more effective and efficient.
Others saw the training as useful for them in delivering their work either as a member of the Response
Team in the EOC or as part of the local government unit (LGU). This same appreciation of the course
was noted towards future planning or formulation of plans as far as disaster/health management is
concerned. It was not only described as interesting and applicable to them but also that the
introduction of the program to the LGUs is timely due to the successive occurrences of disastrous
natural calamities. There was a realization of the urgency to hasten the implementation of the
learning to the LGUs, in terms of delivery of technical support, in order to establish a disaster resilient
municipality.

The open-ended questions also resulted to the gathering of a number of positive feedbacks from the
participants. They looked at the course as very informative, knowledge-based, comprehensive, very
interesting and properly sequenced. Although one mentioned that it was overwhelming, another saw
it as easy to absorb. All the contents of the lectures or topics were valued especially the new sets of
protocols on health aspect of Disaster Risk Reduction and HEMS information system as mentioned by
some. It was noteworthy to know that the training was able to fill the gap in knowledge on disaster
management and meet the expectation of the participants.

ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

In the context of training delivery and process or methods of learning applied, a number of participants
wrote that the sharing of experiences from participants and examples given by resource persons
facilitated their education about the topics. In particular, the concrete and practical examples given,
appropriate and applicable workshops and exercises, and recommendations, suggestions and question
and answer exchanges between the participants and resource speakers/facilitators were beneficial
strategies in the implementation of the training course. As a participant noted, the discussions of the
different topics were made clear and relevant to the experiences especially lessons learned from the
Yolanda experience. Furthermore, it also contributed to the learning process that there was lively and
interactive discussions and group work as well as participative participants. Moreover, some identified
the comprehensive power point presentations and provision of printed materials/handouts as
effective in supporting knowledge acquisition from the course. One trainee probably summed up the
opinions of the group on training methodology when she commented that Through the advancement
of technology and through the use of training techniques and other instructional materials, the topics
had become more understandable and the process of gaining knowledge became expeditious.

Based on the responses of the trainees to the course, the accomplishment of the objectives of the
BHEDMTC was also made possible through having knowledgeable and effective speakers/
lecturers/facilitators. The very excellent presentations, simplified delivery of the sessions and clear
discussions of topics were recognized by several of the participants as factors that effectively assisted
in understanding the different concepts that were presented.

Some of the participants likewise expressed their happiness, enthusiasm and excitement about the
course. They also noticed the friendliness of the staffs, venue being conducive to learning, very good
accommodation and good food, in addition to a very enjoyable program.

The predominant theme in the assessment made by the participants can be summarized by the
characterization of the training course by some participants as very good, excellent and even perfect.

But there were three factors that constrained the learning process for some. As identified by a few of
the trainees, one of them was the vastness of the scope of the training content. In spite of being very
insightful and informative, too many information presented actually limited full appreciation of the
course in others. Additionally, some topics had reduced time while others were too long. Personal
factors also played a role in the full participation of trainees such as interruptions from their respective
offices (eg. phone calls) and tiredness.

The results of the Overall Course Evaluation validated what the participants noted as the strengths and
weaknesses of the training course. More than 70% or higher strongly agreed that the training
objectives were clear and relevant, lectures and materials were effective in facilitating understanding,
activities were appropriate and effective, facilitators provided valuable information, venue conducive
and meals adequate. Less than 70% but more than 50% of the participants strongly agreed that the
training stimulated their interest of health emergency and disaster management, they were
adequately prepared and content was appropriate for their needs. Even if all agreed, only 45%
strongly agreed that they were given enough time to ask questions and participate. This supports the
observation of a few participants that the training was not given enough time.

ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

D. ANALYSIS
1. Major problems faced during implementation (State reason why problem occurred)

The participation of the target members of the LGUs (MHO, MDRRMO, MPDO, MLGOO and
MSWDO) was dismal or very disturbing especially if it will be a reflection or a gauge on their future
involvement in the team who will craft the Health Emergency Preparedness, Response and
Recovery/Rehabilitation Plan (HEPRRP). If only to emphasize the importance of having the
complete members of the team attend the different modules of the rEBAP Project, we quote the
comment of one participant in the daily evaluation tool, I firmly believe that this is a tough job
and this would entail cooperation from among other members of the disaster mitigating team. If
one member will not function in accordance to what is expected of him/her, the team cannot
absolutely deliver the complete services required. Out of the expected minimum five (5)
participants from each municipality for a total of 50 attendees, only 8 or 16% were able to commit
their presence. Nineteen of those who attended from the different municipalities were not part of
the identified members of the HEPRR Planning Team but are part of the LGUs such as NDPs,
Sanitary Inspectors or RHMs.

Although, majority of the participants who signified their intention to attend the training came on
Day 0 and stayed for the full duration of the training, no additional members of the team came
after Day 0. The main reason identified was conflict in schedule with other commitments in the
LGU.

2. What changes do you think this activity has produced, if any? Please detail changes in the original
situation, type of changes (new behavior, new skills, new practices etc..) and for which group?

The overall aim of the rEBAP Project is to provide or enhance the knowledge and skills that are
necessary to enable selected/prioritized LGUs to formulate their own HEPRRP. The BHEDMTC
which comprise Module 2 of the four module project was intended to furnish the background and
introduce the important components of health emergency and disaster management. Its purpose is
also to level off the participants on the different aspects of health emergency and disaster so that a
common understanding by the members of the HEPRR Planning team will be achieved.

A good basis for evaluating the immediate change in the knowledge of participants on health
emergency and disaster management is the result of the pre and post tests. Thirty participants (30)
took the pre test and 28 for the post test but only 27 of them were able to complete both. All 27
except for 2 showed an increase in the post test scores compared to the pre-test. The
improvement in results ranged from 1 to as high as 11 points, with 4 as the most common increase
observed (7 out of 27 or 26%). The mean score in the pre-test was 21 while a remarkable rise was
noted in the post test with 27 as mean. Equally important was that the lowest point garnered in the
post test was 22, a far better score than the 13 in the pre-test. Although none of the participants
got a perfect score of 40, it was still significant to know that the highest achieved in the post test
was 77.5% or 31 out of 40 compared to the pre-test with only 24 or 60% of the total points.

3a. How many children, the activity may have reached, directly or indirectly?

The children in the municipalities included in the project are not the main recipients of the training

ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

course but indirectly, they would be involved somehow as their sector will have to be considered
during the crafting of the HEPRRP. Through the leaders of the LGUs and the HEPRRP that will be
produced at the end of the project, it is hoped that the development of the community towards
resiliency to emergencies and disasters will greatly benefit all stakeholders in the municipalities
including the children.

3b. Can this activity help to reach disparity areas, if yes, why?

Yes. The basic health emergency and disaster management course can be considered an equalizer
as the knowledge and skills that will be acquired would benefit all communities regardless of their
level. BHEDMTC would enable the people especially the decision-makers and implementers in the
LGUs to become prepared for any eventualities during onslaught of hazards and be able to respond
and act accordingly during such incidents.

E. NEXT STEPS
Follow-up Actions

Responsible Persons

1. Ensure maximum attendance of participants

Focus on ensuring properly coordinated social preparation
and invitation of participants by implementing partners
Confirm participation of LGU members early
Reiterate the significance of the participants attendance to
the course in the formulation of the HEPRRP
Adequately explain the relationship of the four Modules
with each other and how they would build up from Module 1
to 4

2. Make sure that all required participants/key personnel (MHO,
MPDO, MDRRMO, MLGOO and MSWDO) from different LGUs
would be attend the training course.

3. Properly schedule the next training courses
Close coordination with the implementing partner, who in
turn will directly coordinate with the LGU participants

4. Enhancement of the content and delivery of the training sessions
Include more concrete examples and best practices of LGUs
Incorporate more video presentations and group dynamics
Complete the handouts provided to the participants for their
future references
Adjust the allotted time for each session according to
relevance and need of the participants
Have a proper awarding or closing ceremony

CPH-UP Manila but

most especially UP
Visayas as the next
implementing partner

CPH-UP Manila and UP

Visayas as the next
implementing partner
CPH-UP Manila and UP
Visayas as the next
implementing partner
CPH-UP Manila and
DOH-HEMB Resource
Speakers

ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

Prepared by:

______________________________

Lilen DC. Sarol, PhD

Batch 1 Course Coordinator
Leyte BHEDMTC Training Course

Signature & Name of CPC6 Programme Manager

Date

* This report must be done for every completed activity and must be submitted with the
Certificate of Liquidation (CoL) and Cash Assistance Summary