State of Local Governance Report 2011

localgovernanceperformancemanag ementsystemstateoflocalgovernance reportlocalgovernanceperformance managementsystemstateoflocalgove rnancereportlocalgovernanceperfor mancemanagementsystemstateofloc STATE OF LOCAL GOVERNANCE REPORT For the Calendar Year 2011
algovernancereportlocalgovernance performancemanagementsystemsta teoflocalgovernancereportlocalgove rnanceperformancemanagementsys temstateoflocalgovernancereportloc algovernanceperformancemanagem entsystemstateoflocalgovernancere portlocalgovernanceperformancema nagementsystemstateoflocalgoverna ncereportlocalgovernanceperforma ncemanagementsystemstateoflocalg
Municipal Government of San Jose
Rizal Street, Barangay Poblacion VIII San Jose, Occidental Mindoro Philippines 5100
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page Page Table of Contents Message from the Local Chief Executive Introduction Executive Summary Part I STATE OF LOCAL GOVERNANCE a. b. c. d. e. Administrative Governance Social Governance Economic Governance Environmental Governance Valuing Fundamentals of Governance 2 3 4 9 16 17 30 38 45 51 56 56 61 64
Part II FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE a. Revenue Generation b. Resource Allocation and Utilization Part III PRIORITY STRATEGIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION Part IV ATTACHMENTS a. b. c. d. e. f. LGU Profile (Based on LGPMS) LGU Vision-Mission-Goal-Objectives Statement Socio-Economic and Physical Profile Organizational Profile Financial Statements FY 2011 LGPMS Aggregation Table (Results)
70 72 73 77 83 97
INTRODUCTION
What is LGPMS?
The Local Governance Performance Management System, or LGPMS for brevity, is a selfassessment, management and development tool that enables local governments provinces, cities and municipalities to determine their capabilities and limitations in the delivery of essential public services. It is neither a scorecard nor a rating system to measure specific LGUs and promote competition. The LGPMS is spearheaded by the Department of the Interior and Local Government, through the Bureau of Local Government Supervision, in collaboration with major stakeholders, i.e., LGU users, national government agencies, local government leagues, civil society organizations, business community, and international development partners. The LGPMS looks into a local government as 5 Performance Areas and 17 Service Areas. Within these areas are predefined indicators categorized into input, output, and outcome to reflect LGU management capacity, service delivery provision and development condition, respectively.
What are the 5 Performance Areas And 17 Service Areas of LGPMS?

1. GOVERNANCE - Local Legislation; Transparency; Participation 2. ADMINISTRATION -Development Planning; Revenue Generation ; Revenue Allocation and Utilization; Financial Accountability; Customer Service; Human Resource Management and Development 3. SOCIAL SERVICES - Health and Nutrition; Education; Housing and and Basic Utilities; Peace, Security and Disaster Management 4. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - Agriculture and Fisheries Development; Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion 5. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT - Natural Resources Management; Waste Management and Pollution Control
What is the Strategic Purpose and Value of LGPMS?

To build a culture of performance highly essential in an environment of local autonomy To build a culture of database management for planning, budgeting, legislation, poject development, partnership, etc. To revolutionalize the way we relate with local governments A tool of choice for decisionmakers
Who are the Users of LGPMS?

Primary Users - Local Government Units Secondary Users - National Government Agencies; LG Leagues, Civil Society Organizations, Business Community And International Development Partners
What is the LGPMS Customized Software?

This software is designed for on-line data inputting, processing and analysis. Likewise, the software is designed to allow LGUs to customize their own reports based on their specific development requirements. To access the system, each province, city and municipality is provided with a username and a password. For non-internet connected LGUs, accessing the system can be
made through a connected LGU or through the nearest Internet caf.
What are the Benefits from LGPMS?

For Local Government Units Improves local government management and operations Suggests ways to provide high quality and essential public services Improves planning, budgeting, and rational allocation of resources Stimulates innovations Strengthens transparency, accountability and participation Helps achieve a focused vision for the future For National Government Agencies and LG Leagues Serves as a common national platform of information about LGU performance Provides benchmarks for local government performance Provides a basis for capability-building initiatives Identifies good local governance and sustainable development practices Provides a basis for the strategic allocation of resources and assistance to LGU For Civil Society Organizations and the Business Community Serves as a medium for better awareness of LGU operations and challenges Conveys citizens agenda to local government officials Stimulates effective participation in governance For International Development Partners Provides information benchmarks on local government performance Facilitates more focused assistance to LGUs
What are the Strategic Linkages of LGPMS?

Local Government Capacity Development Poverty Alleviation Incentives and Awards IRA Reformulation Reclassification of LGUs Alliance Building
Why use LGPMS as the platform?

The strength of the LGPMS is that, it is capable of creating sub-systems to customize the data capture and reporting functionalities in organizing the flow of information between local governments and specific national government agencies. Since LGPMS is web-based, the exchange of information is faster and accessible 24/7. As the process implies, the LGPMS can be used as a common platform of national government agencies in generating performance information on local governments. With the release of LGPMS version 2.1, new features are being introduced to cater to various stakeholders. The latest is the integration of the LGU Scorecard on Health designed by the Department of Health (DOH), and the Local Tourism Statistics, developed by the Department of Tourism (DOT), to the LGPMS. The DILG, DOH, and DOT converge for the CY 2011 implementation of the LGPMS.
Why is there a need for convergence?

The DOH and DOT converge with the DILG in making LGPMS a common platform on local government information. As such, the LGU Scorecard on Health of the DOH and the Local Tourism Statistics of the DOT are both integrated to LGPMS as sub-systems to generate crucial information particular to health and tourism which can be used primarily by the two agencies (DOH and DOT, respectively) and LGUs for planning and investment programming. Through convergence, other NGAs need not develop a separate system which may cause disjointed efforts in collecting and processing of performance information of local governments. More importantly, through convergence, we harness the expertise of various NGAs in providing a performance management tool for local governments.
METHODOLOGY
The LGPMS is implemented by cycle. An Implementation Cycle corresponds to a three-year period. The same sets of indicators are implemented for each cycle. After one cycle, the LGPMS indicators and implementation procedure are to be reviewed and enhanced accordingly. The LGPMS annual implementation process is described as follows:
Step 5 Utilizing LGPMS Results Step 4 Report Generation Step 3 Online Data Entry
Step 2 - Data Gathering, Data Proofing and Certification
Step 1 Setting-up the LGPMS database
Illustration: The LGPMS Annual Implementation Process
Step 1. Setting-up the LGPMS Database

Setting-up the LGPMS Database is crucial. This is a facility where User Account Management, LGU Management, indicators and scaling configuration, and activity scheduling are done.
Step 2. Data Gathering, Data Proofing and Certification

Step 2 involves the filling up of the DCF by respective service area respondents, DCF proofing or validation and certification to ensure reliability and accuracy of all data gathered. The Service Areas included in LGPMS and their respective respondents are as follows:
2.1. Accomplishing the LGU Profile

Respondent
LGU Profile MPDC, CPDC or PPDC -- all information, except for financial indicators. ALL FINANCIAL INFORMATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY THE TREASURER OR ACCOUNTANT.
2.2 Accomplishing questions on Administrative Governance Service Area Respondent

Local Legislation Development Planning Revenue Generation Resource Allocation and Utilization Customer Service HRMD Sanggunian Secretary MPDC, CPDC or PPDC Treasurer, Accountant, Local Finance Committee Members On Resource Allocation -- Budget Officer On Resource Utilization Accountant On civil registry documents - City or Municipal Registrar On RPT documents Assessor and Treasurer HRMD Officer
2.3 Accomplishing questions on Social Governance Service Area

Health Services Support to Education Support to Housing and Basic Utilities Peace, Security and Disaster Risk Management
Respondent
Health Officer Chairperson or Member, Sanggunian Committee on Education MPDC, CPDC or PPDC MLGOO, City Director or Provincial Director of DILG, or PNP official
2.4 Accomplishing questions on Economic Governance Service Area

Support to Agriculture Services Support to Fishery Services Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion
Respondent
Municipal, City or Provincial Agriculturist Agriculturist or Planning and Development Coordinator For questions 1 & 2 -- Dept. Head, Business Permit and Licensing Office For questions 3 & 4 -- MPDC, CPDC, or PPDC
2.5 Accomplishing questions on Environmental Governance Service Area Respondent

Forest Ecosystems Management Freshwater Ecosystems Management Coastal Marine Ecosystems Management Urban Ecosystems Management (Solid Waste Management and Pollution Control) Environment Officer or MPDC, CPDC or PPDC Environment Officer or MPDC, CPDC or PPDC Environment Officer or MPDC, CPDC or PPDC Environment Officer or MPDC, CPDC or PPDC
The respondents, as mentioned above, and the rest of the members of the LGPMS-LGU Team, have to meet to discuss and agree with the responses of the key respondents. They also have to collectively answer the last section of the Data Capture Form, which are questions on Valuing the Fundamentals of Good Governance. Accomplishing questions on Valuing the Fundamentals of Good Governance
Service Area Transparency Financial Accountability Participation Respondent All members of the LGPMS-LGU Team All members of the LGPMS-LGU Team All members of the LGPMS-LGU Team
Once completed, the Information Users, being the respondents, have to sign on the Certification Page attached to the last page of the DCF.
Step 3. Online Data Entry

It is the step wherein the official LGU Data Encoders will encode all data into the online system within the data entry period. It is understood that the accomplished DCF which is certified and signed by the members of the LGPMS-LGU Team is final.
Step 4. Report Generation

There are two levels of online reports one is the e-report for provincial, city and municipal governments, and the other are the summaries of reports at the provincial, regional and national levels. Immediately after online data entry, the system processes the data and produces on-line reports. All LGU Users with read-only accounts, can access the online LGU reports. The electronic reports that can be generated for city and municipal governments are: 1. e-SLGPR or the State of Local Governance Performance, Electronic Report which contains information on how the LGU values the fundamental elements of good governance, i.e., transparency, participation and financial accountability, and the LGUs performance in the areas of administrative, social, economic and environmental governance. It provides information on areas where the LGU acquires excellent performance or where the LGU needs improvement, as well as suggested actions to undertake which the LGU may wish to pursue. This report is available annually. 2. Financial Performance e-Report: Monitoring Financial Indicators which provides specific information about financial performance of the LGU, e.g., Real Property Tax Accomplishment Rate, % of locally sourced income to total LGU income, etc., for a single year and multiple years (for progress monitoring purposes). This is available annually. 3. Full Cycle Report: e- SLGPR, PYs 2010-2012 which provides a comparative assessment of a local governments performance within a three year period. This report is available at the end of a full cycle, e.g., in 2012 and every three years thereafter. 4. e-SLDR or the State of Local Development, Electronic Report which contains information about local development conditions in areas of social development, economic development and environmental health. This report is available starting 2009, 2013, and every three years thereafter.
Step 5. Utilizing LGPMS Results

At this point, the DILG and LGU Users are expected to organize forums to inform local authorities and other stakeholders on the LGPMS Results. This is strategic since information has to be linked to actions in support of good local governance and of meaningful development.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Part I of this report covers the State of Local Government Performance based on the LGUs key responsibilities in areas which it has direct control: Administrative Governance, Social Governance, Economic Governance and Environmental Governance. Administrative Governance looks into six areas: Local Legislation, Development Planning, Revenue Generation, Resource Allocation and Utilization, Customer Service, and Human Resource Management and Development. The LGU obtained Excellent performance in Human resource management and Development, High but not Excellent performance in Development Planning and Customer Service Civil Applications, Fair performances in Local Legislation and Revenue Generation, and Poor Performance in Resource Allocation and Utilization. Social Governance covers four areas: Health Services, Support to Education Services, Support to Housing and Basic Utilities, and Peace, Security and Disaster Risk Management. High but not Excellent performances had been achieved of these four areas. Economic Governance includes three areas: Support to Agriculture Sector, Support to Fishery Services, and Enterprise, Business and Industry Promotion. High but not Excellent performances in Support to Agriculture Sector and Support to Fishery Services had been achieved, but performance in Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion had only been Fair. Environmental Governance looks into four areas: Forest Ecosystem Management, Freshwater Ecosystem Management, Coastal Marine Ecosystem Management, and Urban Ecosystem Management. Performance had been Fair in Urban Ecosystems Management, the LGU demonstrated Low performance in Forest Ecosystems Management and Very Low performances both in Coastal Marine Ecosystems Management and Freshwater Ecosystems Management. On Valuing Fundamentals of Governance in the context of Transparency, Participation, and Financial Accountability. An Excellent performance was obtained in Transparency and Fair performances in Participation and Financial Accountability. The table below shows the over-all State of Local Governance Performance of the Municipality of San Jose: PERFORMANCE AREAS Administrative Governance Social Governance Economic Governance Environmental Governance Valuing Fundamentals of Good Governance Overall Performance Rating SUMMARY RATING 4.32 4.59 4.79 2.11 4.56 4.07 DESCRIPTION High but not Excellent High but not Excellent High but not Excellent Low High but not Excellent HIGH but not Excellent
The LGU obtained a HIGH BUT NOT EXCELLENT rating in four performance areas, specifically, in Administrative Governance, Social Governance, Economic Governance and Valuing Fundamentals of Good Governance. The LGU, however, obtained a LOW rating in Environmental Governance. It is well to note that the high but not excellent rating means that there are areas for improvement which the LGU must address to be able to fully provide its constituents with the mandated services and facilities for a municipality. It has to exert extra efforts to further improve its performance by providing all the basic services and allowing them to access such services in a manner that is easy and convenient and with greater transparency and accountability, the LGU exemplifies a government that is for the people, by the people, and of the people. Areas for improvement have been identified to be given full consideration. The following initiatives shall be pursued. However, one may observe that the area for improvement and actions to be taken by the LGU have never been changed by the Office. This is for the LGU to be more constant and adhere to what the local chief executives popular line: Push yourselves to the wall to know your limit, so that you can go beyond your horizons,
VALUING FUNDAMENTALS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE

Increase the involvement of NGOs, POs and private sector by institutionalization of a formal mechanism of citizens participation through an ordinance or resolution. Promote the establishment and operation of peoples and non-governmental organizations to become active partners in the pursuit of local autonomy [Section 34, LGC] Provide assistance, financial or otherwise, to accredited municipal-based peoples and nongovernmental organizations for economic, socially-oriented, environmental, or cultural projects to be implemented in the municipality [Section 36, LGC] Enter into joint ventures and other cooperative arrangements with peoples and nongovernmental organizations. [Section 35, LGC] Enforce the guidelines in the accreditation and membership of POs and NGOs in the Municipal Development Council, Municipal School Board, Municipal Health Board, MPOC and MBAC [DILG MC No. 01-89, s. 2001] Ensure the participation of NGOs and the community in the planning and implementation of programs, projects and activities for the eradication of illiteracy [DILG MC No. 00-120, s. 2000] and of other projects and activities Strengthen citizens support and participation in Peace and Order programs, projects and activities [DILG MC No. 02-162, s. 2002] Enhance involvement of all religious, civil and other nongovernment organizations in the Anti-Crime Campaign to complement peace and order efforts [DILG MC No. 02-62, s. 2002] Maximize the use communication mediums. Aim for the automation of the FMIS. Do this phase by phase if budget is not sufficient. In the long term it will result to more benefits.
ADMINISTRATIVE GOVERNANCE
Strictly adhere to the 45% general limitation to personal services. Appropriate at least 5% of the total budget for Gender and Development projects. Approve the annual budget within the period prescribed by law. Install a Legislative Tracking and Analysis System.
10
Create a Backstopping Committee which is the professional research arm of the legislative body. Enact those Codes which support social development, economic development, and environmental health. Enact ordinances and other legislative measures relating to Local Administrative Governance, Local Social Governance, Local Economic Governance, and Local Environmental Governance among others. Cause the integration of Indigenous Peoples rights and related concerns within the framework of gender and development. [DILG MC No. 05-34, s. 2005] Codify revenue ordinances with the end in mind of improving local revenue. Upgrade and modernize tax information and collection services through the use of computer hardware and software, and other means. [Section 17 (B) 3-x, LGC] Establish a Good Municipal Archival System. Equip the MPDO with a GIS whose primary function is to capture, store, analyze, manage, and present data that are linked to location. Optimally utilize the Annual Report. [DILG MC No. 07-24, s.2007] Ensure the full implementation of the LGPMS. [DILG MC No. 04-141, s.2004] Support the institutionalization of integrated rural accessibility planning (IRAP) procedure in local planning. [DILG MC No. 01-8, s. 2001] Incorporate development projects on culture and arts in the short and long-term municipal development plans. [DILG MC No. 95-117, s.1995] Encourage the members of the LDC to meet at least once every six months. Include Monitoring and Evaluation as integral component of the CDP. Ensure that the Municipal Planning and Development Coordination Office maintain a database which contains the minimum information it must contain. Identify and provide venue and opportunities for the development of staff. Strongly link performance appraisal to core HRM decisions promotions, rewards, and sanctions. Cause the formulation and implementation of a Municipal Human Resource and Development Program [DILG MC No. 96-17, s. 1996; PD No. 284] Make use of the eRPTAAS the soonest the system becomes fully functional. Post the procedure in securing real property documents. Equip the assessors office with the necessary computers and software to deliver quality services.
SOCIAL GOVERNANCE
Complete an inventory of: informal settlers, makeshift houses, sites for potential socialized housing, households with no access to potable water supply, and households with no access to electricity. Cause the donation of a local government lot for socialized housing, or provide socialized housing or mass dwelling in partnership with the private sector.
11
Submit an updated report on lands identified for socialized housing and resettlement area. [DILG MC No. 01-21, s. 2001] Create a Municipal Housing Board/Force or Housing Coordinating Unit. Such team shall assist the Sanggunian on matters concerning low cost housing and mass dwellings. Provide technical, financial, and other possible forms of support or assistance to Punong Barangays within the municipality to ensure that the problem of squatting is properly addressed. [MC No. 98-202] Ensure an annual financial allocation to the Katarungang Pambarangay. Strengthen the Local Disaster Coordinating Council. Enhance local government readiness to manage the risks of disasters, including relief, other associated services and rehabilitation. Appropriate an amount for the continuing education and enhancement of skills of those who are directly involved in maintaining peace and order apart from appropriations for MOOE and capital outlays. Develop and implement programs and services for the CICL and provide funds thereof. [DILG MC No. 06-104, s. 2006] Include in the Annual Budget a corresponding appropriation for the operation of PLEB. [DILG MC No. 59, s. 2006] Strengthen the Municipal Anti-Drug Abuse Council which shall be responsible for advocacy and information campaign against illegal drugs. Organize a Municipal Special Drug Education Center Team to establish and operate a Special Drug Education Center for OSY and street children. (DILG MC No. 06-150, s. 2006) Ensure the efficient and effective administration of Katarungang Pambarangay. [Section 421, LGC] Provide for in the annual budget of the municipality such amount as may be necessary for the effective implementation of the katarungang pambarangay. [Sec. 422, LGC] Encourage the Lupong Tagapamayapa to be efficient in its operation and join the annual search for Outstanding Lupong Tagapamayapa. Ensure that the LGU has a Quality DRRM Plan and such plan contains the minimum information it has to contain. [DILG MC No. 94, s.1998] Enhance local government readiness to manage the risks of disasters, including relief, other associated services and rehabilitation. Remind the MPOC and the MDCC that they shall serve as an Advisory Committee to the Sanggunian concerned on Peace and Order and Public Safety. Provide a reassuring presence of local police officers on the streets. Mobilize the Local Health Board. Improve the quality of primary health care or basic curative services. [Section 17, LGC] Improve the quality of child care services. Establish or improve the quality of the ALS. Exert advocacy and social mobilization efforts to attract more learners being the center of the ALS. Establish a Scholarship Fund for the poor but qualified. It is the essence of public service. Establish or improve the quality of the Alternative Learning System. Provide financial support to ALS as recommended by the Local School Board.
12
The Local School Board shall serve as an advisory committee to the Sanggunian concerned on matters relative to Education.
ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE
Improve the quality of permitting or licensing. Ensure the ease of doing business. Establish an administrative support body to take the lead in marketing the investment potentials of the local government. Provide, or cause the provision of, direct support services to business, particularly those categorized as micro, small and medium enterprises. Establish an administrative support body to take the lead in marketing the investment potentials of the local government. Strengthen the LGU-San Jose Chamber of Commerce partnership by holding regular meetings/dialogues with its members. Provide, or cause the provision of, direct support services to business, particularly those categorized as micro, small and medium enterprises. Enact a Local Investment and Incentive Code. Create an Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion Office. Improve credit facilitation services to fisher folks by allocating additional fund from the 20% Development fund. Improve infrastructure support for the fishery sector, e.g., mariculture parks, fish ports, seaweeds village ecozones, sea cages, among others. Improve credit facilitation services to the fisherfolks. Extend adequate production support services, e.g. fingerlings. Provide assistance to research and development services, e.g., techno-demo cooperators. Improve market development services for the fishery sector. Reach more fishing-household beneficiaries. Implement DOFS that is aimed not only to increase rice production but to diversify farm production. Cause the provision of extension and on-site research services and facilities related to agriculture. Improve infrastructure support, e.g., communal irrigation system, farm-to-market roads, post-harvest facilities. Improve credit facilitation services to farmers and fisherfolks by allocating additional fund and by organizing an Agri-Credit Desk in the municipality and designate a senior staff as Agri-Credit Information Officer (DILG MC No. 97-262, s. 1997). Extend adequate production support, e.g., planting materials, fertilizers, and laboratory services such as soil testing. Provide assistance to research and development, e.g., techno-demo cooperators, and research institutes. Improve market development services, e.g., trade fairs, exhibits, missions and congresses.
ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE
Consider long-term planning on coastal marine, freshwater, and forest protection and management.
13
Maximize CSOs and citizens' involvement in coastal marine protection and management. Set target areas for rehabilitation and protection, and monitor actions to ensure the achievement of targets Move from Open Dumpsite Facility to Controlled Dumpsite Facility to a Sanitary Landfill as the final disposal facility. Improve the quality of the Solid Waste Management Plan. Establish an incentive system for barangays which perform well in managing solid waste. [DILG MC No. 01-38, s. 2001]. Institutionalize other environmental management programs or projects that promote air and water quality [Section 287, LGC; EO No. 189 s. 1999; DILG and DBM JMC No. 1 s. 2005] Implement the Zero-Waste Management Technology.[DILG MC No. 00-117, s. 2000] Improve solid waste collection process. Strengthen the Solid Waste Management Board Ensure that every barangay has a material recovery facility.
In Part II, on Financial Performance, the report is divided into two parts: Revenue Generation, and Resource Allocation and Utilization. PERFORMANCE AREAS Revenue Generation Resource Allocation and Utilization Overall performance rating SUMMARY RATING 4.26 3.50 3.88 DESCRIPTION High but not Excellent Fair FAIR
On Revenue Generation
The cost to collect revenues stands at 16.00% which is lower than the average of 1st class municipalities shows exceptional local revenue collection efficiency. Average first class municipality stands at 29.90% while the national average for municipalities regardless of income class is 41.22%. Locally-sourced revenues to total income shows a 71.44% dependency rate from external revenue sources slightly lower than the average first class municipalities dependency ratio of 74.53% and to the national average of 81.93%. However, this also shows an exceptional performance having attained a lower dependency ratio against that of the average first class municipalities and national average. Locally-sourced revenues to total income of 28.56% is also higher both to the average first class municipalities of 25.47% and national average of 18.07%, thus, another exceptional performance. Regular revenue to total income improved to 91% versus the average 90.28% funding sources reliability ratio of first class municipalities and the 86.01% ratio of the national average. This is slightly higher funding sources reliability ratio both to the average of first class municipalities and the national average shows an exceptional performance with regards to the reliability of funding sources.
14
The level of locally-sourced revenue level is ended at Php 61,534,984.61 is 59.46% higher (translated to a gap of Php 22,944,999.11) than the average for 1st class municipalities of Php 38,589,985.50. This is even higher by 329.99% or Php 47,224,207.11 higher than the Php 14,310,777.50 of the national average for municipalities. This is also an exceptional performance area. The locally-sourced revenue per capita of 419.55 is ahead of the national average of Php 368.93 but lagging behind the average for 1st class municipalities of Php 490.17. However, it must be noted the following points as a result of our analysis: The computation was based on the 146,669 population projection for 2011. Recently, the NSO has released its official 2010 Population Data where San Jose has a population of 131,188 based on the 2010 Census at 3.47% annual population growth rate. Considering the aforesaid population growth, the Municipalitys population would have grown into 135,740. This will increase the Municipalitys locally-sourced revenue per capita into Php 453.33 that is Php 84.40 (22.88%) higher than national average and Php 36.84 (8.78%) slightly lower than the average of first class municipalities. Having such performance would mean me may have an exceptional performance since comparing the average population of all first class municipalities which is only 79,947 as to our municipalitys 135,740. Thus, the performance of the LGU in terms of the locallysourced revenue per capita is almost at par with its contemporaries.
Real property tax accomplishment rate is slightly lower at 79.16% compared to the national average of 80.77% and even lower to the 90.02% average RPT accomplishment rate of first class municipalities. However, considering the efforts perceived in the performance, the LGUs RPT collection is still at par with that of the national average of municipalities regardless of the income class.
On Resource Allocation and Utilization

Personal Services Expenditure Ratio is set at 57.94%. This rate is higher than the national average, the fact remains that the LGU exceeds the LG Code limitation on Personal Service which is set at 45%. Total expenditure per capita is set at Php 632.84 which revealed how much was actually spent by the LGU in a per capita basis. This rate is way lower than the national average set at Php 2,276.03 and lagging behind the average of 1st class municipalities which is set at Php 1,998.31. The Debt Service Ratio of the Municipality of San Jose is set at 6.00% which is within the limit stipulated in the LG Code of 1991 which should not exceed 20% of the regular income.
15
e-SLGPR
State of Local Governance Performance, Electronic Report
Municipality of San Jose, PY 2011
Highlighted in this report is your LGU's performance in four (4) areas of governance: (1) Administrative Governance, (2) Social Governance, (3) Economic Governance, and (4) Environmental Governance. A special report is included to determine how the fundamentals of good governance such as Participation, Transparency, and Financial Accountability are valued in the LGU. It is to note that the LGU's performance was assessed based on the responses of the LGU's Team to the questions provided into the LGPMS database. A Performance Scale is used to identify areas with excellent performance and areas for improvement. A 5-point scale is applied to group local government performance -- to facilitate the identification of weak and strong points, or to situate localities with high or poor level of development. Applying a Scaling System also enables the summarizing of indicator values into a higher level of information. A perfect scale of 5 denotes excellent performance while performance scales of 1-4 indicate areas for improvement. Although scales of 3 and 4 are relatively high, there are areas which can still be improved on. All these are explained in detail as you read the entire report. The scale of 1 to 5 is also called Index. For Governance Indicators Result, the term used is Performance Scale as shown in Box 1. The box below indicates the performance scale and description used in this report: Box 1 Excellent 5 High but not Excellent 4 Fair 3 Low 2 Very Low 1
The scales do not use equal distribution of intervals as applied in statistical operation but use uneven class breaks in order to highlight issues.
16
On Administrative Governance Administrative governance comprises the systems of policy implementation and requires the existence of a well-functioning local government unit. It is carried out through an efficient, independent, accountable, and open local government unit. In this report, Administrative Governance looks into six areas: Local Legislation, Development Planning, Revenue Generation, 0Resource Allocation and Utilization, Customer Service and Human Resource Management and Development. Your LGU performance in each area of Administrative Governance is plotted in the graph below.
Area(s) with Excellent Performance
Your LGU is doing an excellent performance in 1 out of 6 sub-areas of Administrative Governance. Sustain Performance in this area:
Area(s) with Excellent Performance Interpretation
Human Resource Management and Development

Area(s) for Improvement
Managing the human resource is geared towards a desired end which is "desirable organizational performance and productivity".
The areas for improvement are listed by priority, starting from the area which gets the lowest performance scale followed by areas which get higher performance scales, respectively.
17
Priority Area for Improvement Resource Allocation and Utilization
Performance Description 3.50 Fair
Interpretation Management and coordination processes for budgeting and accounting are in place. However, these processes need to be revisited and improved. They are guarantees to an effective allocation and optimum utilization of financial resources.
Service Area Resource Allocation and Utilization
Indicator(s) with 5 Rating Debt Service Ratio
Interpretation
The appropriations for debt servicing set at 17.00% do not exceed the twenty percent (20%) limit expressly stipulated on the Local Government Code of 1991.
Service Area
Resource Allocation and Utilization
Indicator(s) with 3 4.99 Rating

Quality of the Annual Budget
Interpretation
The total appropriation, annual and supplemental combined, for development projects is equivalent to the 20% component of the IRA which amounts to Php 28,726,841.40. Such 20% component of IRA was appropriated for development projects. The aid to 38 component barangays amounts to Php 38,000.00 which is within the budgetary limitations. The Annual Budget is responsive to the budgetary requirements of the Annual Investment Program. The amount appropriated did not exceed the estimates of income. of the total budget appropriations.
The 2010 budget has 1% appropriations for GAD out

Personal Services Ratio The 57.94% Personal Services Expenditure Ratio of the municipality exceeded the 45% ceiling mandated by law for a first class municipality. The annual budget for 2010 was approved on January 5, 2010. The above-mentioned date is beyond the period stipulated by law which is October 17 to December 31, 2009.
Resource Allocation and Utilization
Quality of the Annual Budget
Service Area Resource Allocation and Utilization
Indicator(s) with 1 2.99 Rating Per Capita Expenditure
Interpretation
Php 632.84 is the actual per capita expenditure of the Municipality of San Jose. This amount can be considered small; however, this performance is off
18
Service Area
Interpretation mark compared to the average performance of LGUs with the same type and income class and also way off mark compared to the national average of the same LGU type regardless of income class.
SUGGESTED ACTIONS TO TAKE:
Strictly adhere to the 45% general limitation to personal services. In the approval the Annual Budget, Sec. 325 (A) of the Local Government Code of 1991, RA 7160 provides that appropriations for Personal Services shall not exceed 45% for 1 st 3rd class LGU. It is well to note that Section 316 (G) of the Local Government Code of 1991, RA 7160 specifically provides that the Local Finance Committee shall assist the Sanggunian concerned in the analysis and review of annual regular and budgets of the respective local government unit to determine compliance with statutory and administrative requirements. Appropriate at least 5% of the total budget for Gender and Development projects. Section 29 of General Appropriations Act (GAA) of 2009 clearly states that all departments, including their attached agencies, offices, bureaus, SUCs, GOCCs, LGUs and other instrumentalities shall formulate a GAD Plan designed to address gender issues. The cost of implementing the GAD Plan shall be at least 5% of the LGUs annual budget appropriations. Approve the annual budget within the period prescribed by law. Optimum utilization of resources will surely work to the advantage of the local government of San Jose when budget is approved on or before the end of the current fiscal year. Section 319 of the Local Government Code of 1991, RA 7160 specifies that on or before the end of the current fiscal year, the Sanggunian concerned shall enact, through an ordinance, the annual budget of the local government unit for the ensuing fiscal year on the basis of the estimates of income and expenditures submitted by the local chief executive. Thus said, efforts should be exerted to ensure that the annual budget for the ensuing year shall be approved within the period of October 17 to December 31 of the current year.
Performance Description 3.64 Fair Interpretation The imperatives of quality legislation have to be looked into. This might mean looking into legislative staff competence and the greater use of legislative tools such agenda development, legislative tracking, backstopping committee and legislative performance.
Priority Area for Improvement
Local Legislation
19
Service Area Local Legislation
Indicator(s) with 5 Rating Quality of the Legislative Agenda
Interpretation
The Legislative Agenda is supportive of the Executive Agenda. All the items in the Legislative Agenda are products of research and results of consultations with stakeholders.
Indicator(s) with 3 4.99 Rating Quality of the Legislative Tracking System
Interpretation
The Office of the Local Council has a tracking system which is computer-aided. The tracking system is capable of generating information on existing local rules and regulations which complement national laws; local rules and regulations which are being enforced; those which are not being enforced; existing local rules and regulations to avoid duplication; and status of a draft ordinance in the legislative process.
Indicator(s) with 1 2.99 Rating Presence of Updated Codes in Support of Administrative Functions, Regulatory Mandates, Corporate Objectives, Social Development, Economic Development and Environmental Management
Interpretation
The following codes are already enacted by the Sanggunian: Revenue Code Local Investment & Incentive Code Market Code Zoning Ordinance The following codes are not yet published by the Sanggunian: Code of General Ordinances Environmental Code Health and Sanitation Code Code for Children Gender and Development Code The percentage of ordinances over legislative measures is set at 15% which is way below the benchmark.
Local Legislation
Percentage of Ordinances over Legislative Measures
Install a Legislative Tracking and Analysis System. The purpose of a tracking and analysis system is to assess the effectiveness or non-effectiveness of an enactment, with the information generated factored into the review of the legislative measure. By utilizing such tracking system, real-time and accurate reports beyond the confines of the basic legislative process becomes easily accessible in no time without the hassle of manually
20
culling old files and documents. Further, regular updating of the legislative database and conducting periodic legislative review be set in place.
Create a Backstopping Committee which is the professional research arm of the legislative body. By creating such committee, the Sanggunian members will be free from lengthy, time-consuming, and costly debates on legislative action to take in the face of a particular issue. Backstopping Committees are particularly useful in the sense that such mechanisms ensure focused analysis of issues, with responsive legislative remedies easily worked out. Leadership of the committee is issue-dependent. If it is an issue on health, necessarily the head should be the Municipal Health Officer. Enact those Codes which support social development, economic development, and environmental health. The Legislative Tracking and Analysis System shall guide the members of the Sanggunian in identifying and rationalizing which ordinances require further analysis, amendment, or supplementation: Code of General Ordinances Environmental Code Health and Sanitation Code Code for Children Gender and Development Code Enact ordinances and other legislative measures relating to Local Administrative Governance, Local Social Governance, Local Economic Governance, and Local Environmental Governance among others. Cause the integration of Indigenous Peoples rights and related concerns within the framework of gender and development. [DILG MC No. 05-34, s. 2005]
Priority Area for Improvement Revenue Generation
Performance Description 4.26 High but not Excellent
Interpretation Existing measures in support of revenue generation need to be enhanced. This is an initial yet essential step in maximizing revenue generation potentials.
21
Service Area
Revenue Generation
Indicator(s) with 5 Rating

Quality of the Comprehensive Revenue Generation Plan
Interpretation
The plan embodies local revenue policy direction(s) for the given year. The plan contains strategies that have to be undertaken in order to yield the amount of revenues estimated to be collected for the given year. The plan identifies local government personnel responsible for each strategy. The plan includes the amount of revenues projected or estimated to be generated annually from real property taxes, business taxes, fees and charges, and from other potential sources. Monitoring and evaluation is an integral component of the Plan. The Comprehensive Revenue Generation Plan is utilized by local financial generation managers in monitoring accomplishments, lapses and misses in revenue generation. The Comprehensive Revenue Generation Plan is used as a principal reference document in updating the Revenue Code. The cost to collect revenues to total locally-sourced revenues is set at 7.05%. This percentage determines local revenue collection efficiency. The performance of the Municipality of San Jose is exceptional primarily because it is lower than the average of all 1 st class municipalities and lower than the national average.
Total Revenue Collection Cost to Total Revenue Collected
Service Area Revenue Generation
Indicator(s) with 5 Rating Real Property Tax Accomplishment Rate
Interpretation
Real property tax is one of the major sources of income of LGUs in general. This indicator determines local revenue collection effort on RPT. The accomplishment rate of the Municipality of San Jose in RPT collection is exceptional because it exceeded its Php 6M target with an all time high actual collection of Php 16,901,607.16 with 57.14% accomplishment rate which is lower than the average of 1st class municipalities and the national average accomplishment rates.
22
Service Area Revenue Generation
Indicator(s) with 3 4.99 Rating Efficiency of the system on local governmentimposed or collected taxes, fees and charges
Interpretation

Service Area Revenue Generation Indicator(s) with 1 2.99 Rating Percentage of Regular Revenues to Total Local Government Revenues
The system on all local taxes, fees, and charges does not operate on a network that is interlinked with computers in the Offices of the Assessor, Business Permits and Licensing Officer, and the Treasurer. Incentive scheme is provided to promote efficiency in real property assessment and real property tax collection The system on all local taxes, fees, and charges is guided by a Local revenue Code, which is not more than 5 years old. The system on real property tax is guided by updated real property tax maps for property identification. The system on business tax is capable of tax records management.
Interpretation
The percentage of locally sourced revenues set at 43.74% is higher than the average of 1st class municipalities and the national average municipalities. This rating shows that the Municipality of San Jose is an IRA dependent 1st Class Municipality.
SUGGESTED ACTIONS TO TAKE: To maximize revenue potentials, the following may be done to improve the locally-sourced revenues:
Codify revenue ordinances with the end in mind of improving local revenue. (e.g. include the TIN in all application for government permits, CTC, and other official papers and documents, campaign on the issuance of official receipts for every purchase made by the tax payers). Upgrade and modernize tax information and collection services through the use of computer hardware and software, and other means. [Section 17 (B) 3-x, LGC]
23
Priority Area for Performance Interpretation Improvement Description Development Planning 4.74 Improvements in the following areas are underscored: High but not (a) organizational performance; (b) consultation process; Excellent and (c) management of planning database. These areas are instrumental in quality land use and development planning, or lack of it.
Service Area
Development Planning

Quality of the CLUP
Interpretation
The CLUP is participatory in its formulation; demography, socio-economic, infrastructure and utilities, land use and local administration are integral sectors, in the plan. Monitoring and evaluation component of the plan. is an integral
The CLUP is updated every 10 or 15 years. The AIP is consistent with Development Investment Program. the Local
Quality of the AIP
The AIP embodies projects to be undertaken, for whom, how, by whom, and when. Financing is an integral component of the Plan. Monitoring and evaluation component of the Plan. is an integral
The LGU of San Jose has an Executive and Legislative Agenda.
Presence of ELA
Service Area

Functionality of the LDC
Interpretation
The LDC composition is in accordance with the LG Code. The Executive Committee organized is pursuant to the LG Code. Sectoral or Functional Committees are organized to assist the LDC. The Executive Committee meets as often as necessary. The Sectoral Committee meets as often as necessary. There is an organized agenda for every meeting.
24
Service Area
Interpretation

Service Area
Every meeting is documented. All decisions are embodied through resolutions of the LDC or of the Sectoral or Functional Committees. Overall, the LDC performance is Good. The LDC does not meet at least once every six months. The CDP is participatory in its formulation. Socio-economic development embodied in the Plan. thrusts are
Quality of CDP or PDPFP
Development Strategies are embodied in the Plan. Local development Investment Plan is an integral component of the CDP. The CDP is supportive if overall provincial development thrusts. The CDP is updated at least every six months. Monitoring and Evaluation is not an integral component of the Plan.

Quality of database for Development Planning
Interpretation
The Planning and Development Coordination Office does not maintain a database for development planning.
The LGU has no Geographic Information System (GIS).
Establish a Good Municipal Archival System. The system shall contain both quantitative and qualitative information; complete and updated information; and sex and agedisaggregated data. By installing a municipal archival system, information becomes easy to retrieve and available to users upon request and accessible through electronic means. Equip the MPDO with a GIS whose primary function is to capture, store, analyze, manage, and present data that are linked to location. Among many functions of the MPDO, the department exists primarily to formulate integrated economical, social, and other developmental plans and policies for consideration of the local government council. As such, it is imperative that the office shall be equipped with a system which will keep valuable and up-to-date data on economic development (e.g. data on poverty, labor and employment); environmental data (e.g. data on forest, agricultural, coastal marine,
25
freshwater, biodiversity, and urban ecosystems); physical land use; institutional data of local government or of the non-government sector.
Optimally utilize the Annual Report. Ensure that the SLGR becomes a principal source document in the formulation and implementation of programs or projects, or administrative reforms which are within the competence and authority of local authorities to undertake, in support of good local governance and meaningful development. [DILG MC No. 07-24, s.2007] Ensure the full implementation of the LGPMS. Also, cause the preparation of the State of Local Governance Report utilizing LGPMS results [DILG MC No. 04-141, s.2004] Support the institutionalization of integrated rural accessibility planning (IRAP) procedure in local planning. [DILG MC No. 01-8, s. 2001] Incorporate development projects on culture and arts in the short and long-term municipal development plans. [DILG MC No. 95-117, s.1995] Encourage the members of the LDC to meet at least once every six months. Include Monitoring and Evaluation as integral component of the CDP. Ensure that the Municipal Planning and Development Office maintain a database which contains the minimum information it must contain.
Priority Area for Improvement Customer Service Civil Applications
Performance Description
Interpretation
The civil application system needs to be transformed 4.80 into a seamless transactional process. After all, the High but not inherent motivation of putting up such a system is to Excellent ensure the ease of obtaining civil registry and real property documents.
Indicator(s) with 5 Rating Quality of Customer Service in the Processing of Civil Registry Documents Interpretation
Service Area Customer Service Civil Applications
The LGU has a database of civil registry records and it uses two softwares: CRIS (Civil registry Indexing System) and BREQS (Batch Request System). The office is manually utilizing the indexing system for those which are not yet encoded to the system. The set of steps in getting the civil registry records is made known to clients; procedure is clear; and it takes more or less 30 minutes in securing a civil registry document.
26
Service Area Customer Service Civil Applications
Indicator(s) with 3 4.99 Rating Quality of Customer Service in the Processing of real Property Documents
Interpretation
Procedure in securing documents is simple.
real
property

The Municipality of San Jose processes real property documents with the aid of computers. Currently, the Municipality of San Jose has installed the eRPTAAS but such software is not fully functional. Full operation is subject to further notice from the Provincial Office. Procedure in securing real property documents is not made known to clients. It takes more than 30 minutes but less than 8 hours to issue a real property document.
Make use of the eRPTAAS the soonest the system becomes fully functional. Post the procedure in securing real property documents. This effort will bring the government, specifically, the office, closer to the people. Equip the assessors office with the necessary computers and software to deliver quality services. The all time high performance of the LGU in RPT collection deserves direct support from the LGU to further improve the RPT collection and ultimately benefit the LGU as a whole.
Priority Area for Improvement Human Resource Management and Development
Performance Description 5.0 Excellent
Interpretation Managing the human resource is geared towards a desired end which is desirable organizational performance and productivity.
27
Service Area Human Resource Management and Development
Indicator(s) with 3 5.0 Rating Quality of Human Resource Management and Development
Interpretation
95% (209/220) of the total employees of the LGU occupy plantilla positions. There is a grievance system where employees can air their grievances and such grievances were properly responded to or acted upon. Recruitment and selection process and results, whether for plantilla or nonplantilla positions, are posted in three conspicuous places specifically Public Market, Municipal Health Office, and Municipal Hall Lobby. Staff development activities or opportunities are made available to staff regardless of level, or position in a given level, with low performance or to those staff who need career advancement.
Good performers are not recognized either

through personnel evaluation, written recommendation, or public acknowledgement.
Identify and provide venue and opportunities for the development of staff. It has to be emphasized that though there are staff development efforts, such efforts were usually initiated by national agencies. Efforts must be given to provide staff development which is initiated by the LGU. It is well to note that allocation of resources is just one side of the HRMD coin. However, it should not be forgotten in this context that local governments regularly spend substantial resources in the development of their staff through centrally funded institutes of public administration as well as other capacitybuilding programs. To obtain adequate return on investments in training and capacity development and to ensure that the skills that the staff acquired at public expense shall be used to the fullest extent, dialogue between management and staff on both performance expectations and capacity development strategies shall be strengthened. This will minimize waste of time and resources with regard to staff development. There are creative ways by which staff development may be done. Strongly link performance appraisal to core HRM decisions promotions, rewards, and sanctions. It is thus recommended that performance appraisals do not
28
become stand alone elements of staff management. Performance appraisals should be linked to the rest of human resources management processes. International experience shows, however, that performance appraisals should probably be used both as a way of dealing with development and underperformance, with a focus on better developing and changing the allocation of responsibilities of underperformers, and as a way of rewarding good performance.
Cause the formulation and implementation of a Municipal Human Resource and Development Program [DILG MC No. 96-17, s. 1996; PD No. 284]. Relative to the effectiveness of the Municipal Resource Management and Development Program, ensure that the following are in place and operational, as appropriate: Human Resource Planning Recruitment and Selection Performance Evaluation Human Resource Development Career Development Incentives and Awards System Grievance Committee
29
e-SLGPR
Highlighted in this report is your LGU's performance in four (4) areas of governance: (1) Administrative Governance, (2) Social Governance, (3) Economic Governance, and (4) Environmental Governance. A special report is included to determine how the fundamentals of good governance such as Participation, Transparency, and Financial Accountability are valued in the LGU. It is to note that the LGU's performance was assessed based on the responses of the LGU's Team to the questions provided into the LGPMS database. A Performance Scale is used to identify areas with excellent performance and areas for improvement. A perfect scale of 5 denotes excellent performance while performance scales of 1-4 indicate areas for improvement. Although scales of 3 and 4 are relatively high, there are areas which can still be improved on. All these are explained in detail as you read the entire report.
On Social Governance
Social Governance looks into four areas: Health Services, Support to Education Services, Support to Housing and Basic Utilities, and Peace, Security and Disaster Risk Management. Your LGU performance in each area of Social Governance is plotted in the graph below.
None of the 4 areas in Social Governance marked "excellent performance" so far. Meantime, dedicate more time and effort on the areas for improvement.
30
The areas for improvement are listed by priority, starting from the area which gets the lowest performance scale followed by areas which get higher performance scales, respectively. Performanc Interpretation e Description Support to Housing and 4.20 A certain level of support is extended to the housing Basic Utilities High but not services sector. However, further assistance to concerns Excellent such as the following is encouraged.
Suggested Action(s) to Take Complete an inventory of: informal settlers, makeshift houses, sites for potential socialized housing, households with no access to potable water supply, and households with no access to electricity Cause the donation of a local government lot for socialized housing, or provide socialized housing or mass dwelling in partnership with the private sector. Housing is an inalienable right
Service Area
Support to Housing and Basic Utilities

Database for the housing sector
Interpretation
The database of LGU for the housing sector has identified sites for potential socialized housing; updated inventory of households with access to water supply; and updated inventory of household with access to electricity. The database has an updated inventory of informal settlers. The database has an updated inventory of makeshift houses.
Cause the donation of a local government lot for socialized housing, or provide socialized housing or mass dwelling in partnership with the private sector. Housing is an inalienable right. Submit an updated report on lands identified for socialized housing and resettlement area. [DILG MC No. 01-21, s. 2001] Create a Municipal Housing Board/Force or Housing Coordinating Unit. Such team shall assist the Sanggunian on matters concerning low cost housing and mass dwellings. Provide technical, financial, and other possible forms of support or assistance to Punong Barangays within the municipality to ensure that the problem of squatting is properly addressed. [MC No. 98-202]
31
Priority Area for Improvement Support to Education Services

Suggested Action(s) to Take
Interpretation A certain level of support to basic education is extended. However, further assistance to matters such as the following is encouraged. The Local School Board might have to do more to advance the cause of those in need of quality education.
Mobilize the Local School Board Establish a Scholarship Fund for the poor but qualified. It is the essence of public service Establish or improve the quality of the Alternative Learning System
Service Area
Support to Education Services

Functionality of the Local School Board
Interpretation
The LSB composition is in accordance with the LG Code. The LSB meets at least once a month; there is an organized agenda for every meeting; every meeting is documented; and the overall performance is Good. The LGU extends support in the construction, repair or maintenance of school buildings, facilities and equipment of public elementary and secondary schools; educational research, purchase of books and periodicals; establishment or maintenance of extension classes, and sports development.
Support to Elementary and Secondary Education from the Special Education Fund
Service Area

Support to Education from the General Fund
Interpretation
The LGU implements a scholarship program from the General Fund. The LGU extends support in the construction of extension classroom and hiring of extension teachers. The ALS focuses on functional literacy and skills training of target beneficiaries. The ALS promotes gender sensitivity, equality, and development. Practical skills gained from the system are known to be applied by many of the beneficiaries. There are resources available, including staff and funds, but the same are not sufficient. Not all target beneficiaries are aware of the alternative learning system
Quality of Alternative Learning System
Quality of Alternative Learning System
32

Establish or improve the quality of the ALS. Ensure that ALS truly operates as a system and not just a string of programs and activities. From the initial engagement with alternative learning practices, set out to construct a genuine alternative learning system.
Exert advocacy and social mobilization efforts to attract more learners being the center of the ALS. Competency development and skills enhancement of facilitators being the heart and souls of the system shall be given priority. Equally important is to intensify the power of collaboration among the stakeholders which include the LGU, DepEd, parents, NGOs, private sector, other government agencies, and universities and colleges. Establish a Scholarship Fund for the poor but qualified. It is the essence of public service. Establish or improve the quality of the Alternative Learning System. Provide financial support to ALS as recommended by the Local School Board. The Local School Board shall serve as an advisory committee to the Sanggunian concerned on matters relative to Education. Performance Description 4.83 High but not Excellent Interpretation Efforts are made to ensure Peace, Security and Disaster Risk Management. But much more need to be done. Factors that have the ability to improve performance in this area have to be considered.
Priority Area for Improvement Peace, Security and Disaster Risk Management
Ensure an annual financial allocation to the Katarungang Pambarangay. The Local Government Code mandates
it. Let us be reminded that this village justice system is principal in the promotion of community peace, harmony and solidarity.
Service Area
Peace, Security and Disaster Risk Management

Functionality of POC
Interpretation
There POC composition is in accordance with Sec. 1 of EO No. 773, 2009. The POC meet as often as necessary; there is an organized agenda for every meeting; every meeting is documented; and the overall performance is Good. The IACPSP is participatory in its formulation; needsbased priority projects to enhance peace and order and public safety, financing, and Monitoring and Evaluation are integral components of the Plan and the IACPSP is updated annually. The LGU has Police Station, Fire Station, and Municipal Jail. The LCPC composition is in accordance with DILG Memorandum Circular No. 2002-121, s. 2002. The LCPC meets as often as necessary; there is an organized agenda for every meeting; and every meeting is documented. The LCPC is able to cause approval of a legislation on child survival, protection, participation, and development among others.
Quality of the IACPSP
Provision of sites for protective services Functionality of the LCPC
33
Service Area

Percentage of disputes resolved through Lupong Tagapamayapa Adequacy of services for disaster victims
Interpretation
The LT resolved more interpersonal disputes
than
80%
of
There are sufficient evacuation centers, sufficient relief goods and services, sufficient first aid and medical services for all victims incase of having calamity. All disaster damages were rehabilitated.
Rehabilitation effort
Service Area

Support to Lupong Tagapamayapa
Interpretation
The appropriation provides for the Maintenance and Other operating Expenses and covers expenses for capital outlays. The appropriation does not include financial benefits of the Lupon. The appropriation does not provide funding for the conduct of continuing education for the Lupon members. 98-100% of cases resolved were sustained.
Percentage of Amicable Settlements sustained by Lupong Tagapamayapa Responsiveness of Disaster operations
LDCC Action Team exists and can be easily mobilized. There are available evacuation centers, relief goods, medical and counseling services, operational community-based disaster early warning system. No appropriate and adequate equipage. With Quality Disaster Risk Management Plan.
Service Area

Functionality of LDCC
Interpretation
The LDCC composition is in accordance with Presidential Decree No. 1566, s. 1978. Support groups and community volunteers are organized. The LDCC meet as often as necessary; there is
34
an organized agenda for every meeting; and every meeting is documented.

Quality of Accomplishments
The LDCC is able to integrate Disaster Risk management in the CDP, LDIP, and AIP. The LDCC is not able to formulate an Operations Manual incorporating therein a communications strategy and Monitoring and Evaluation. Projects implemented are consistent with priority projects embodied in the Plan.
Incidence of crime reduced compared to last year.
Ensure an annual financial allocation to the Katarungang Pambarangay. The Local Government Code mandates it. Let us be reminded that this village justice system is principal in the promotion of community peace, harmony and solidarity. Strengthen the Local Disaster Coordinating Council. There are a lot of creative ways to achieve it. Enhance local government readiness to manage the risks of disasters, including relief, other associated services and rehabilitation. Appropriate an amount for the continuing education and enhancement of skills of those who are directly involved in maintaining peace and order apart from appropriations for MOOE and capital outlays. Develop and implement programs and services for the CICL and provide funds thereof. [DILG MC No. 06-104, s. 2006] Include in the Annual Budget a corresponding appropriation for the operation of PLEB. [DILG MC No. 59, s. 2006] Strengthen the Municipal Anti-Drug Abuse Council which shall be responsible for advocacy and information campaign against illegal drugs. Organize a Municipal Special Drug Education Center Team to establish and operate a Special Drug Education Center for OSY and street children. (DILG MC No. 06-150, s. 2006) Ensure the efficient and effective administration of Katarungang Pambarangay. [Section 421, LGC] Provide for in the annual budget of the municipality such amount as may be necessary for the effective implementation of the katarungang pambarangay. [Sec. 422, LGC] Encourage the Lupong Tagapamayapa to be efficient in its operation and join the annual search for Outstanding Lupong Tagapamayapa. Stress that winning is in the joining. Ensure that the LGU has a Quality DRRM Plan and such plan has provisions for the following: Warning and communication systems; Early evacuation from high risk areas; Rescue and emergency operations;
35
Distribution of relief goods and services; Reporting of situations and actions taken; Post-calamity clean-up; Medical assistance; rehabilitation of agricultural and livelihood programs; Housing assistance; Burial service; Loan assistance[DILG MC No. 94, s.1998]
Remind the MPOC and the MDCC that they shall serve as an Advisory Committee to the Sanggunian concerned on Peace and Order and Public Safety. Provide a reassuring presence of local police officers on the streets. Increasing police officers visibility most especially in areas which pose danger to constituents demonstrates that the local PNP is serious in covering a range of core policing activities. In return, this increases the confidence of the public to the police officers and the LGU in general.
Priority Area for Improvement Health Services

Interpretation The overall quality of the local health system deserves a second look. This is so because performance falls short in certain aspects. The principal support system on this matter is the Local Health Board. It might have to do more.
Mobilize the Local Health Board Improve the quality of primary health care or basic curative services
Service Area Health Services
Indicator(s) with 5 Rating Quality of Maternal Care
Interpretation
There is a regularly available safe motherhood and family planning consultations. There is a regularly available pre-natal check-up, including tetanus toxoid vaccination to pregnant women. Breast feeding campaign is supported. Post-partum care or check-up after delivery is available regularly. Regular medical missions are conducted regularly in partnership with nongovernmental organization or with private sector. The LGU provides Philhealth Cards to poor families.
Other Innovative Health Services
36
Service Area
Health Services

Functionality of the LHB
Interpretation
The LHB composition is in accordance with the LG Code. There is an organized agenda for every meeting and every meeting is documented. The performance of the LHB is only Somewhat Good. The LHB meets at least once every quarter instead of at least once a month or as often as necessary.
Service Area
Health Services

Quality of Primary Health Care
Interpretation
Health referral system is established. The facility is always clean and maintained. Patients recording system is established. The Physician or a medical staff is regularly stationed as scheduled. Some basic medical supplies are available but some are not and some numbers of equipment are available but some are not.
Quality of Child Care
Basic medicines are available most of the time.

Regular check-up for children is available. OPV3, DPT3, Hep B3, and Measles vaccination to infants before 12 months of age is ensured. Program to counter malnutrition is undertaken and information on proper child care is disseminated through various means. Basic dental care service is limited to tooth extraction only. Other oral health care services like filling and proper oral health care information are wanting.
Mobilize the Local Health Board. Ensure that the LHB meets at least once a month or as often as necessary to discuss health issues and concerns. It is well to note that the LHB shall serve as an advisory committee to the Sanggunian concerned on health matters. Improve the quality of primary health care or basic curative services. The LGU may start by making basic medicines readily available and adding necessary medical equipment to improve the delivery of health services. Include in the annual budget the purchase of medicine, medical supplies, and equipment. [Section 17, LGC] Improve the quality of child care services. Ensure that the basic dental care service will include filling and proper oral health care information.
37
e-SLGPR
Municipality of San Jose, PY-2010
Highlighted in this report is your LGU's performance in four (4) areas of governance: (1) Administrative Governance, (2) Social Governance, (3) Economic Governance, and (4) Environmental Governance. A special report is included to determine how the fundamentals of good governance such as Participation, Transparency, and Financial Accountability are valued in the LGU. It is to note that the LGU's performance was assessed based on the responses of the LGU's Team to the questions provided into the LGPMS database. A Performance Scale is used to identify areas with excellent performance and areas for improvement. A perfect scale of 5 denotes excellent performance while performance scales of 1-4 indicate areas for improvement. Although scales of 3 and 4 are relatively high, there are areas which can still be improved on. All these are explained in detail as you read the entire report. On Economic Governance Economic Governance looks into three areas: Support to Agriculture Sector, Support to Fishery Services, and Enterprise, Business and Industry Promotion. The report varies according to the nature of economic activities in the locality. Support to agriculture or fishery services are filtered out if not applicable. Your LGU performance in this area is plotted in the graph below.
38
None of the 3 areas in Economic Governance marked "excellent performance" so far. Meantime, dedicate more time and effort on the areas for improvement.
Priority Area for Improvement Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion
Interpretation More need to be done to institutionalize a businessfriendly environment. Factors such as the following need to be looked into:
Suggested Action(s) to Take Improve the quality of permitting or licensing Ensure the ease of doing business. Strategize to effect the issuance of building, occupancy, and business permits in a more expedient manner Indicator(s) with 5 Rating
Processing time of Building Occupancy and Business Permits
Service Area
Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion
Interpretation
Processing time of a building permit takes 4-8 hours. Processing time of an occupancy permit takes less than 4 hours. Processing time of a business permit takes more than 30 minutes.
Service Area

Quality of direct support to businesses, enterprises, and industries
Interpretation
The LGU provides tax incentive. The LGU supports training of business-employed personnel or private sector employees. The LGU maintains industrial peace and extends support to job fairs. No assistance is extended in product labeling and product packaging for small and medium enterprises.
Entrepreneurship,
Quality of Civil Application System to business Sector
39
Service Area
Business and Industry Promotion
Interpretation
Procedure in securing permits is made known to clients and such procedure is clear. The LGU has One-Stop-Shop in the processing of permits. The LGU has a Customer Assistance desk that attends to inquiries or complaints of businessclienteles. Processing of Building Permit requires more than 9 documentary requirements, 9 steps and 5 signatories. Processing of Occupancy Permit requires more than 5 documentary requirements, more than 3 steps, and 1 signatory.
Processing of Business Permit requires 12 documentary requirements, 4 steps, and 1 signatory. The permitting procedure of the LGU is computer aided
Service Area

Presence of LG-supported administrative body that us responsible in the promotion of business and industry
Interpretation
The LGU has local government-supported administrative body that is responsible in the promotion of business and industry in the locality.
Improve the quality of permitting or licensing. Endeavor to computerize the whole process of permitting and licensing. The following strategies may be utilized by the LGU: Installment of BPLS which automates the permit application process, assessment of taxes and fees, billing, payment, and liquidation of collections. The BPLS dramatically reduces transaction time, and practically eradicates underassessment or miscalculation of taxes and fees by keeping human discretion to a minimum. It also enables LGUs to monitor compliance of businesses with their tax obligations. The management and statistical reports generated by BPLS allows LGUs to establish patterns of business tax compliance, and facilitate enforcement of focused collection strategies; Launching of a municipal website and inclusion of permitting and licensing processes in the site for easy access of information; Completion of requirements before licenses and business permits are issued must be strictly implemented. Ensure the ease of doing business. Strategize to effect the issuance of building, occupancy, and business permits in a more expedient manner. This can be done by
40
simplifying the process, reducing the number of documentary requirements, and the number of signatories.
Establish an administrative support body to take the lead in marketing the investment potentials of the local government. Strengthen the LGU-San Jose Chamber of Commerce partnership by holding regular meetings/dialogues with its members. To project a business friendly government, the LGU officials must establish a good relationship with business owners, know their concerns, and provide services they need. Provide, or cause the provision of, direct support services to business, particularly those categorized as micro, small and medium enterprises. Support services may come in the form of tax incentives, product labeling, product packaging, training, job fairs and trade fairs. The following are suggested strategies: Massive information and education campaign on tax incentives for on-time tax payers using tri-media. Aside from radio programs, consider publication of fliers or leaflets and advertisements in local channel that would also cater information dissemination of other programs and services of the LGU. Creation of a Task Force or designation of a Livelihood Officer to focus on the provision of livelihood assistance and assistance in product labeling and packaging especially for small and medium enterprises. Create an Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion Office. The office, task force or board will be tasked to implement LGU plans and programs for the realization of the LGUs goals.
Priority Area for Improvement Support to Agriculture Sector
Interpretation
4.76 Local government support is extended to the Agriculture High but not Sector. But greater intervention is necessary. Excellent
Suggested Action(s) to Take Improve infrastructure support, e.g., communal irrigation system, farm-to-market roads, post-harvest facilities Improve credit facilitation services to farmers Provide assistance to research and development, e.g., techno-demo cooperators, and research institutes
Service Area
Support to Agriculture Sector

Percentage of farming HH benefitting from agricultural extension or on-site services Alternative assistance/services to farmers
Interpretation
The extent of farming households benefitting from agricultural extension and on-site research services or facilities is set at more than 80%. The LGU of San Jose has an alternative assistance to farmers specifically the use of Bio-N.
41
Service Area
Support to Agriculture Sector

Extent of support to agriculture
Interpretation
High rehabilitation or construction of feeder roads or FMR. High support in terms of production services, research and development services, and market development services. The LGU provides high rehabilitation support, high provision of post-harvest equipment, and high credit facilitation services.
Implement DOFS that is aimed not only to increase rice production but to diversify farm production. Agriculture is the major source of income for more than half the population of San Jose; however, most of the farmers remain poor due to any of the following factors: Low household income, caused by high production cost; Prevalence of pest and diseases; Poor soil productivity; Unstable market price of farm products; Absence or lack of alternative source of income; and Inadequate post harvest facilities. The DOFS main goal is to improve the economic condition and the quality of life of the marginalized farmers by increasing the household net income of the farmers, establishing a sustainable agricultural approach in rice production, and establishing a healthy farm environment.
Cause the provision of extension and on-site research services and facilities related to agriculture. Aside from demo-farms, farmer field school engaging farmers in a process of experiential or active learning (learning by doing) can be introduced. Improve infrastructure support, e.g., communal irrigation system, farm-to-market roads, post-harvest facilities. Improve credit facilitation services to farmers and fisherfolks by allocating additional fund and by organizing an Agri-Credit Desk in the municipality and designate a senior staff as Agri-Credit Information Officer (DILG MC No. 97-262, s. 1997). Extend adequate production support, e.g., planting materials, fertilizers, and laboratory services such as soil testing. Provide assistance to research and development, e.g., techno-demo cooperators, and research institutes. Improve market development services, e.g., trade fairs, exhibits, missions and congresses.
42
Priority Area for Improvement Support to Fishery Services
Performance Interpretation Description 4.85 Support is extended to Fishery Services. However, High but not more focused intervention and sustained engagement Excellent are important.
Suggested Action(s) to Take Improve infrastructure support for the fishery sector, e.g., mariculture parks, fish ports, seaweeds village ecozones, sea cages, among others. Provide assistance to research and development services, e.g., techno-demo cooperators Improve market development services for the fishery sector
Service Area
Support to Fishery Services

Functionality of FARMC
Interpretation
The FARMC composition is in accordance with Section 75 of Republic Act No. 8550. The FARMC meets as often as necessary; there is an organized agenda in every meeting; and every meeting is documented. The FARMC is able to assist in the preparation of the Fishery Development Plan. The FARMC is able to cause the enactment of a fishery ordinance. The FARMC is able to assist in the enforcement of fishery laws and rules and regulations on municipal waters.
Service Area
Support to Fishery Services

Percentage of fishing households benefitting from extension or on-site services Support to fisherfolks and fishing industry
Interpretation
80% or more of fishing-household benefit from fishery extension and on-site research or facilities. The LGU provides infrastructure support to fisherfolks; offers production support services; and research and development services. The LGU provides full credit facilitation services.
Market development is high.
43
Improve credit facilitation services to fisher folks by allocating additional fund from the 20% Development Fund. With a capital to use, fisher folks can venture into other source of income related to fishing or improve their production that would increase their income. However, provision of such assistance should be accompanied with a proper monitoring and evaluation system to sustain the service. Improve infrastructure support for the fishery sector, e.g., mariculture parks, fish ports, seaweeds village ecozones, sea cages, among others. Extend adequate production support services, e.g. fingerlings. Continuous of providing assistance to research and development services, e.g., techno-demo cooperators. Improve market development services for the fishery sector. Reach more fishing-household beneficiaries.
44
e-SLGPR
Highlighted in this report is your LGU's performance in four (4) areas of governance: (1) Administrative Governance, (2) Social Governance, (3) Economic Governance, and (4) Environmental Governance. A special report is included to determine how the fundamentals of good governance such as Participation, Transparency, and Financial Accountability are valued in the LGU. It is to note that the LGU's performance was assessed based on the responses of the LGU's Team to the questions provided into the LGPMS database. A Performance Scale is used to identify areas with excellent performance and areas for improvement. A perfect scale of 5 denotes excellent performance while performance scales of 1-4 indicate areas for improvement. Although scales of 3 and 4 are relatively high, there are areas which can still be improved on. All these are explained in detail as you read the entire report. On Environmental Governance Environmental Governance looks into four areas: Forest Ecosystem Management, Freshwater Ecosystem Management, Coastal Marine Ecosystem Management, and Urban Ecosystem Management. The report varies according to local ecosystems. Ecosystems which are not related to the LGU are filtered out. Your LGU performance in this area is plotted in the graph below.
45
None of the 4 areas in Environmental Governance marked "excellent performance" so far. Meantime, dedicate more time and effort on the areas for improvement.
Priority Area for Improvement Coastal Marine Ecosystems Management

Performance Description 1.00 Very Low
Interpretation Minimal effort or low capacity in Coastal Marine Ecosystem Management. Take note of the factors that pull down performance, and ensure failure. The way forward is to improve. Today's leaders are stewards of the coastal marine ecosystem - to preserve and to protect.
Consider long-term planning on coastal marine protection and management Maximize CSOs and citizens' involvement in coastal marine protection and management Set target areas for rehabilitation and protection, and monitor actions to ensure the achievement of targets
Service Area
Coastal Marine Ecosystems Management

Involvement of NGOs/Pos/Private Sector in the protection and rehabilitation of coastal areas Integration of coastal marine resource rehabilitation in the CLUP or PDPFP Adequacy of coastal marine ecosystem management efforts
Interpretation
NGOs, Peoples organizations, the private sector or the general public are all involved in the protection and rehabilitation of coastal areas. The coastal marine resource rehabilitation is not integrated in the CDP Efforts are not deliberate, area-targets are not set, not rehabilitated, and not protected.
Consider long-term planning on coastal marine protection and management. Maximize CSOs and citizens' involvement in coastal marine protection and management. Set target areas for rehabilitation and protection, and monitor actions to ensure the achievement of targets
46
Interpretation Minimal effort or low capacity in Freshwater Ecosystem Management. Take note of the factors that pull down performance. The way forward is to improve performance. The thinking is that the leaders today are merely stewards of this resource - to preserve and to protect.
Freshwater Ecosystems 1.00 Management Very Low
Consider long-term planning on fresh water protection and management Maximize CSOs and citizens' involvement in fresh water protection and management Set target areas for rehabilitation and protection, and ensure the attainment of targets
Service Area
Freshwater Ecosystems Management

Involvement of NGOs/Pos/Private Sector in the protection /rehabilitation of freshwater Integration of freshwater protection in the CLUP or PDPFP Adequacy of freshwater management efforts
Interpretation
NGOs, Peoples organizations, the private sector or the general public are not involved in the protection and rehabilitation of freshwater.
The freshwater protection or rehabilitation is not integrated in the CDP Efforts are not deliberate, area-targets are not set, not rehabilitated, and not protected.
Consider long-term planning on fresh water protection and management. Maximize CSOs and citizens' involvement in fresh water protection and management. Set target areas for rehabilitation and protection, and ensure the attainment of targets.
Priority Area for Improvement Forest Ecosystems Management

Performance Description 2.33 Low
Interpretation Minimal effort or low capacity in Forest Ecosystem Management. The way forward is to improve performance. It is said that trees are the lungs of the earth. Not only that. Forests are the sanctuary of biodiversity, invariably linked to the water resource, to agriculture, and to mankind.
Maximize CSOs and citizens' involvement in forest protection and management Set target areas for rehabilitation and protection, and ensure the realization of targets
47
Service Area
Forest Ecosystems Management

Involvement of NGOs/POs Private Sector in the protection and management of forest
Interpretation
NGOs, Peoples organizations, the private sector or the general public are all involved in the protection and management of forest.
Service Area
Forest Ecosystems Management

Integration of forest management program in the CLUP or PDPFP Adequacy of forest management efforts
Interpretation
The forest management program is not integrated in the CDP Efforts are not deliberate, area-targets are not set, not reforested, and not protected.
Consider long-term planning on forest management. Set targets areas for rehabilitation and protection, and ensure the realization of targets.
Performance Description Interpretation
Priority Area for Improvement Urban Ecosystems Management
Pollution control and proper solid waste management 4.13 are essential in preserving the integrity of the High but not environment. More need to be done. To gain better Excellent performance in this area, consider the following:
Strengthen the Solid Waste Management Board Prepare, if none has been formulated, or improve the quality of, the Solid Waste Management Plan Ensure that every barangay has a material recovery facility Improve solid waste collection practices Move from Open Dumpsite Facility to Controlled Dumpsite Facility to a Sanitary Landfill as the final
disposal facility. It makes sense. At the very least, inaction has legal implications. But more telling are the health and environmental imperatives
Service Area
Urban Ecosystems Management

Integration of pollution control program in CDP or PDPFP Involvement of NGOs/POs/Private Sector in the Protection of the environment from air and water pollution Effort to enforce pollution control measures
Interpretation
The pollution control program is integrated in CDP. The NGOs/Pos/Private Sector in the protection of the environment from air and water pollution. Efforts are deliberate, area-targets are set, and areatargets are protected from pollution.
48
Service Area

Presence if facilities as final disposal of solid wastes Effectiveness of Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Presence of Solid Waste Management Plan
Interpretation
The LGU has a Controlled Dumpsite. Most of the time, solid waste collection is done on time The LGU has a Solid Waste Management Plan which is participatory in formulation and financing and M & E are integral components of the plan. Waste characterization, source reduction, collection and transfer, recycling, composting, solid waste disposal, education and public information, and incentive scheme are only partially integrated in the plan.
Service Area

Percentage of Barangays with Material Recovery Facilities
Interpretation
The percentage of barangays with material recovery facilities is set at 0 25%.
SUGGESTED ACTIONS TAKE:
Move from Open Dumpsite Facility to Controlled Dumpsite Facility to a Sanitary Landfill as the final disposal facility. It makes sense. At the very least, inaction has legal implications. But more telling are the health and environmental imperatives. Improve the quality of the Solid Waste Management Plan. Expand the membership and involvement of the SWMB members in its formulation and update the plan at least every two years. Establish an incentive system for barangays which perform well in managing solid waste. [DILG MC No. 01-38, s. 2001]. Ensure that all barangay in your LGU has a fully operational MRF. LGPMS benchmark in the presence of MRF in ALL barangays does not distinguish whether the barangay is rural or urban. MRF can also be a source of additional revenues for the barangays. Institutionalize other environmental management programs or projects that promote air and water quality [Section 287, LGC; EO No. 189 s. 1999; DILG and DBM JMC No. 1 s. 2005] Implement the Zero-Waste Management Technology through: Total recycling such as conversion of wastes into factory-returnable goods i.e. bottles, aluminum cans; fertilizers i.e. composts; feeds, fuel i.e. bio-gas; fine crafts and filling materials; Adoption of methodologies in recycling wastes such as sorting, segregation at source, proper waste packaging and ecologically-sound disposal system; and Information campaigns on the benefits derived from the adoption of the technology. [DILG MC No. 00-117, s. 2000]
49
Improve solid waste collection process. Ensure that every barangay has a material recovery facility Strengthen the SWMB by performing the other functions of the like: Develop specific mechanics and guidelines for the implementation of the SWMP; Recommend measures and safeguards against pollution and for the preservation of the natural ecosystem; Adopt measures to promote and ensure the viability and effective implementation of SWM programs in component barangays; Review the SWMP for purposes of ensuring its sustainability, viability, effectiveness and relevance in relation to local and international developments in the field of solid waste management; Adopt specific revenue generating measures to promote the viability of the SWMP; Recommend to local authorities measures for franchise or BOT agreements with recognized institutions, to provide either exclusive or non-exclusive authority for the collection, transfer, storage, processing, recycling or disposal of solid waste; Monitor the implementation of the SWMP in cooperation with the private sector and NGOs.
50
e-SLGPR
Highlighted in this report is your LGU's performance in four (4) areas of governance: (1) Administrative Governance, (2) Social Governance, (3) Economic Governance, and (4) Environmental Governance. A special report is included to determine how the fundamentals of good governance such as Participation, Transparency, and Financial Accountability are valued in the LGU. It is to note that the LGU's performance was assessed based on the responses of the LGU's Team to the questions provided into the LGPMS database. A Performance Scale is used to identify areas with excellent performance and areas for improvement. A perfect scale of 5 denotes excellent performance while performance scales of 1-4 indicate areas for improvement. Although scales of 3 and 4 are relatively high, there are areas which can still be improved on. All these are explained in detail as you read the entire report. On Valuing Fundamentals of Governance This section of the report describes how your LGU values and maintains good governance in the context of Transparency, Participation, and Financial Accountability.
Area(s) with Excellent Performance Your LGU is doing an excellent performance in 1 out of 3 sub-areas of Valuing Fundamentals of Governance. Sustain Performance in this area:
51

Transparency
Interpretation
Transparency in governmental operations is remarkable. Communicating to the public through various means, i.e., Bulletin Board, Public Information Office or Desk, print, broadcast media, website, and forum, is valued.
Service Area
Transparency

Public Information Office or Desk Communication mediums used to update the public on LG plans and programs.
Interpretation
The LGU has Public Information Desk at located at the lobby of the Municipal Hall The LGU of San Jose was able to communicate to the public updated information about the LGUs services, plans, programs, and special events through assemblies, bulletin board, flyers, website, and broadcast media. Public documents such as transaction records and contracts are all accessible to the public.
Accessibility of public documents
Area(s) for Improvement The areas for improvement are listed by priority, starting from the area which gets the lowest performance scale followed by areas which get higher performance scales, respectively.
Interpretation
Participation
4.00 High but not Excellent
Strengthening CSO participation in Local Special Bodies and the Citizen Feedback system, including the maximization of CSO engagement in development projects is a MUST action. There are merits to it. In addition to the principal of participation, other desirable governance values like transparency, accountability and consensusinfluenced decisions are reinforced.
52
Service Area
Participation

Representation of NGOs/POs/Private Sector in LSB Presence of feedback mechanism to generate citizen views on LGU services
Interpretation
The NGOs, POs, and Private Sector are represented in LDC, LHB, LSB, and POC. The LGU has a suggestion box located near the Public Information Desk. Public documents such as transaction records and contracts are all accessible to the public.
Service Area
Participation

Involvement of NGOs/Pos/Private Sector in the implementation of LGU development projects
Interpretation
Below 50% of the LGU development projects were implemented in partnership with NGOs, POS, and other private sector.
Increase the involvement of NGOs, POs and private sector by institutionalization of a formal mechanism of citizens participation through an ordinance or resolution. One of the aspects of good governance is an active participation of the public in all stages of government plans, programs, and activities from formulation to evaluation. A legislative support will help make a government for the people, of the people, and by the people a reality. Promote the establishment and operation of peoples and non-governmental organizations to become active partners in the pursuit of local autonomy [Section 34, LGC] Provide assistance, financial or otherwise, to accredited municipal-based peoples and nongovernmental organizations for economic, socially-oriented, environmental, or cultural projects to be implemented in the municipality [Section 36, LGC] Enter into joint ventures and other cooperative arrangements with peoples and nongovernmental organizations. Engage in the delivery of certain basic services, capabilitybuilding and livelihood projects in the municipality [Section 35, LGC] Enforce the guidelines in the accreditation and membership of POs and NGOs in the Municipal Development Council, Municipal School Board, Municipal Health Board, MPOC and MBAC [DILG MC No. 01-89, s. 2001] Ensure the participation of NGOs and the community in the planning and implementation of programs, projects and activities for the eradication of illiteracy [DILG MC No. 00-120, s. 2000] and of other projects and activities Strengthen citizens support and participation in Peace and Order programs, projects and activities [DILG MC No. 02-162, s. 2002] Enhance involvement of all religious, civil and other nongovernment organizations in the Anti-Crime Campaign to complement peace and order efforts [DILG MC No. 02-62, s. 2002]
53
Interpretation
Financial Accountability
4.68 High but not Excellent
Efforts to improve financial accountability are acknowledged. However, administrative capacity to ensure observance of guidelines relative to accounting, internal control, procurement and financial transactions need to be strengthened.
Service Area

Functionality of the BAC Timely liquidation of cash advances
Interpretation
The composition of the BAC is in accordance with Section 11 of RA No. 9184 or the Government Procurement Reform Act. Procurement rules and procedure are enforced. All BAC meetings are held at the municipal hall. Proceedings of the meetings are documented. Minutes of the meetings are made available upon request. Salaries and wages are liquidated within 5 days after each 15 day or end of the month pay period.
Service Area

Timely liquidation of cash advances Availability of status report on actions taken by LGU on COA Audit Findings
Interpretation
Petty operating expenses and field operating expenses are liquidated within 20 days after the end of the year subject to replenishment as frequently as necessary during the year. Official travels are liquidated within 60 days after return to the Philippines or 30 days upon return to permanent official station. The actions taken by the LGU on the COA audit findings and recommendations are available.
Service Area

Effectiveness of LGU Financial Management System
Interpretation
Relevant management tools such as manuals or guidelines are not available.
Disbursements are made only for approved purposes. Accounting records are supported by source documentation such as canceled checks, paid bills, payrolls, contracts, subcontracts and other financial transaction documents.
54
Service Area
Interpretation
Accountable financial officers are known and their responsibilities are clear. Sanctions for erring local government personnel regarding financial transactions are clear and enforced.
Information about the procedure in transacting financially with the local government is not available via various media.
Monthly financial reports are available. Annual financial statements are certified. Annual financial statements are submitted within 60 days after the 31st of December. Summary of income and expenditures is posted in at least three conspicuous places in the local government unit within 30 days from year-end Annual Financial statements are made available upon request. Financial statements are not published in the local media Financial management information system is not automated.
Maximize the use communication mediums. This can be done through the utilization of semi-permanent bulletin board or performance billboard, newsletter, flyer or brochure and the LGU website to inform the public of all updated information about financial transactions procedures, FS and other financial reports, among others, that the public needs to know. Aim for the automation of the FMIS. Do this phase by phase if budget is not sufficient. In the long term it will result to more benefits.
55
Financial Performance e-Report

This Report provides a practical tool to gauge your LGU's financial performance as compared to financial performance of all LGUs within the same LGU type and income class. The information lets you know whether your LGU is ahead or lagging behind with many LGUs for purposes of maintaining good performance, or catching up. Financial performance is divided into two parts: (1) Revenue Generation, and (2) Resource Allocation and Utilization. It is hoped that the information presented here would help you to plan ahead for the LGU and adjust revenue and expenditure priorities in accordance with the financial realities, projections and priorities of the organization. The financial performance of a LGU is, to a large extent, indicative of its observance of good governance principles. It can be said that a higher level of financial performance suggests more substantial compliance to the principles of transparency, accountability, predictability, and participation (Sound Development Management, ADB, 2005). The results of the evaluation of financial performance and relating the same with the observance of good governance principles can be used as a reference in the implementation of future activities in the different areas of Local Financial Management. It should likewise be noted that there are factors in the external environment of the LGUs that affect their financial management practices and the resulting financial performance. These factors include macro-economic conditions, national policies and executive issuances, political conditions in the country, and local socio-cultural practices, among others. REVENUE GENERATION The Local Government Code of 1991 was designed to empower LGUs to be financially selfsufficient and less dependent on intergovernmental transfers from the national government. Hence, the six (6) revenue indicators selected, cost to collect revenues, locally-sourced revenues to total income & dependency rate from external revenue sources, regular revenues to total income, locally-sourced revenue level, locally sourced revenue per capita, RPT accomplishment rate, personal service expenditure ratio, specifically measure how effectively an LGU maximizes its local revenue potential. Summary of Key Measures Data revealed that the LGU spent reasonable amount in its collection efforts which stands at 16%. This is relatively low and implies that the LGU spent a minimum amount in its collection efforts. However, it is important to note that such is a good indication that we spend less than other LGUs in terms of collecting tax. The aggregate locally-sourced revenue, set at Php 61,534,984.61 is equivalent to 28.56% of LGUs total revenue. This translates to the high dependency of San Jose on the IRA, which is an annual revenue sharing from the national government to local governments. For the year under review, the IRA stands at 71.44% of the total LGU income, a slight improvement from the 78% -level in 2010. It is well to note that the regular revenue to total income is set at 91.00%. The LGU performance, however, in RPT collection out of the RPT collectibles stands at the rate of 79.16%. Close examination of the data shows that the locally-sources income per capita is only Php 419.55, a more than double improvement two years back.
56
Peer Comparison Relative to local peers, the Municipality of San Jose demonstrated exceptional performance in four (4) indicators, specifically, cost to collect revenue, RPT accomplishment rate, total expenditure per capita, and debt service ratio. The cost to collect revenue stands at 7.05% which is way below the performance of average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class, and also way below the national average of the same LGU type regardless of income class. San Jose demonstrated 57.14 RPT accomplishment rate which is lower than the national average. In three (3) indicators, the Local Government of San Jose exhibited relatively good performance in locally-sourced revenues to total income, locally-sourced revenue level, and Personal Service expenditure ratio. As regards the locally sourced revenue to total income, the Municipality of San Jose is slightly ahead among its local peers at 28.56% than to average first class municipalities of 25.47 and definitely higher than 18.07% compared to the national average. Comparatively, locally-sourced revenue level of the Municipality of San Jose which stands at Php 61,534,984.61 is higher by Php 29,944,999.11 (77.60%) among its local peers group as well as by Php 47,224,207.11 (330%) to the national average. The LGU of San Jose scored better in two (2) indicators which include the regular revenues to total income and locally-sourced revenue per capita. The regular revenue to total income stands at 91.00% which is higher by 0.72% than its peers group and higher by 4.99% than the national average. The locally-sourced revenue per capita which stands at Php 419.55 is way below the average among its peers group by Php 70.62 (16.83%) and relatively higher than the national average by Php 50.62 (12.07%). Recently, the NSO has released its official 2010 Population Data where San Jose has a population of 131,188 based on the 2010 Census at 3.47% annual population growth rate. Considering the aforesaid population growth, the Municipalitys population would have grown into 135,740. This will increase the Municipalitys locally-sourced revenue per capita into Php 453.33 that is Php 84.40 (22.88%) higher than national average and Php 36.84 (8.78%) slightly lower than the average of first class municipalities. Thus, the performance of the LGU in terms of the locally-sourced revenue per capita is almost at par with its contemporaries. The Personal Service expenditure ratio is set at 21.23% which passed the 45% limitation for 1st class municipalities as provided in the LG Code. The average performance of 1st class municipalities is within the limit except that the national average of the same LGU type regardless of income class is higher (41.38%) than that of the Municipality of San Jose. SUGGESTED ACTIONS TO TAKE:
Enhance the revenue collection system. Exert efforts to boost the locally-sourced revenue level such that it goes beyond the national average by identifying the untapped sources of income, plug leaks, and generate more local funds to ultimately lessen the municipalitys dependence on the IRA. For Business Tax, the LGU may consider the following strategies: Periodically conduct a sampling of businesses to establish baselines for presumed income among common types of businesses. Update the database of businesses on a weekly basis. Set-up the Business Tax Registry Send Notices to Delinquent Taxpayers Monitor payments made on delinquencies Verify declared Gross income of Taxpayers vis--vis SEC data Deputize the Barangays to disseminate information and collect real property taxes. Extension of payment without penalties, interest, or surcharges Exempt the businesses from examination of gross receipts if there is an increase of at least 20 percent in gross receipts reported by a business.
57
Examination of gross receipts if there is a decrease of gross receipts reported by a business.
Lay out strategies to carry out targets. Aggressively set revenue goals by giving due consideration to historical trending in setting the revenue goals for the year or the national growth rate of taxes in order to make sure that the LGU keeps in step with the revenue growth of the national government. Initiate a tax information guide/primer. This quick and easy primer informs self-employed professionals about registration, bookkeeping, invoicing and BIR requirements, tax forms, and where and when to file taxes. Utilize a variety of tax information campaign. There being an appropriation for IEC, find creative ways to inform and educate your constituents on their responsibilities to remit taxes and to explain the purpose and use of the revenues collected by the LGU. Innovative approaches that the LGU may utilize include: Regular meetings with owners of local businesses before business tax deadlines to remind them of their responsibilities to pay taxes on time. Tax caravans that go around the different Barangays of the LGU to disseminate information and collect taxes on the spot. Recognition and awards for top local tax payers, e.g. annual dinner sponsored by LGU. Dissemination of information to teachers through the DepEd. Oratorical contest for students sponsored by LGU to espouse to the youth the importance of paying taxes on time and in full. Establish a revenue mobilization body (e.g. Resource Mobilization Team) to specifically explore alternative sources of funds for the LGU.
Revenue Generation
INTERPRETATION GUIDE DESIRED PERFORMANCE: Should be lower than the average of LGU type and income class EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE: Lower for both conditions: (1) average of LGUs within the same LGU type and income class, (2) national average of the same LGU type regardless of income class
58
Cost to collect revenues includes salaries of collection agents, operations (computerization), public address notices, and advertisements, among others. Locally-sourced revenue is composed of tax and non-tax revenues. Tax revenues are sourced from Real Property Tax, Business Tax, and other taxes. Non-tax revenues are those that come from regulatory fees, service/user charges, receipts from economic enterprise, toll fees, and other receipts.
INTERPRETATION GUIDE DESIRED PERFORMANCE: Locally-sourced revenues to total income should be higher than the average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE: Locally-sourced revenues to total income should be higher than the: 1. average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class, and, 2. national average of the same LGU type regardless of income class Total LGU income is composed of locally sourced revenues, IRA, other share from national and special revenues, i.e., extraordinary receipts/financial aids, loans and borrowings, and inter-local fund transfers.
59
INTERPRETATION GUIDE DESIRED PERFORMANCE: Should be higher than the average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE: Should be higher than the: 1. average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class, and 2. national average of the same LGU type regardless of income class
Regular revenues mean locally-sourced revenues plus IRA.
INTERPRETATION GUIDE DESIRED PERFORMANCE: Should be higher than with the same LGU type and income class EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE: Should be higher than the: 1. average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class, and 2. national average of the same LGU type regardless of income class
the
average
of
LGUs
60
RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND UTILIZATION Resource Allocation and Utilization looks at three indicators: Personal Services Expenditure Ratio, Total Expenditure per Capita, and Debt Service Ratio. These expenditure indicators focus on two different aspects of expenditure performance. These two indicators are complimentary in the sense that an LGU should have a low level of expenditures per capita and a low personal services ceiling. The first indicator, the personal services ceiling, is based on a requirement of the Code for LGUs to limit expenditures for personal services (i.e. personnel salaries, benefits, etc.) to 45 percent of total expenditures. A low personal services ceiling for an LGU is indicative of a greater concentration of expenditures for providing services rather than on overhead costs for personnel. The second indicator, expenditures per capita, is a basic indicator of how much the LGU spends to provide services to the public on a per capita basis. Generally speaking, an LGU with a high level of expenditures per capita relative to its peers is likely to provide more services to its constituents. The third indicator, debt service ratio, is based on a requirement of the Code for LGUs to limit debt service expenses to within 20 percent of total expenditures. Maintaining a manageable level for debt servicing ratio is important for LGUs given that an exceedingly high level of debt service payments relative to total expenditures means that an LGU has less resources to spend on providing services to its constituents.
61
Summary of Key Measures Expenditure for Personal Services of the municipality is 21.23% which is lower than the Personal Expenditure Ceiling as stated in the Local Government Code of 1991. Conversely, Php 632.84 is the amount the LGU spends in providing services to the public on a per capita basis. The debt service ratio of the LGU of San Jose is set at 6% which is within the acceptable limit and did not exceed the 20% limitation set for under LG Code of 1991. Peer Comparison Unlike its domestic peers, the Personal Services Expenditure Ratio of the Municipality of San Jose, which stands at 21.23%, is comparatively better and lower than 41.79% to the average performance of first class municipalities. Also it is lower to the 49.00% of the national average of all LGU type regardless of income class, the fact remains that the Personal Service Expenditure of the municipality exceeded the requirement of the law. This demonstrates that the local government unit of San Jose spends more than the limitation that the law expressly provides. As regards the total expenditure per capita, the LGU of San Jose spent Php 2,419.70, way above than the average expenditure of both all first class municipalities set at Php 2,030.47 but lower than the national average of all LGU type regardless of income class set at Php 2,586.32. This means that the LGU spent to its constituents almost at par to its local peers. SUGGESTED ACTIONS TO TAKE:
Ensure that the budgetary allocation for personal services complies with LGC of 1991, RA 7160 provisions. Setting the personal expenditure to a level below 45% is ideal yet desirable. The reduction of personal services expenditure ratio shall be achieved through belt-tightening measures aimed at reducing the cost of hiring of casual and contractual employees. It is well to remind that generally speaking, a low personal services ceiling for an LGU is indicative of a greater concentration of expenditures for providing services rather than on overhead costs for personnel. Create a comprehensive program to rationalize Personal Services. To improve the quality and efficiency of public service, the local government unit shall adopt institutional improvements in the bureaucracy by deactivating irrelevant functions, consolidating duplicated functions while reinforcing the most vital functions. Resource Allocation and Utilization
62
INTERPRETATION GUIDE DESIRED PERFORMANCE: Determines the biases of the local government unit in terms of budget allocation LGU type and income class. Should not exceed with the ceiling as mandated by law, i.e., for 1st 3rd class LGUs 45%, for 4th 6th class LGUs 55% EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE: Met these three conditions: 1. lower than the average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class, 2. lower than the national average of LGUs with the same LGU type regardless of income class, and 3. did not exceed the 45-55 ceiling for P.S.
INTERPRETATION GUIDE DESIRED PERFORMANCE: Should be higher than the average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE: Should be higher than the: 1. average of LGUs with the same LGU type and income class, and 2. National average of the same LGU type regardless of income class.
INTERPRETATION GUIDE SIGNIFICANCE: Considers the proportion of actual debt service costs to total regular income. DESIRED PERFORMANCE: Should not exceed 20% of the regular income. That is the debt servicing limitation set for under LG Code of 1991.
63
PART III PRIORITY STRATEGIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION Priority strategies for implementation are capacity development responses, strategies, approaches, or PPAs that when implemented will answer performance area and/or service area gaps. These are divided into two categories namely performance strategies and development strategies. Performance Area/Service Area Administration Resource Allocation and Utilization PPAs Strictly comply with the 45% PS limitation provision of the LG Code of 1991. Appropriate at least 5% of the total budget for Gender and Development projects. Approve the budget within the period prescribed by law. Enact the following codes: (1)Code of General Ordinances; (2)Market Code; (3)Health and Sanitation Code; (4)Code for Children; and (5)Gender and Development Code Office Responsible Budget Office, Office of the Mayor Source of Technical Assistance Local Finance Committee Time Frame 3rd Quarter, 2012 Remarks
Budget Office
Local Finance Committee
3rd Quarter, 2012
Office of the Mayor
4th Quarter, 2012 4th Quarter, 2012
Administration Local Legislation
Office of the Vice Mayor, Office of the Secretary to the Sanggunian
Install a Legislative
Office of the Vice Mayor,
DILG
3rd Quarter, 2012
Sanggunian Information
64
Performance Area/Service Area
PPAs Tracking and Analysis System Create a Backstopping Committee
Office Responsible Office of the Secretary to the Sanggunian
Source of Technical Assistance
Time Frame
Remarks System (SIS) is offered for free.
Administration Revenue Generation
Office of the Vice Mayor, Office of the Secretary to the Sanggunian Upgrade and Office of the IT modernize tax Mayor, Department information and Assessor, collection services Business through the use Permits, of computer Licensing hardware and Officer, and software, and the Treasurer other means. Codify revenue ordinances with the aim of improving local revenue. Equip the MPDO w/ a Geographic Information System (GIS). Strengthen the Local Development Council. Optimally utilize the Annual Report in formulation & implementation of programs or projects. Office of the Vice Mayor
3rd Quarter, 2012
1st Quarter, 2013
4th Quarter, 2012
Administration Development Planning
MPDO, Office of the Mayor
1st Quarter, 2013
Office of the Mayor
Local Devt. Council
3rd Quarter, 2012 3rd Quarter, 2012
Office of the Mayor
Local Devt. Council
65
Performance Area/Service Area Administration Human Resource Management and Development
PPAs Provide venue and opportunity for staff development Strongly link performance appraisal to core HRM decisions. Cause the formulation and implementation of a Municipal Human Resource and Development Program Make use of the eRPTAAS the soonest the system becomes functional Post procedure securing property documents
Office Responsible HRMDO
Time Frame 3rd Quarter, 2012
Remarks There are creative ways and approaches to develop staff of the LGU.
HRMDO
Office of the Mayor, Office of the Sangguniang Bayan Office of the Mayor, Office of the Sangguniang Bayan, all offices IT Department
3rd Quarter, 2012
HRMDO
3rd Quarter, 2012
Administration Customer Service Civil Applications
Office of the Municipal Assessor
Waiting for further notice from the Provincial Office July 2012
the Office of the in Municipal real Assessor
Equip the Office of the Assessors office Municipal with the necessary Assessor computers and software Social Governance Peace, Security, and Disaster Risk Management Formulate a good quality Disaster Risk Management Plan. Include in the Annual Budget a Office of the Mayor
Office of the Mayor, Office of the Sangguniang Bayan, IT Dept MDRMC
3rd Quarter, 2012
3rd Quarter, 2012
Budget Officer, Local Finance Office of the Committee
3rd Quarter, 2012
66
PPAs corresponding appropriation for PLEB operation Strengthen the LDCC Ensure an annual KP financial allocation. Provide financial support to ALS as recommended by the Local School Board.
Office Responsible Mayor
Time Frame
Remarks
Office of the Mayor Budget Office, Office of the Mayor Local School Board, Local Finance Committee, Office of the Mayor Local Finance Committee Local Finance Committee
3rd Quarter, 2012 3rd Quarter, 2012 3rd Quarter, 2012
Social Governance Support to Education Services
Social Governance Support to Housing and Basic Utilities
Submit an MPDO updated report on lands identified for socialized housing and resettlement area. Provide technical, financial, and other possible forms of support or assistance to Punong Barangays to ensure that the problem of squatting is properly addressed. Create a Municipal Housing Board, Housing Task Force or Housing Coordinating Unit. Office of the Mayor All Barangay officials
1st Quarter, 2012
1st Quarter, 2012
Office of the Mayor
MPDO
July 2012
67
PPAs Complete an inventory of: informal settlers, makeshift houses, sites for potential socialized housing, households with no access to potable water supply, and households with no access to electricity. Include in the annual budget the purchase of medicine, medical supplies, and equipment. Establishment of an administrative support body to take the lead in marketing the investment potentials of SJ.
Office Responsible MPDO
Time Frame 1st Quarter, 2013
Remarks
Social Governance Health Services
MHO
Local Finance Committee, Office of the Mayor
3rd Quarter, 2013
Economic Governance Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion
Mayors Office, NEDA SB
3rd Quarter, 2013
Create an Entrepreneurship, Mayors Office, Business, & SB Industry Promotion Office Improve the quality of permitting or Licensing Improve credit facilitation services to fisher folks by allocating additional funds from the 20% Mayors Office, SB MAO, Office of the Mayor, Local Finance Committee
4th Quarter, 2013
4th Quarter, 2013 3rd Quarter, 2013
Economic Governance Support to Fishery Services
68
PPAs development Fund. Training on the Zero-Waste Management Technology implementation Creation of Municipal Environment and Natural Resource Office with competent staff Ensure that every barangay has a material recovery facility
Office Responsible
Time Frame
Remarks
Environmental Governance Urban Ecosystems Management
Municipal Planning and Development Office Office of the Mayor, SB
DILG, DENR
4th Quarter 2013
To reduce, recycle, segregate, and properly package waste at source.
4th Quarter 2013
Office of the Mayor, SB, Liga ng mga Barangay
4th Quarter 2013
69
LGU PROFILE
LGU Name: Municipality of San Jose Year Profile: 2011 - LGPMS LGU Profile: Basic Profile LGU Type: Income Class: Population: Total Land Area (in has): No. of Barangays:: No. of Households:
Municipality 1st
146,669
55192.94 38
29,334
Financial Profile 132,221,671.80 IRA Share: Local-Sourced Revenues: 61,534,984.61 17,054,597.77 Other Revenues: 210,811,254.18 Total LGU Income: Ecosystems (Tick if present): Agricultural Ecosystems Forest Ecosystems Coastal Marine Ecosystems Freshwater Ecosystems Tourism Potential (Tick if present): Beach Resort History and Culture (e.g., fort, cathedral and church, historical road, historical monument, museum, structures and buildings) Hotels Natural attractions Economic Activity (Rank accordingly, skip if not applicable):
70
1 3 5 4 2
Agricultural Fishery Mining Industrial Commercial and Service Centers
Contact Information Name of Mayor or Governor: Telephone Number: Fax Number: E-mail Address: Website Address:
HON. JOSE T. VILLAROSA (043) 491-2087 (043) 491-7962 sulongbagongsanjose@gmail.com & lgu_sanjoseocc w w w .sanjosemindoro.w eebly.com
71
LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS VISION-MISSION STATEMENT VISION

San Jose, Occidental Mindoro a premier town of empowered people, with vibrant economy and modern infrastructures and facilities, putting premium on tourism and attractive investment opportunities, which everyone can be proud of for which we commit ourselves to the following:
MISSION
Improve the quality of life of its citizenry through responsive and accountable governance and to consistently pursue sustainable economic and environmental development to attain the following goals and objectives:
GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Overall Development Goal

To elevate the general welfare of the people through providing the effective delivery of social services and continuously improving the economy and responsibly utilizing its natural resources In pursuit of the overall development goal of San Jose, major programs and projects will be specifically directed in attaining the following objectives: 1. Increase productivity and promote efficient land utilization; 2. Encourage economic diversity to increase employment opportunities and bring in investments in the locality; 3. Improve the systems and environment among LGU offices to provide convenience and efficiency to the people and all its stakeholders; 4. Facilitate development through improved provision of modern and landmark infrastructure and support facilities; 5. Increase public awareness in the development and management; 6. Preserve critical areas through efficient solid waste and environmental management; 7. Strengthen capability of the local government to undertake development projects through efficient tax collection; 8. Provide livelihood programs to support small and medium enterprises and encourage better economic activities; 9. Strengthen and increase social and economic services as well as investments on infrastructures; and, 10. Improve local income generation and secure better economic stability.
72
BRIEF PROFILE OF THE MUNICIPALITY San Jose is located 130 kilometers southeast from the provincial capital and approximately 230 nautical miles from the National Capital Region. It shares common boundary with Rizal on the north, Mansalay on northeast, Magsaysay on east and southeast. Its southern and western side is bounded by Mindoro Strait. History records of San Jose started in century when Chinese traders anchored at the shores of Mangarin, the oldest settlement in the southern portion of Occidental Mindoro. When the Spanish took possession of the Island, the first site of the presidencia was in the sitio of Sinaoga. Due to frequent attacks of Moro pirates, appointed leaders had to transfer the site of their government to the old barrio site of San Isidro, then it was again transferred to Caminawit and finally in Pandurucan. In 1911, Pandurucan, the old name of SAN JOSE, became the seat of the Civil Government with Don German Ramirez as its first appointed leader up to 1915. 18th From then on, Caminawit was utilized as a docking shore. Presently, it was developed into one of the major shipping port in the Province. When the Japanese Imperial Forces occupied the town in 1941, and subsequently by the American in 1955, San Jose began to experience massive population influx due to the existence of Philippine Sugar Mill located in Barangay Central. During the time of American reoccupation, San Jose was used as an Air Force Supply Base. Together with the base, they started developing major roads within the town. Now, with the existing facilities such as a two-hectare public market, Caminawit Pier, San Jose Airport, schools and colleges, San Jose evolved into a major commercial, industrial, agricultural, trading, cultural, and entertainment center in the province. Until now, San Jose remains the most progressive and developed town in the province.
73
Physical Characteristics
It is located at the southern part of the province with a total land area of 55,192.94 hectares. Climatic condition is classified under Type A category which is characterized by wet season on May to October and a dry season on November to April. The slope is generally flat. Temperature varies between 22C-32.3C from which December to January are the coldest months while April to May are the warmest. Soil composition developed from recent alluvial deposits which are silty-loam to clay loam and landforms consist of limestone and sedimentary rocks. All types of erosion are present: slight, moderate and severe erosion. Eleven rivers and creeks serve as natural drainage. Mineral deposits include copper and limestone. The municipality is divided into 38 barangays. Of which, 13 are urban, 14 are rural, while the remaining 11 are island barangays.
Demographic Characteristics
San Jose is the most thickly populated area in the province, with a population continuously growing at 0.94% annually. Out of the total population of 118,807 as of August 2007, around 41.97% resides in urban area and 58.03 percent are situated in rural barangays. Of the recorded average household size at 4.5 with built-up density of 65 persons per hectare, the municipality has had 23,761.4 households during that year. About 69.42% are dependents resulting to a dependency ratio of 1:2. On the other hand, male-female ratio is computed at 108:100. Tagalog is the most spoken dialect and 83.97% are practicing Catholicism. The municipality is projected to have a population of 143,319 for 2010 based on the expected and finalized output of the latest census. Results of the May 2010 Census is expected to be released by February 2011. Literacy rate stands at 90% while the common language is Filipino. However, dialects in the area are Tagalog, Ilonggo, Ilocano, and Mangyan. There are also significant number of other religions like Islam, and other Christian religions.
Infrastructure Facilities/Utilities
Sixteen bridges and 498.219 kilometers road network surrounds San Jose but 60 percent of which remains unpaved. Barangays roads comprise 380.32 kilometers of the total road network while 14.30 kilometers are municipal roads. National highway measures 73.03 kilometers in length while the provincial road is 34.64 kilometers. Seaport which is four kilometers away from the town proper operated by the Philippine Ports Authority and domestic airport of about two kilometers away, both with good facilities, provide external linkages. Three airline companies namely ZestAir, Cebu Pacufic, and Philippine Airlines have daily trip in San Jose-Manila route. Two cable television system, the L&S CATV and Ultimate CATV, provide cable TV service. Telecommunication companies are also present in the area: Digitel, Wireless PLDT, Bayantel, Smart, Globe, and Sun Cellular. Broadcast and print media are also present. Three local newspapers namely: Ang Bagong San Jose, Tamaraw Bulletin, and Mindoro Guardian circulate in the area. Meanwhile, there are also two AM and four FM radio
74
stations. Postal services include that of the Philippine Postal Office, RCPI, JRS, LBC, FedEx/Air21, and 2GO. National Power Corporation (NAPOCOR) and Island Power Corporation (IPC) are the two sources of electric power supply which is distributed by the Occidental Mindoro Electric Cooperative (OMECO) servicing 29 barangays. Level II water supply (Pipeline Water System) is accessible in 18 barangays with almost 5,000 individual household connections. About eight (8) hectares in Barangay San Isidro serve as disposal site for regular waste collection in urban areas. Average waste collection in urban areas is at 106 m per day.
Economic Base
The Municipality has largely diverse economic activities. However, 76% or majority of working force are still engage in agriculture. Major crops produced includes corn, rice, garlic, onions, tobacco, and among others. Potential labor force is about 28,000 while those in the labor force counts at more than 34,000. It is also known for inland fishing producing lapu-lapu, milkfish, and export quality prawns. Substantial quantities of marine products are also available. Commercial livestock and poultry farms producing layers, broilers and meat products also exist. Cattle production is now a rebounding industry in the area. It has the large number of agricultural support facilities such as rice mills, warehouse, solar dryers, and the likes. Commercial establishment is around 1,600 and while the public market, the center of commercial activities, is the largest in the province in terms of the number of establishments and market activities. Service sector has the biggest number of establishments in the area counting at about 2,000 followed by the trading and retailing at around 700 for both. There are about a hundred financial institutions and 11 banks in the area. Industries, which gets the least chunk in the number of establishments standing at about less than a hundred, include hollow block making, handicrafts and furniture, and other small scale processing and manufacturing plants. Known tourism facilities are beach resorts, hotels, and restaurants. Coral reefs and islets that surround island barangays may be considered for tourism. Tourist attractions also include a variety of historical landmarks. Sand and gravel extraction poses a great contribution in the natural resources of the area. However, it has also plenty of mineral deposits and natural resources including forest products such as yantok, buri, and bamboo.
Social Services
Seventy-five public and private elementary schools including minority and primary schools, five private and seven public high schools, and five tertiary schools dispersed in the locality. Three of which are the campus schools of the only state college in the province. Meanwhile, there are six schools offering vocational and technical courses.
75
Health facilities include San Jose District Hospital, Rural Health Units, Barangay Health Station, and numerous private hospitals and clinics which are generally located in urban area. For the last five years epidemic occurrences are mostly related to with environmental & sanitation problem. Crude mortality rate is 3.0 percent. Around 36% of the total population suffered from the different degrees of malnutrition. Only 29% are using sanitary toilet. Day Care centers dispersed in the locality and senior citizen center is available. Blighted areas are commonly located in marine zone comprising more than 2,600 families. Basketball courts, karaoke bars, disco houses, cockpit arena, and many more are also available for recreation and leisure activities. Protective force includes policemen and numerous civilian volunteers otherwise known as Barangay Tanods. From 2000 to 2005 crime incidence declined by 10 percent. However, it increased by 25.59 percent on the following year but 2010 showed a significant singledigit decline in crimes. Grass fire and faulty electrical wirings are common causes of fire occurrences.
Existing Land Uses and Land Classification

Lands Classification The Philippine Constitution has classified lands in the country into two major categories, namely, Alienable and Disposable (A & D), and General Forest Land (Phil. Constitution). About 61.95% or 34,192.94 hectares of the total land area of San Jose is classified as Forest Land; while A & D or those capable of being owned by individuals, private or government entity is only 21,543.50 hectares. The latter is further classified into different uses in accordance with the land use plan of the Municipality, formulated in compliance with the provisions of RA 7160. In accordance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan of San Jose of 2003, prevailing land uses in the Municipality are as follows: LAND USE CATEGORY Commercial Residential Institutional Industrial Parks and Playgrounds Infrastructures Agriculture Mining/Quarrying Grassland Special Use (Dumpsite) Others Forest TOTAL AREA (has) 43.22 1,619.59 80.31 333.47 11.23 145.53 15,797.14 24.00 1,045.56 8.00 1835.09 34,192.94 55,192.94
76
ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE
The Local Government Unit of San Jose has a total number of officials and employees broken down as follows: Elective Permanent Contractual Contract of Service Job-Order Co-Terminus : : : : : : 12 205 1 37 323 4
The following is the organizational composition of each office in the LGU:

Mayor's Office 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Jose T. Villarosa Ma. Theresa S. Sarmiento Jaime E. Dela Cruz Jennifer F. Sadsad Cherry Joy Mercene Cristopher G. Lee Crisanto Guerrero Alejandro L. Delano Josefina S. Villamar Ofelia B. Coronacion Filipinas N. Castillo Pearl P. Cabado Myrna S. Aurelio Manolito P. Burao MHRMO 1 Maridel A. Ralleta Norma S. Balingit Josielee M. Seco GSO POSITION Municipal Mayor Executive Assistant III Executive Assistant II Administrative Aide VI Administrative Aide IV Administrative Aide VI Administrative Aide III Security Guard Community Affairs Officer II Community Affairs Officer I Administrative Officer IV Administrative Aide VI Administrative Officer III Administrative Aide III POSITION Mun. Human Resource Management Officer Administrative Officer V Administrative Assistant II STATUS Elected Co-Terminous Co-Terminous Co-Terminous Co-Terminous Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent
12 13 14
2 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Susana A. Callos Ruben S. Aguilar Randy P. Dela Cruz Avelina A. Turquia Ma. Jesusa C. Parias Julius T. Agustin Norma C. Abeleda Myrna M. Apolinario
Administrative Officer V Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Officer III Administrative Assistant III
Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent
77
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
SB Rey C. Ladaga Victoria A. Villaroza Senen M. Zapanta Joel G. Aguilar Philip Z. Lim Augusto S. Abeleda Norma C. Gonzales Renato C. Tan June S. Palmares Danilo A. Centeno Joven T. Cruz Felma G. Aguilan Arlet D. Mactal Roberta S. Villola MPDO
POSITION Municipal Vice Mayor Sangguniang Bayan Member Sangguniang Bayan Member Sangguniang Bayan Member Sangguniang Bayan Member Sangguniang Bayan Member Sangguniang Bayan Member Sangguniang Bayan Member Sangguniang Bayan Member
ABC Pres.-Sangguniang Bayan Member SKF Pres.-Sangguniang Bayan Member
Sangguniang Bayan Secretary Administrative Officer III Administrative Aide VI POSITION Mun. Planning and Development Coordinator Project and Development Officer III Administrative Officer II Administrative Assistant II Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III POSITION Municipal Civil Registrar Registration Officer III Administrative Aide VI Administrative Aide VI Administrative Aide III POSITION Municipal Budget Officer Administrative Assistant II Administrative Aide IV Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III POSITION Municipal Accountant Administrative Officer V Administrative Officer II Administrative Assistant III Administrative Assistant III Administrative Assistant II Administrative Assistant II
STATUS Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent
1 2 3 4 5 6
Joseph E. Salgado Ronald V. Reyes Don Vincent B. Busto Estela P. Garillo Emily D. Ugay Editha F. Zubiri MCR Alegria L. Figueroa Susan C. Recio Luisito A. Hernandez Cora P. De Lara Lennette D. Calayag MBO Zenaida V. Dela Cruz Sally C. Valles Josephine M. Castro Paul D. Pagsuguiron Edna D. Campos ACCTG. Pablo I. Alvaro Eufrocina A. Asilo Edna C. Cruz Joel E. Gayona Zenaida G. Ramirez Estelito B. Balleza, III Virginia R. Mercado
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
78
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
MTO Angelito L. Castronuevo Ricarte E. Aguilar Fe O. Artoz Corazon DL. Santos Ma. Lourdes T. Abeleda Aurora P. Ruiz Rhenee D. Saulong Marie Joy C. Domingo Rolando M. Arabiran Seigfredo D. Aguilar Jennifer R. Teston Angelito P. Necia Elena S. Egaa Inanama V. Gallardo Noreen Venus Mendoza Adelino M. Friolo IV Jenny R. Pagsuguiron MASSO Olivia W. Salgado Elfleda P. Formentos Erlinda P. Pacaul Reggie J. Santos Corazon R. Javier Louie C. Balicao MHO Enid M. Asuncion Natividad A. Garcia Yolanda P. Ylagan Merlinia A. Panganiban Abdon P. Fordan Rosemelinda R. Espiritu Ernesto P. Jose Romeo M. Dimaano Flordeliza A. Gomez Emelyn M. Gabao Gena B. Ancheta Evangeline C. Peaflor Marissa T. Baylon Meldie Driza-Soriano Maria Fe D. Rivera Nelia M. Jimenez Ofelia S. Gales
POSITION Local Revenue Coll. Officer III Local Revenue Coll. Officer II Local Revenue Coll. Officer II Local Revenue Coll. Officer II Administrative Officer IV Administrative Officer I Revenue Coll. Clerk III Revenue Coll. Clerk III Revenue Coll. Clerk III Revenue Coll. Clerk II Revenue Coll. Clerk II Revenue Coll. Clerk II Revenue Coll. Clerk I License Officer II Licensing Officer I Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III POSITION Municipal Assessor
Local Assessment Operation Officer III Local Assessment Operation Officer II
STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent
1 2 3 4 5 6
Draftsman III Administrative Aide VI Administrative Aide III POSITION Municipal Health Officer Medical Technologist Nutrition Officer Midwife II Sanitary Inspector II Sanitary Inspector II Sanitary Inspector II Sanitary Inspector II Administrative Aide VI Nursing Attendant Administrative Aide III Nursing Attendant Midwife I Medical Officer IV Dentist II Nurse III Nurse II
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
79
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
MHO Rosavelle R. Hayag Wilhelmina M. Enriquez Avelinda R. De Guzman Laurensa S. Joldanero Luisa A. Enano Imelda S. Corpuz Hernita C. Palomo Maela B. Ramos Lourdes R. An Virgilio B. Pangasian Rosalinda R. Celestino Lolita S. Pagasian Alicia E. Guilas Cherryl C. Tinamisan Elna G. Francisco MSWD
POSITION Midwife III Midwife III Midwife III Midwife II Midwife II Midwife II Midwife II Midwife II Midwife II Midwife II Midwife II Midwife II Midwife II Dentist II Sanitary Inspector I POSITION Mun. Social Welfare and Development Officer Social Welfare Officer I Social Welfare Assistant Day Care Worker II Day Care Worker II POSITION Municipal Agriculturist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist Agricultural Technologist
STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent
1 2 3 4 5
Alicia M. Cajayon Adelina L. Dangupon Romeo S. Lilagan Mirabeth M. Layson Ma. Aurea Q. Gendrano MAO Perlita C. Esperanza Leonardo P. Aonuevo Ma. Luisa A. Mangahas Reynante V. Nepales Rodolfo S. Gonzales Jr. Iny Lourdes S. Peroy Ricardo J. Gelena Rosalila A. Austral Norma F. Tacderan Ofelia F. Dolor Domingo A. Florentino Amelita S. Apoderado Editha L. Lim Alicia L. Orosco Alrizza C. Zubiri Gorgonio S. Terrayo Fernando G. Leoncito Romel B. Calingasan Ma. Annabel B. Sunga Myra Lyn D. Adriano
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
MEO Emmanuel P. Aguilar Antonio P. Salcedo Edgar V. Masangkay Elpidio P. Paz, Jr. Pilar M. Hora Christopher N. Alvarado Rosana A. Flores Ferdinand Efren E. Mapili Leopoldo R. Forteza Alex C. Sabado Vic A. Saulong Armando S. Arevalo Rodrigo P. Agnas Jose P. Septimo, Jr. PMO Jaime S. Boongaling Francisco T. Adriano Jr. Prescila L. Riego Jesus T. Hernandez Erao F. Bautista Roen Manansala Adora F. Dimasacat Peter M. Fernando Leodegario T. Muoz Renato T. Delos Reyes Manuel I. Medalla Pule M. Bacay Romeo M. Vidal Nestor D. Sulit Junard E. Aguilar Esmeraldo D. Turquia Petronila V. Gamboa Chito H. Alfaro Ma. Theresa R. Ruizol Celso M. De Vera Ernestine May A. Balleza Analiza O. Gomez Cherry P. Samar Edeliza G. Cajayon Chito E. Lahip Edna E. Dela Cruz Leenlee D. Dela Fuente Cerila V. Balleza Jason T. Cuisia
POSITION Engineer III

Construction and Maint. Gen. Foreman
Draftsman III
Construction and Maint. Foreman
Administrative Aide VI Administrative Aide VI Administrative Aide III Construction and Maint. Capataz Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide VI License Inspector II POSITION Market Supervisor III Slaughterhouse Master II Revenue Collection Clerk II Revenue Collection Clerk I Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III License Inspector II Administrative Aide VI Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Revenue Collection Clerk II Administrative Aide III Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker
STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
81
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
PMO Arsenia S. Juan Genoveva F. Valencia Josephine P. Samar Jaime T. Dela Cruz Jr. Sonny V. Cajayon Amado M. Melgar Naldy D. Ternida Elizabeth E. Sanqui Marlon L. Javier Julius D. Masian Anabelle T. Lopez Emily D. Ysit Jocelyn S. Valera Leonard V. Aniban Nemi S. Bandong Leonarda C. Ramos Edna M. Agustin Mildred C. Castronuevo Ericson D. Almogela Brenda L. Suason Jimmy F. Gabani Aileen C. Delos Reyes Catherine O. Del Carmen
POSITION Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Ticket Checker Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III Administrative Aide III
STATUS Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent
MENRO Hector Aragones, Jr.
POSITION Environment Management Specialist II
STATUS Permanent
82
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF SAN JOSE

San Jose, Occ. Mindoro
CONSOLIDATED TRIAL BALANCE

General Fund, 20% Development Fund, Infres Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust Fund As of December 31, 2011 ACCOUNT CODE 103 111 123 126 127 128 136 144 149 185 201 202 302 205 305 211 311 212 312 213 313 214 314 215 315 221 321 222 322 223 323 226 326 227 327 229 329 230 85,904,505.55 861,727.00 199,975.29 25,000.00 12,375.00 71,620.00 31,297.35 8,373,817.05 5,873,048.56 5,032,469.47 1,730,202.79 15,124,449.64 13,128,316.53 32,820,251.64 3,953,243.38 34,893,372.63 12,533,721.43 901,796.00 106,693.93 6,515,088.39 2,690,073.58 30,781,691.37 10,478,710.69 32,261,676.23 1,533,332.45 DEBIT BALANCE 2,354,645.97 24,357,952.32 453,680.89 33,208,243.92 28,939,133.07 36,132,245.23 305,358.52 51,587,471.56 1,254,634.26 3,167,933.41 9,850,000.00 19,126,773.43 16,554,858.59 Final CREDIT BALANCE
ACCOUNT TITLES Cash-Disbursing Officers Cash in Bank-Local Currency, Current Account Due from Officers and Employees Loans Receivable - Others Real Property Tax Receivable Special Education Tax Receivables Due from NGAs Due from Other Funds Other Receivable Other Prepaid Expenses Land Land Improvements Accumulated Depreciation-Land Improvements Electrification, Power and Energy Structures Accumulated Depreciation-Electrification,Power & Energy Structures Office Buildings Accumulated Depreciation-Office Buildings School Buildings Accumulated Depreciation-School Buildings Hospitals and Health Centers Accumulated Depreciation-Hospitals and Health Centers Markets and Slaughterhouses Accumulated Depreciation-Markets and Slaughterhouses Other Structures Accumulated Depreciation-Other Structures Office Equipment Accumulated Depreciation - Office Equipment Furniture and Fixtures Accumulated Depreciation-Furniture and Fixtures I T Equipment and Software Accumulated Depreciation-IT Equipment and Software Machineries Accumulated Depreciation-Machineries Agricultural, Fishery and Forestry Equipment Accumulated Depreciation-Agricultural, Fishery and Forestry Equipment Communication Equipment Accumulated Depreciation-Communication Equipment Construction and Heavy Equipment
83
Accumulated Depreciation-Construction and Heavy Equipment Sports Equipment Accumulated Depreciation-Sports Equipment Technical and Scientific Equipment Accumulated Depreciation-Technical and Scientific Equipment Other Machinery and Equipment Accumulated Depre-Other Machinery and Equipment Motor Vehicles Accumulated Depreciation-Motor Vehicles Other Transportation Equipment Accumulated Depreciation-Other Transportation Equipment Other Property, Plant and Equipment Accumulated Depreciation-Other Property, Plant and Equipment Work/Other Animal Other Assets Accounts Payable Due to BIR Due to PHILHEALTH Due to Other NGAs Due to LGUs Due to Other Funds Guaranty Deposits Payable Tax Refunds Payable Other Payables Loans Payable - Domestic Other Long-Term Liabilities Deferred Real Property Tax Income Deferred Special Education Tax Income Other Deferred Credits Government Equity GRAND TOTALS 281 290 250 248 241 240 236 235
330 456,972.00 335 178,649.66 336 1,351,894.31 340 34,421,737.73 341 4,707,900.00 348 7,508,843.90 350 129,000.00 7,117,743.55 401 412 415 416 418 424 426 429 439 444 450 451 452 455 501 520,178,278.70
11,568,512.22 285,228.50 160,784.69 404,437.72 6,183,391.26 315,480.87 4,582,864.77
5,962,758.22 384,260.22 20.92 8,150,809.88 2,409,406.75 43,930,277.56 3,571,967.99 24,597.77 23,365,757.15 28,843,000.00 2,135,073.95 28,939,133.07 36,132,245.23 16,981,583.96 227,020,836.43 520,178,278.70 -
84

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS

General Fund, 20% Development Fund, Infres Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust Fund For the Year Ended December 31, 2011 Cash Flows from Operating Activities: Cash Inflows: Collection from Taxes Share from Internal Revenue Collections Receipts from sale of goods or services Interest Income Dividend Income Other Receipts Total Cash Inflows Cash Outflows: PaymentsTo suppliers/creditors To employees Interest Expenses Other Disbursements Total Cash Outflows Net Cash from Operating Activities Cash Flows from Investing Activities: Cash Inflows: From Sale of Property, Plant and Equipment From Sale of Debt Securities of Other Entities From Collection of Principal on Loans to Other Entities Total Cash Inflows Cash Outflows: To Purchased Property, Plant and Equipment To Purchased Debt Securities of Other Entities To Grant/Make Loans to Other Entities Total Cash Outflows Net Cash from Investing Activities Cash Flows from Financing Activities: Cash Inflows: From Issuance of Debt Securities From Acquisition of Loan Total Cash Inflow Cash Outflows: Retirement/Redemption of Debt Securities Payment of Loan Amortization - Principal Total Cash Outflow Net Cash from Financing Activities Net Increase/Decrease in Cash Cash at Beginning of the Period Cash at the End of the Period
43,220,964.89 155,554,908.00 1,734,326.71 498,281,849.68 698,792,049.28
121,054,296.56 81,956,701.84 3,394,383.68 372,709,261.52 579,114,643.60 119,677,405.68
249,205,247.30 26,770,600.00 275,975,847.30
(275,975,847.30)
30,076,000.00 30,076,000.00 (30,076,000.00) (186,374,441.62) 213,087,039.91 26,712,598.29
85

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS

General Fund, 20% Development Fund, Infres Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust Fund For the Year Ended December 31,
2011 2010
Cash Flows from Operating Activities: Cash Inflows: Collection from Taxes Share from Internal Revenue Collections Receipts from sale of goods or services Interest Income Dividend Income Other Receipts Total Cash Inflows Cash Outflows: PaymentsTo suppliers/creditors To employees Interest Expenses Other Disbursements Total Cash Outflows Net Cash from Operating Activities Cash Flows from Investing Activities: Cash Inflows: From Sale of Property, Plant and Equipment From Sale of Debt Securities of Other Entities From Collection of Principal on Loans to Other Entities Total Cash Inflows Cash Outflows: To Purchased Property, Plant and Equipment To Purchased Debt Securities of Other Entities To Grant/Make Loans to Other Entities Total Cash Outflows Net Cash from Investing Activities Cash Flows from Financing Activities: Cash Inflows: From Issuance of Debt Securities From Acquisition of Loan Total Cash Inflow Cash Outflows: Retirement/Redemption of Debt Securities Payment of Loan Amortization - Principal Total Cash Outflow Net Cash from Financing Activities Net Increase/Decrease in Cash Cash at Beginning of the Period Cash at the End of the Period
43,220,964.89 155,554,908.00 1,734,326.71 498,281,849.68 698,792,049.28
17,839,138.76 143,634,207.00 15,717,133.01 2,787,279.59 818,573,056.28 998,550,814.64
121,054,296.56 81,956,701.84 3,394,383.68 372,709,261.52 579,114,643.60 119,677,405.68
80,199,786.07 88,556,247.50 727,486.94 549,083,709.97 718,567,230.48 279,983,584.16
249,205,247.30 26,770,600.00 275,975,847.30 (275,975,847.30)
131,542,180.29 9,833,066.60 141,375,246.89 (141,375,246.89)
30,076,000.00 30,076,000.00 (30,076,000.00) (186,374,441.62) 213,087,039.91 26,712,598.29
52,000,000.00 52,000,000.00 2,076,000.00 2,076,000.00 49,924,000.00 188,532,337.27 24,554,702.64 213,087,039.91
86

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET

General Fund, 20% Development Fund, Infres Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust Fund As of December 31, 2011 ASSETS Current Assets Cash-Disbursing Officers Cash in Bank-Local Currency, Current Account Due from Officers and Employees Loans Receivable - Others Real Property Tax Receivables Special Education Tax Receivable Due from NGAs Due from Other Funds Other Receivables Other Prepaid Expenses Total Current Assets Property, Plant and Equipment (Net of Depreciation) Land Land Improvements Electrification, Power and Energy Structures Office Buildings School Buildings Hospitals and Health Centers Markets and Slaughterhouses Other Structures Office Equipment Furniture and Fixtures IT Equipment and Software Machineries Agricultural, Fishery and Forestry Equipment Communication Equipment Construction and Heavy Equipment Sports Equipment Technical and Scientific Equipment Other Machinery and Equipment Motor Vehicles Other Transportation Equipment Other Property, Plant and Equipment Total Property, Plant and Equipment Other Assets Work/Other Animal Other Assets Total Other Assets Total Assets LIABILITIES AND EQUITY LIABILITIES Current Liabilities Accounts Payable Due to BIR Due to PHILHEALTH Due to Other NGAs Due to LGUs
2,354,645.97 24,357,952.32 453,680.89 33,208,243.92 28,939,133.07 36,132,245.23 305,358.52 51,587,471.56 1,254,634.26 3,167,933.41 181,761,299.15
9,850,000.00 2,571,914.84 30,728,343.78 20,302,980.68 3,825,014.81 795,102.07 22,359,651.20 28,867,008.26 1,996,133.11 3,302,266.68 2,500,768.49 40,322.65 12,625.00 661,751.71 74,335,993.33 171,743.50 17,864.97 947,456.59 28,238,346.47 4,392,419.13 2,925,979.13 238,843,686.40 129,000.00 7,117,743.55 7,246,743.55 27,851,729.10
5,962,758.22 384,260.22 20.92 8,150,809.88 2,409,406.75
87
Due to Other Funds Guaranty Deposits Payable Tax Refunds Payable Other Payables Total Current Liabilities Long - Term Liabilities Loans Payable - Domestic Other Long-Term Liabilities Total Long-Term Liabilities Deferred Credits Deferred Real Property Tax Income Deferred Special Education Tax Income Other Deferred Credits Total Deferred Credits Total Liabilities EQUITY Government Equity, January 01, 2011 Add: Net Income Transfer of Property, Plant and Equipment (Trust Fund) Total Less: Prior Years' Adjustments Transfer of Public Infrastructures Total Add: Other Adjustments Government Equity, December 31, 2011 Total Liabilities and Equity
43,930,277.56 3,571,967.99 24,597.77 23,365,757.15 87,799,856.46 28,843,000.00 2,135,073.95 30,978,073.95 28,939,133.07 36,132,245.23 16,981,583.96 82,052,962.26 200,830,892.67
240,756,444.55 6,628,664.69 4,502,049.02 251,887,158.26 72,336,959.70 92,297,173.37 164,634,133.07 139,767,811.24 227,020,836.43 27,851,729.10 -
88

CONSOLIDATED COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET

General Fund, 20% Development Fund, Infres Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust Fund As of December 31, 2011 ASSETS Current Assets: Cash-Disbursing Officers Cash in Bank-Local Currency, Current Account Cash in Bank-Local Currency, Time Deposits Due from Officers and Employees Loans Receivable - Others Real Property Tax Receivables Special Education Tax Receivable Due from NGAs Due from Other Funds Other Receivables Other Prepaid Expenses Total Current Assets Property, Plant and Equipment: (Net of Depreciation) Land Land Imptovements Electrification, Power and Energy Structures Office Buildings School Buildings Hospitals and Health Centers Markets and Slaughterhouses Other Structures Office Equipment Furniture and Fixtures IT Equipment and Software Machineries Agricultural, Fishery and Forestry Equipment Communication Equipment Construction and Heavy Equipment Sports Equipment Technical and Scientific Equipment Other Machinery and Equipment Motor Vehicles Other Transportation Equipment Other Property, Plant and Equipment Total Property, Plant and Equipment Construction in Progress Construction in Progress - Agency Assets Construction in Progress - Roads, Highways and Bridges Total Construction in Progress Other Assets: Work/Other Animal Other Assets Total Other Assets Total Assets 2010
2,354,645.97 24,357,952.32 453,680.89 33,208,243.92 28,939,133.07 36,132,245.23 305,358.52 51,587,471.56 1,254,634.26 3,167,933.41 181,761,299.15
656,277.60 80,810,032.61 131,620,729.70 225,219.22 9,833,066.60 32,897,526.03 41,051,727.49 305,358.52 75,511,721.04 1,254,634.26 374,166,293.07
9,850,000.00 2,571,914.84 30,728,343.78 20,302,980.68 3,825,014.81 795,102.07 22,359,651.20 28,867,008.26 1,996,133.11 3,302,266.68 2,500,768.49 40,322.65 12,625.00 661,751.71 74,335,993.33 171,743.50 17,864.97 947,456.59 28,238,346.47 4,392,419.13 2,925,979.13 238,843,686.40 129,000.00 7,117,743.55 7,246,743.55 427,851,729.10
2,850,000.00 3,039,896.12 6,787,124.44 7,781,213.67 3,529,661.33 259,414.98 23,129,094.44 3,441,716.29 2,153,702.92 3,179,530.70 2,968,030.02 46,768.45 14,875.00 442,254.55 69,394,171.73 212,876.98 21,320.45 633,563.50 10,089,010.19 91,291.75 2,818,756.55 142,884,274.06 18,417,128.30 12,231,682.11 30,648,810.41 7,117,743.55 7,117,743.55 554,817,121.09
89
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY LIABILITIES Current Liabilities: Accounts Payables Due to BIR Due to PAG-IBIG Due to PHILHEALTH Due to Other NGAs Due to LGUs Due to Other Funds Guaranty Deposits Payable Tax Refunds Payable Other Payables Total Current Liabilities Long-Term Liabilities: Loans Payable - Domestic Other Long-Term Liabilities Total Long-Term Liabilities Deferred Credits: Deferred Real Property Tax Income Deferred Special Education Tax Income Other Deferred Credits Total Deferred Credits Total Liabilities EQUITY Government Equity: Government Equity, January 01 Add: Transfer of Property, Plant and Equipment (Trust Fund) Net Income Total Less: Prior Years Adjustments Transfer of Public Infrastructures Total Add: Other Adjustments Government Equity, December 31 Total Liabilities and Equity
5,962,758.22 384,260.22 20.92 8,150,809.88 2,409,406.75 43,930,277.56 3,571,967.99 24,597.77 23,365,757.15 87,799,856.46
137,701.21 95,082.98 200.00 105,426.68 1,202,316.13 911,855.92 75,962,942.62 379,075.84 98,716,103.13 177,510,704.51
28,843,000.00 2,135,073.95 30,978,073.95
58,919,000.00 2,135,073.95 61,054,073.95
28,939,133.07 36,132,245.23 16,981,583.96 82,052,962.26 200,830,892.67
32,897,526.03 41,051,727.49 1,546,644.56 75,495,898.08 314,060,676.54
240,756,444.55 4,502,049.02 6,628,664.69 251,887,158.26 72,336,959.70 92,297,173.37 164,634,133.07 139,767,811.24 227,020,836.43 427,851,729.10 -
121,894,313.04 48,523,874.42 74,661,253.92 245,079,441.38 343,611.58 3,979,385.25 4,322,996.83 240,756,444.55 554,817,121.09 -
90

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENSES

General Fund, 20% Development Fund, Infres Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust Fund For the Period January 1 to December 31, 2011 INCOME Local Taxes Business Tax Community Tax Franchise Tax Occupation Tax Real Property Tax Special Education Tax Tax on Sand, Gravel and Other Quarry Products Fines and Penalties - Local Taxes Permits and Licenses Fees on Weights and Measures Permit Fees Registration Fees Other Permits and Licenses Fines and Penalties - Permits and Licenses Service Income Clearance and Certification Fees Garbage Fees Inspection Fees Medical, Dental and Laboratory Fees Business Income Income from Cemetery Operations Income from Markets Income from Slaughterhouses Landing and Parking Fees Rent Income Other Income Interest Income Internal Revenue Allotment Share from PGCOR/PCSO Share from Tobacco Excise Tax Miscellaneous Income Other Fines and Penalties Total Income LESS: EXPENSES Personal Services Salaries and Wages-Regular Personnel Economic Relief Allowance (PERA) Additional Compensation (ADCOM) Representation Allowance (RA) Transportation Allowance (TA) Clothing/Uniform Allowance Subsistence, Laundry and Quarter Allowance Productivity Incentive Allowance Other Bonuses and Allowances Honoraria Hazard Pay Cash Gift Year End Bonus
22,572,284.66 2,192,534.69 1,614,869.50 649,127.00 3,958,393.16 4,919,482.26 2,053,499.46 341,291.97 50,207.80 2,171,492.96 1,029,982.20 1,172,677.01 123,028.50 374,567.00 1,000,157.00 1,841,230.36 1,405,844.00 245,135.00 2,311,445.00 1,404,799.70 533,445.33 11,430,021.50 1,734,326.71 155,554,908.00 2,383,592.60 14,671,004.95 1,110,985.98 216,724.76
38,301,482.70
4,547,388.47
4,621,798.36
15,924,846.53
175,671,543.00 239,067,059.06
38,572,750.50 1,251,571.21 3,855,037.46 1,922,433.48 1,556,100.00 840,000.00 506,467.10 6,893,500.00 11,703,410.00 1,435,727.28 672,085.73 520,000.00 3,752,822.40
91
Life and Retirement Insurance Contributions PAG-IBIG Contributions PHILHEALTH Contributions ECC Contributions Terminal Leave Benefits Other Personnel Benefits Total Personal Services Maintenance and Other Operating Expense Travelling Expenses-Local Training Expenses Scholarship Expenses Office Supplies Expenses Food Supplies Expenses Medical, Dental and Laboratory Supplies Expenses Gasoline, Oil and Lubricants Expenses Agricultural Supplies Expenses Other Supplies Expenses Water Expenses Electricity Expenses Postage and Deliveries Telephone Expenses - Landline Telephone Expenses - Mobile Membership Dues and Contributions to Organizations Advertising Expenses Rent Expenses Representation Expenses Transportation and Delivery Expenses Rewards and Other Claims Auditing Services General Services Security Services Repair and Maintenance - Land Improvements Repair and Maintenance - Electrification, Power & Energy Structures Repair and Maintenance - Office Buildings Repair and Maintenance - School Buildings Repair and Maintenance - Hospitals and Health Centers Repair and Maintenance - Markets and Slaughterhouses Repair and Maintenance - Other Structures Repair and Maintenance - Office Equipment Repair and Maintenance - IT Equipment and Software Repair and Maintenance - Construction and Heavy Equipment Repair and Maintenance - Motor Vehicles Repair and Maintenance - Other Transportation Equipment Repair and Maintenance - Other Property, Plant and Equipment Repair and Maintenance - Roads, Highways and Bridges Repair and Maintenance - Parks, Plazas and Monuments Repair and Maintenance - Irrigation, Canals and Laterals Repair and Maintenance - Flood Controls Repair and Maintenance - Other Public Infrastructures Confidential Expenses Taxes, Duties and Licenses Fidelity Bond Premiums Depreciation - Land Improvements Depreciation - Electrification, Power and Energy Structures Depreciation - Office Buildings Depreciation - School Buildings Depreciation - Hospitals and Health Centers Depreciation - Markets and Slaughterhouses Depreciation - Other Structures Depreciation - Office Equipment Depreciation - Furniture and Fixtures
4,135,029.60 247,000.00 443,800.00 234,613.10 718,302.06 2,696,051.92 81,956,701.84 4,004,671.65 1,107,317.13 54,147.00 4,766,548.84 297,693.70 508,417.03 11,311,030.96 313,900.00 2,535,052.63 393,041.06 9,214,874.35 3,895.00 891,288.76 33,924.53 20,000.00 2,041,891.32 9,000.00 1,019,638.10 388,494.50 560,700.00 159,592.18 32,969,767.54 222,856.00 839,132.20 74,800.00 4,391,305.27 83,021.12 101,020.00 7,200.00 3,062,570.94 93,931.04 33,600.00 786,972.28 4,022,192.03 46,020.00 1,754,429.00 984,481.20 27,233.36 30,400.00 272,281.25 33,059.00 521,040.00 648,635.21 73,961.26 846,389.28 960,103.04 379,194.54 204,542.52 21,098.91 769,443.24 1,527,697.31 1,405,268.81 274,319.52
92
Depreciation - IT Equipment Depreciation - Machineries Depreciation - Agricultural, Fishery and Forestry Equipment Depreciation - Communication Equipment Depreciation - Construction and Heavy Equipment Depreciation - Sports Equipment Depreciation - Technical and Scientific Equipment Depreciation - Other Machinery and Equipment Depreciation - Motor Vehicles Depreciation - Other Transportation Equipment Depreciation - Other Property, Plant and Equipment Other Maintenance and Operating Expenses Total Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses Financial Expenses Interest Expenses Other Financial Charges Total Financial Expenses Total Expenses NET INCOME BEFORE SUBSIDIES Less: Subsidies and Donations Subsidy to Local Government Units Donations Total Subsidies and Donations NET INCOME
1,289,385.39 6,445.80 2,250.00 47,622.84 6,646,178.40 41,133.48 3,455.48 95,106.90 2,702,114.52 308,872.62 1,153,971.87 30,339,269.12 139,738,891.03 3,394,383.68 193,302.53 3,587,686.21 225,283,279.08 13,783,779.98 38,000.00 7,117,115.29 7,155,115.29 6,628,664.69
93

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENSES

General Fund, 20% Development Fund, Infres Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust Fund For the Period January 1 to December 31, 2011 INCOME: Local Taxes Amusement Tax Business Tax Community Tax Franchise Tax Occupation Tax Real Property Tax Special Education Tax Tax on Sand, Gravel and Other Quarry Products Fines and Penalties - Local Taxes Total Local Taxes Permits and Licenses Fees on Weights and Measures Permit Fees Registration Fees Other Permits and Licenses Fines and Penalties - Permits and Licenses Total Permits and Licenses Service Income Clearance and Certification Fees Garbage Fees Inspection Fees Medical, Dental and Laboratoy Fees Total Service Income Business Income Income from Cemetery Operations Income from Markets Income from Slaughterhouses Landing and Parking Fees Rent Income Total Business Income Other Income Interest Income Share from Internal Revenue Collections Share from PAGCOR/PCSO Share from Tobacco Excise Tax Miscellaneous Income Other Fines and Penalties Total Other Income TOTAL INCOME LESS: EXPENSES Personal Services: Salaries and Wages-Regular Salaries and Wages-Casual Personnel Economic Relief Allowance (PERA) Additional Compensation (ADCOM) Representation Allowance (RA) 2010
22,572,284.66 2,192,534.69 1,614,869.50 649,127.00 3,958,393.16 4,919,482.26 2,053,499.46 341,291.97 38,301,482.70 50,207.80 2,171,492.96 1,029,982.20 1,172,677.01 123,028.50 4,547,388.47 374,567.00 1,000,157.00 1,841,230.36 1,405,844.00 4,621,798.36 245,135.00 2,311,445.00 1,404,799.70 533,445.33 11,430,021.50 15,924,846.53 1,734,326.71 155,554,908.00 2,383,592.60 14,671,004.95 1,110,985.98 216,724.76 175,671,543.00 239,067,059.06
11,505.00 8,080,718.12 1,088,706.79 1,417,573.00 277,150.00 3,392,767.61 4,225,401.79 450,490.29 173,727.00 19,118,039.60 13,370.00 731,550.00 160,835.00 979,442.26 117,993.00 2,003,190.26 632,331.64 517,196.00 1,047,379.00 525,912.55 2,722,819.19 246,625.00 2,174,955.00 1,238,498.56 173,610.50 7,157,434.50 10,991,123.56 2,787,279.59 143,634,207.00 3,270,147.36 71,900,000.00 3,066,684.35 78,225.00 224,736,543.30 259,571,715.91
38,572,750.50 1,251,571.21 3,855,037.46 1,922,433.48
37,680,581.19 3,684,257.82 1,247,116.70 3,737,349.97 1,271,970.00
94
Transportation Allowance (TA) Clothing/Uniform Allowance Subsistence, Laundry and Quarter Allowance Productivity Incentive Allowance Other Bonuses and Allowances Honoraria Hazard Pay Overtime and Night Pay Cash Gift Year End Bonus Life and Retirement Insurance Contributions PAG-IBIG Contributions PHILHEALTH Contributions ECC Contributions Terminal Leave Benefits Other Personnel Benefits Total Personal Services Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses: Traveling Expenses-Local Training Expenses Scholarship Expenses Office Supplies Expense Accountable Forms Expenses Animal/Zoological Supplies Expenses Food Supplies Expenses Drugs and Medicines Expenses Medical, Dental and Laboratory Supplies Expenses Gasoline, Oil and Lubricants Expenses Agricultural Supplies Expenses Textbook and Instructional Materials Expenses Military and Police Supplies Expenses Other Supplies Expenses Water Expenses Electricity Expenses Postage and Deliveries Telephone Expenses - Landline Telephone Expenses - Mobile Membership Dues and Contributions to Organizations Awards and Indemnities Advertising Expenses Rent Expenses Representation Expenses Transportation and Delivery Expenses Subscriptions Expenses Rewards and Other Claims Auditing Services Environment/Sanitary Services General Services Security Services Repair and Maintenance - Land Improvements Repairs and Maint.-Electrification, Power & Energy Structures Repairs and Maintenance - Office Buildings Repairs and Maintenance - School Buildings Repairs and Maintenance - Hospitals and Health Centers Repairs and Maintenance - Markets and Slaughterhouses Repairs and Maintenance - Other Structures Repairs and Maintenance - Office Equipment Repairs and Maintenance - IT Equipment and Software
1,556,100.00 840,000.00 506,467.10 6,893,500.00 11,703,410.00 1,435,727.28 672,085.73 520,000.00 3,752,822.40 4,135,029.60 247,000.00 443,800.00 234,613.10 718,302.06 2,696,051.92 81,956,701.84
1,226,250.00 840,000.00 220,550.00 21,571,850.80 973,468.18 1,033,564.76 714,422.83 1,064,500.00 3,259,844.00 4,473,078.75 248,400.00 446,162.50 235,884.32 2,343,491.76 2,283,503.92 88,556,247.50
4,004,671.65 1,107,317.13 54,147.00 4,766,548.84 297,693.70 508,417.03 11,311,030.96 313,900.00 2,535,052.63 393,041.06 9,214,874.35 3,895.00 891,288.76 33,924.53 20,000.00 2,041,891.32 9,000.00 1,019,638.10 388,494.50 560,700.00 159,592.18 32,969,767.54 222,856.00 839,132.20 74,800.00 4,391,305.27 83,021.12 101,020.00 7,200.00 3,062,570.94 93,931.04 33,600.00
3,017,916.36 1,070,931.00 455,070.00 3,414,790.90 96,557.00 9,100.00 2,893,543.65 2,106,981.19 171,885.00 5,346,941.55 2,104,731.00 4,001.00 20,000.00 1,671,699.08 273,925.98 4,401,508.03 28,810.36 386,238.57 199,497.47 999,600.00 55,000.00 388,023.15 46,642.00 39,900.00 221,229.60 114,690.50 19,071,602.77 157,500.00 111,108.00 2,109,550.15 575,843.92 15,000.00 266,841.00 243,545.50 36,538.20 24,464.00
95
Repairs and Maintenance - Construction and Heavy Equipment Repairs and Maintenance-Medical, Dental & Laboratory Equipment Repairs and Maintenance-Motor Vehicles Repairs and Maintenance-Other Transportation Equipment Repairs and Maintenance-Other Property, Plant and Equipment Repairs and Maintenance - Roads, Highway and Bridges Repairs and Maintenance - Parks, Plazas and Monuments Repairs and Maintenance - Irrigation, Canals and Laterals Repairs and Maintenance-Flood Controls Repairs and Maintenance-Other Public Infrastructures Confidential Expenses Taxes, Duties and Licenses Fidelity Bond Premiums Insurance Expenses Depreciation - Land Improvements Depreciation - Electrification, Power and Energy Structures Depreciation - Office Buildings Depreciation - School Buildings Depreciation - Hospitals and Health Centers Depreciation - Markets and Slaughterhouses Depreciation - Other Structures Depreciation - Office Equipment Depreciation - Furniture and Fixtures Depreciation - IT Equipment Depreciation - Machineries Depreciation - Agricultural, Fishery and Forestry Equipment Depreciation - Communication Equipment Depreciation - Construction and Heavy Equipment Depreciation - Sports Equipment Depreciation - Technical and Scientific Equipment Depreciation - Other Machinery and Equipment Depreciation - Motor Vehicles Depreciation - Other Transportation Equipment Depreciation - Other Property, Plant and Equipment Tax Refunds Other Maintenance and Operating Expenses Total Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses Financial Expenses: Documentary Stamps Expenses Interest Expenses Other Financial Expenses Total Financial Expenses TOTAL EXPENSES INCOME BEFORE SUBSIDIES LESS: SUBSIDIES AND DONATIONS Subsidy to Local Government Units Donations Total Subsidies and Donations NET INCOME
786,972.28 4,022,192.03 46,020.00 1,754,429.00 984,481.20 27,233.36 30,400.00 272,281.25 33,059.00 521,040.00 648,635.21 73,961.26 846,389.28 960,103.04 379,194.54 204,542.52 21,098.91 769,443.24 1,527,697.31 1,405,268.81 274,319.52 1,289,385.39 6,445.80 2,250.00 47,622.84 6,646,178.40 41,133.48 3,455.48 95,106.90 2,702,114.52 308,872.62 1,153,971.87 30,339,269.12 139,738,891.03 3,394,383.68 193,302.53 ,587,686.21 225,283,279.08 13,783,779.98
258,440.72 6,500.00 1,932,787.26 177,120.00 226,302.00 1,773,382.04 45,215.00 407,600.00 108,106.34 100,889.60 198,328.32 843,590.37 217,313.52 257,745.26 204,542.52 16,923.00 769,443.24 314,629.51 1,113,018.94 171,116.62 1,205,522.07 6,445.80 2,250.00 39,165.54 1,390,126.50 41,133.48 16,798.44 54,449.40 631,804.32 6,608.25 1,063,655.10 62,500.00 22,553,095.06 88,367,755.15 110,000.00 727,486.94 837,486.94 177,761,489.59 81,810,226.32
38,000.00 7,117,115.29 7,155,115.29 6,628,664.69
7,148,972.40 7,148,972.40 74,661,253.92
96
LGPMS Aggregation Table

ADMINISTRATIVE GOVERNANCE
Local Legislation
Ref No. 1 2 3 Indicator Quality of the Legislative Agenda Quality of the Legislative Tracking Presence of Updated Codes % of ordinances over total 4 enactments Local Legislation Index = sum of performance rating/no. Of applicable indicators Performance Scale 5 4 4.55 1 3.64
Resource Allocation and Utilization Ref No. Indicator 1 Quality of the Annual Budget 2 Per Capita Expenditure 3 Personal Services Ratio 4 Debt Service Ratio Resource Allocation and Utilization Index = sum of performance rating/no. Of applicable Performance Scale 5 5 1 3 3.50
Customer Service Civil Applications Indicator Quality of customer service in the 1 processing of Civil Registry douments Quality of customer service in the 2 processing of Real Property Documents Customer Service Index = sum of performance rating/no. Of applicable indicators Ref No. Performance Scale 5
4.6 4.8
Human Resource Management and Development Ref No. Indicator 1 Quality of Human Resource HRMD Index = sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Performance Scale 5 5
97
Indicator Functionality of the LDC Quality of database for devt 2 planning 3 Quality of CDP or PDPFP Quality of the LDIP as component of 4 CDP or PDPFP 5 Quality of the CLUP 6 Quality of the AIP 7 Presence of ELA Development Planning Index = sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Ref No. 1 Performance Scale 4.6 3.86 5 5 5 5 4.74
Revenue Generation
Ref No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Indicator Performance Scale 4.55 5 5 1 5 5 4.26
Quality of systems on LG- Imposed or collected taxes, fees, or charges Quality of Comprehensive Revenue Generation Plan Total Revenue Collection Cost to Total Revenue Collected RPT Accomplishment Rate % Locally-Sourced Revenues to Total Local Government Revenues %Regular Revenues to Total LG Revenues Revenue Generation Index = sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators
98

SOCIAL GOVERNANCE
Health Services
Ref. No. 1 2 3 4 5 Indicator Functionality of LHB Quality of Primary Health Care Quality of Maternal Care Quality of Child Care Other innovative health services Health Services Index = Sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Performance Rating 3.4 4.5 4.5 5 5 4.48

Ref. No. Indicator Performance Rating
1 2 3 4
Functionality of LSB Support to Elementary and Secondary education from the SEF Support to education from the Gen. Fund Quality of Alternative Learning System Support to Education Services Index = Sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Support to Housing and Basic Services
Ref. No. 1 Indicator
5 3.4 4 4.6 4.25
Database for the housing sector Services provided for the housing 2 sector Support to Housing and Basic Services Index = Sum of performance rating/no. of applicable
Performance Rating 4.2 4.2
99

Ref. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Indicator Functionality of POC Quality of IACPS Quality of Accomplishments Provision of sites for protective services Functionality of LCPC Support to Lupong Tagapamayapa % of disputes resolved through LT % of amicable settlements sustained by LT Functionality of LDCC Responsiveness of disaster operations Adequacy of services for disaster victims Rehabilitation effort Performance Rating 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4.43 4 1 4.44
Peace, Security and Disaster Risk Managemen Index = Sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators
100

ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE
Support to Agriculture Sector Ref. No. 1 Indicator Extent of support to agriculture % of farming HH benefitting from agricultural 2 extension or on-site services 3 Alternative assistance/services to farmers Support to Agriculture Sector Index = sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Performance Scale 4.29 5 5 4.76
Support to Fishery Services Indicator Functionality of FARMC Support to fisher folks and fishing industry % of fishing HH benefitting from extension or on3 site services 4 Alternative assistance/services to fisher folks Support to Fishery Services Index = sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Ref. No. 1 2 Performance Scale 5 4.4 5 5 4.85
Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion Indicator Quality of Civil Application System to Business 1 Sector Processing time of Building , Occupancy and 2 Business Permits Presence of LG-supported administrative body that 3 is responsible in the promotion of business and industry 4 Quality of direct support to business, enterprises and industries Entrepreneurship, Business and Industry Promotion Index = sum of performance rating Ref. No. Performance Scale 3.75 3 1 2.33 2.52
101

ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE
Forest Ecosystem Management

Ref. No. 1 2 3 Indicator
Integration of forest management program in the CLUP or PDPFP Involvement of NGOs/Pos/Private Sector in the protection and management of forest Adequacy of forest management efforts
Performance Rating 1 5 1 2.33
Forest Ecosystem Management Index = sum of performance rating /no.of applicable indicators
Freshwater Ecosystem Management

Ref. No. 1 2 Indicator
Integration of freshwater protection in the CLUP or PDPFP Involvement of NGOs/POs/Private Sector in the protection/ rehabilitation of freshwater
Performance Rating 1 1 1 1
Adequacy of freshwater mgt efforts 3 Freshwater Ecosystem Management Index = sum of performance rating /no.of applicable indicators
Coastal Marine Ecosystem Management

Ref. No. 1 2 3 Indicator
Integration of freshwater protection in the CLUP or PDPFP Involvement of NGOs/POs/Private Sector in protection/ rehabilitation of coastal areas Adequacy of coastal marine ecosystem management efforts
Performance Rating 1 1 1 1
Coastal Marine Ecosystem Management Index = sum of performance rating /no.of applicable
Urban Ecosystem Management

Ref. No. 1 Indicator Performance Rating
1 5 5 4.6 4.2 2 4 2
Integration of forest management program in the CLUP or PDPFP Involvement of NGOs/Pos/Private Sector in the protection of the 2 environment from air and water pollution Effort to enforce pollution control measures 3 Functionality of SWMB 4 Presence of solid Waste Management Plan 5 % Bgys with Material Recovery Facilities 6 Effectiveness of Solid Waste Collection and Disposal 7 Presence of facilities as final disposal of solid waste 8 Urban Ecosystem Management Index = sum of performance rating /no.of applicable indicators
3.48
102

VALUING FUNDAMENTALS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE
Participation Ref No. Indicator Representation of NGOs/Pos/Private 1 Sector in LSB Presence of feedback mechanism to 2 generate citizen views on LGU services Involvement of NGOs/Pos/Private 3 Sector in the implementation of LGU devt projects Participation Index = sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Performance Rating 5 5 1 3.67
Transparency Ref No. 1 Indicator Public Information Office or Desk Communication mediums used to update 2 the public on LG Plans and 3 Accessibility of public documents Transparency Index = sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Performance Rating 5 5 5 5
Finacial Accountability Ref No. 1 2 3 Indicator Effectiveness of LGU FMS Functionality of BAC Timely liquidation f cash advances Availability of status report on actions 4 taken by LGU on COA Audit Findings Financial Accountability Index = sum of performance rating/no. of applicable indicators Performance Rating 3.77 5 1 5 3.69
103

State of Local Governance Report 2011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

State of Local Governance Report 2011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

localgovernanceperformancemanag ementsystemstateoflocalgovernance reportlocalgovernanceperformance managementsystemstateoflocalgove rnancereportlocalgovernanceperfor mancemanagementsystemstateofloc STATE OF LOCAL GOVERNANCE REPORT For the Calendar Year 2011

What are the 5 Performance Areas And 17 Service Areas of LGPMS?

What is the Strategic Purpose and Value of LGPMS?

Who are the Users of LGPMS?

What is the LGPMS Customized Software?

made through a connected LGU or through the nearest Internet caf.

What are the Benefits from LGPMS?

What are the Strategic Linkages of LGPMS?

Why use LGPMS as the platform?

Why is there a need for convergence?

Step 1 Setting-up the LGPMS database

Illustration: The LGPMS Annual Implementation Process

Step 1. Setting-up the LGPMS Database

Step 2. Data Gathering, Data Proofing and Certification

2.1. Accomplishing the LGU Profile

2.2 Accomplishing questions on Administrative Governance Service Area Respondent

2.3 Accomplishing questions on Social Governance Service Area

2.4 Accomplishing questions on Economic Governance Service Area

2.5 Accomplishing questions on Environmental Governance Service Area Respondent

Step 3. Online Data Entry

Step 4. Report Generation

Step 5. Utilizing LGPMS Results

VALUING FUNDAMENTALS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE

On Resource Allocation and Utilization

Area(s) with Excellent Performance

Human Resource Management and Development

Priority Area for Improvement Resource Allocation and Utilization

Performance Description 3.50 Fair

Service Area Resource Allocation and Utilization

Indicator(s) with 5 Rating Debt Service Ratio

Indicator(s) with 3 4.99 Rating

The 2010 budget has 1% appropriations for GAD out

Resource Allocation and Utilization

Quality of the Annual Budget

Service Area Resource Allocation and Utilization

Indicator(s) with 1 2.99 Rating Per Capita Expenditure

Indicator(s) with 1 2.99 Rating

SUGGESTED ACTIONS TO TAKE:

Priority Area for Improvement

Service Area Local Legislation

Indicator(s) with 5 Rating Quality of the Legislative Agenda

Service Area Local Legislation

Indicator(s) with 3 4.99 Rating Quality of the Legislative Tracking System

Service Area Local Legislation

Percentage of Ordinances over Legislative Measures

SUGGESTED ACTIONS TO TAKE:

Priority Area for Improvement Revenue Generation

Performance Description 4.26 High but not Excellent

Indicator(s) with 5 Rating

Total Revenue Collection Cost to Total Revenue Collected

Service Area Revenue Generation

Indicator(s) with 5 Rating Real Property Tax Accomplishment Rate

Service Area Revenue Generation

Indicator(s) with 5 Rating

Quality of the AIP

The LGU of San Jose has an Executive and Legislative Agenda.

Indicator(s) with 3 4.99 Rating

Indicator(s) with 3 4.99 Rating

Quality of CDP or PDPFP

Indicator(s) with 1 2.99 Rating

SUGGESTED ACTIONS TO TAKE:

The LGU has no Geographic Information System (GIS).

Priority Area for Improvement Customer Service Civil Applications