Baseline Report

Adapting Solid Waste Management As

Climate Crises Solution In Cotabato City

World Vision Philippines

Contact:
List name & address of contact person

Published on (insert date)

© World Vision International

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 1

 i. Acknowledgements (1/4 page)

Instructions: Use this section to thankfully acknowledge key organizations, teams or

individuals who played a key role during baseline planning, data collection, analysis,
interpretation/validation and utilization of baseline findings. Keep it short and concise (2-3
paragraphs)! Only acknowledge significant support/contribution. Consider acknowledging the
support the baseline team has received from: program support teams (PSTs); technical input
from regional offices (ROs); WV global center (GC) teams; senior leadership in national
offices; key partners (including government ministries, local leadership; churches/faith
communities); etc.

ii. Affirmation (1/4 page)

Instructions: Use this section to stress the originality of content in the baseline report. See example
below:

“Except as acknowledged by the references in this reeport to other authors and publications, the
information and guidance contained herein consists of our own work, undertaken to improve the
quality and utilization of LEAP 3 baseline findings by World Vision staff and partners.” Albert
Siminyu (LEAP and DME Capacity Building Director)

iii. Table of Contents (1 page)

Instructions: Prepare a table of contents showing where important sections/information in the

baseline report is located. Use MS Word auto-generated table of content. Ensure the table of
contents is updated before submitting the baseline report. Also, please include a list of tables
and figures (include pages where they are located in the report).

iv. Acronyms (1 page)

SWM Solid Waste Management

EBM Environmental Management Bureau
CENRO City Environment and Natural Resources Office
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources

v. Executive Summary ( 2-3 pages)

Instructions: Executive summaries are normally prepared for non-technical people who have
limited time and need information that assists them to understand and utilize baseline
findings. Therefore, the executive summary should be prepared after important components of

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 2

the baseline report have been written1. The executive summary should include a brief
description of:
 Baseline background and context (1-2 paragraphs). Includes baseline purpose,
objectives and research questions.
 Baseline methodology (2-3 paragraphs). Outlines key qualitative and quantitative
techniques/tools, sample sizes, etc., employed by the baseline team.
 Key findings (1-2 pages). Findings should be presented using 1-2 sentences for each
recommendation (guided by key research questions contained in the baseline design
document – BDD). Baseline teams should consider using a table to summarize key
baseline findings.
 Key recommendations (1/2 page). Use 1-2 sentences for each recommendation (which
must be supported by important baseline findings and conclusions).

1. Introduction (1 page)

Project Background

World Vision Development Foundation, Inc. is implementing the project, Adapting

Solid Waste Management as Climate Crises Solution in Cotabato City in partnership with the
City Environment and Natural Resources Office (CENRO) and the five barangays covered in
the project. The implementation was started in February 2021 in Barangay Rosary Heights
Mother (more popularly called as MBRH, locally), Barangay Rosary Heights / PC Hill,
Barangay Rosary Heights 1, 4, and 6. The project focuses on capacitating the communities in
implementing solid waste management and adapting proper waste disposal as a contribution
in solving climate crises.

As a burgeoning urban center in the southern part of the country, Cotabato City
reported Php1B of income for 20192 according to the Philippine News Agency. The city has
seen an average of 10.51% of annual economic growth for the last five years. Population also
grew in the last 50 years from 61,184 3 in 1970 to 325,0794 in the 2020 official census by the
Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA). The increasing population brings in more human
activities in the city for which generation of solid waste is also increased. Cotabato City
generated 108.6 tonnes of wastes per day in 2017 while the waste generation per capita was at
0.35 kg. per day5. Projections on the waste generation per capita is at 0.01/kg per day which
will contribute to approximately 166.9 tonnes of wastes generated in the entire city in 10
years. A study reported by the National Solid Waste Management Committee covering 2008
to 2018 published that the average per capita waste generation of the country is at .40 kg. per
day6. The LGU’s SWM plan also pointed out that there is an “indifferent attitude” towards
proper waste disposal. Geographically, Cotabato City has 70% of its land area below sea
level, and flooding is a common occurrence in recent years as the typhoons and monsoon
rains visited the southern islands more frequent than ever before. This particular land
1
The executive summary should be updated/refined to reflect any changes made to other key sections of the
baseline report.
2
Source: Philippine News Agency retrieved on January 7, 2022 through Cotabato City hits P1-B revenue mark | Philippine
News Agency (pna.gov.ph)
3
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority retrieved on January 7, 2022 through Cotabato City Population Stood at 272
Thousand (Results from the 2010 Census of Population and Housing) | Philippine Statistics Authority (psa.gov.ph)
4
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority retrieved on January 7, 2022 through http://rssoarmm.psa.gov.ph/statistics/population
5
Source: Local Government of Cotabato City. Cotabato City10-Year Ecological Solid Waste Management Plan, 2018-2027
[Note: Cover page of the document was labeled 2010-2019]
6
Source: Environmental Management Bureau. Department of Environment and Natural Resources. National Solid Waste
Management Status Report 2008-2018.

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 3

characteristics plus the increasing waste generation aggravates the problem of flooding in the
area.

As part of the organization’s strategy for Climate Change Adaptation, World Vision
implements the project to support Cotabato City in addressing solid waste issues in the area.

Project Objectives

The baseline study of the project measured the following indicators for the
corresponding project objectives identified in the logical framework.

Log Frame
Summary of objectives Indicator
Code
Decrease solid wastes dumped open space and SWM in the city with successful reduction of
Project Goal dumpsite through community-led SWM in %tage of volume of garbage
contribution to climate change solutions %tage of families practiced WM
%tage of families practiced compliance on
SWM
Improved mechanism for waste collection in
Outcome 1 %tage of families benefitted through incentive
Cotabato City and its targeted communities
approach
Updated SWM plans
Assessment, review and updating of management # of steering committee formed
Output 1.1. plans # of workshop conducted
# of plans finalized
Capacitating SWM Teams and 3R advocates at the # of trainings conducted
barangays in collaboration with CENR – Cotabato # of individuals and barangay trained
City # of barangays provided basic tools
Output 1.2 list of tools provided
# of MRF established
# of individuals feel confident about 3Rs
application
Strengthened recycling value chain from HH level to # of value chain conducted
MRF map out different SW link, actors, and other
Output 1.3
important stakeholders of the project
CENRO acceptance of the report
Increased household compliance on waste # of individuals and barangays implemented the
segregation recycling, segragation, consolidation and
marketing of solid wastes
# of individuals who benefitted from the
incentive program
Output 1.4
volume of recycle materials collected and
marketed
amount of incentive released and proceeds
reflow back to capital
# household gained income through the project
Improved awareness and practice on waste %tage of individuals practiced waste
segregation, recycling and other climate change segregation and aware fo the climate crises
Outcome 2
adaptation practices solutions
SW mechnism in barangay and city improved
Established incentive mechanism for managing Incentive program acceptable by the
recyclable wastes community
Output 2.1
# MOA signed together with local merchant
and MRF
Increased KSA on solid waste management and other # of individuals can demostrate and practice
climate change adaptation practices 3Rs, waste segregation
# of individuals confidently express
Output 2.2
understanding and awareness on climate crises
and solution and practices
# of community actions implemented
Advocated and strengthened LGU SWM and Climate # of barangays with in-placed SWM plans
Crises solutions # of campaign that influenced adoption of
Output 2.3
climate crises solutions
# of successful campaign conducted

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 4

Baseline Objectives

This baseline study aims to:

1. Validate extent and depth of the issue on solid waste management being
addressed by the project
2. Scan local resources and opportunities related to the project interventions in the
target sites by mapping SWM value chain key actors (i.e. from households up
to recycling plants), resources, capacities and opportunities
3. Determine baseline values of key indicators related to the define
objective/indicator of the project
4. Propose realistic project targets for key indicators in reference to the baseline
data

2. Methodology (2-3 pages)

Data Requirements

World Vision formulated four baseline research objectives with specific data
requirements. The data requirements guided the research on the corresponding methods used
in this baseline.

Table 3. Baseline Project Objectives and Value Chain Data Requirements

Objective Indicator Definition Data Requirements Method
Objective 1: Validate extent and depth of the issue on solid waste management being addressed by the project
Climate crises issues Validated list of climate crises and solid Survey
including Solid Waste waste management issues Document
Management identified by review FGD
stakeholders KII
Objective 2: Scan local resources and opportunities related to the project interventions in the target sites by mapping SWM
value chain key actors (i.e. from households up to recycling plants), resources, capacities and opportunities
Presence of local List and map of value chain actors Survey
resources [expertise, from producers to processors, those FGD
programmes, policies providing technical support and KII
institutions, finances, among capacity building, etc. Document review
others] that could be
maximized to address issues Detail information of VC actors
and concerns identified (address, capacity, resources, etc.)
Objective 3: Determine baseline values of key indicators related to the define objective/indicator of the project
Volume of SW SWM in the city with Volume of SW generated and Survey
generated in the city successful managed with data disaggregation FGD
categorized into types and reduction of %tage (sources, volume, recycled, non- KII
who generate it of volume of recycled, etc.) Document review
garbage
%tage of families practiced
WM
Solid Waste # of families engaged in Number of households, businesses Survey
Management and practices SWM or offices, factories contributors of FGD
practices SW KII
Document review
Number of barangays with established
SWM practices, with
available/established MRFs

Number of SME engaged in SWM

which include garbage collectors,
recycling companies, etc.

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 5

 Other relevant information related to
SWM
Potential income # of families engaged in List of existing and potential Survey
generating source out of potential livelihood generated under SWM FGD
SWM income sources from SW KII
Document review
Objective 4. Propose realistic project targets for key indicators in reference to the baseline data
Are there existing thresholds 1. Available thresholds (global or Survey
for outcome indicators that national level) for city or municipal FGD
could help us determine levels KII
ideal levels of growth or 2. Government or city targets Document review
improvement?

Data Collection Methods

Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used to collect data from the project
focus areas in Cotabato City. These included the household survey among beneficiaries, focus
group discussion (FGD) with the community leaders and members, and key informant
interview (KII) with partners and stakeholders.

Instruments Description
Household Survey The household survey was conducted with the project
beneficiaries to collect data about the knowledge and practices
of Solid Waste Management in five communities covered in the
implementation of the project. The survey was conducted online
and face-to-face based on the respondents’ preference and
accessibility to the online questionnaire.
Focus Group Discussion The FGDs with the communities were conducted face-to-face
(FGD) with the participants are their respective barangay halls. The
FGDs collected qualitative data about issues and priorities in
solid waste management from the perspective of the vulnerable
groups and stakeholders.
Key Informant The KIIs were conducted with partners, potential partners, and
Interview/ Inquiry (KII) stakeholders data about local resources and opportunities on
value chain and management. KIIs were conducted online and
face-to-face with the respondents at their respective offices.

Sampling Calculations

For the household survey, sample size calculation was based on the population of the
areas. The project covers 9,274 households in the five barangays where the project is being
implemented. The following formula was used to get an estimate of the households needed for
the survey.

Formula Calculation

N SAMPLE SIZE
n= total households 9274
1+ Ne2 confidence level 95%
margin of error 5%
Where, sample size (n) 383
n is the sample size, 10% buffer 38
N is the total household Target respondents 422
e is the margin of error

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 6

 For this sample size calculation, a margin of error of 5%
was used.

From the actual fieldwork, 403 respondents (135 males, 268 females) successfully
participated in the survey. A few of the target respondents did not want to participate in the
baseline study and refused to be interviewed for various personal reasons. The required
sample size of 383 was still captured and accepted for analysis.

Total Survey Respondents by

Area Male Female Total
1 MBRH 31 69 100
2 Poblacion 4 27 74 101
3 Rosary Heights 1/PC Hill 21 45 66
4 Rosary Heights 4 31 19 50
5 Rosary Heights 6 25 61 86
TOTAL 135 268 403

Purposive sampling method was used to identify and select the participants to the
FGD. Participants identified were the community leaders of the barangay including barangay
officials, clan leaders, faith leaders, women leaders, youth leaders, and other vulnerable
groups, which the communities may identify. This may also include representation from
Indigenous Peoples, PLWDs, and other groups most vulnerable to climate crises.

Target Participants FGD 1 FGD 2 FGD 3 FGD 4 FGD 5 TOTAL

Poblacion MBRH Rosary Rosary Rosary
4 Heights Heights Heights
1 4 6
Punong Barangay 1 1 1 1 1 5
Kagawad for Environment 1 1 1 1 1 5
Clan Leader/Elder in the barangay 1 1 1 1 1 5
Faith / Church leader 1 1 1 1 1 5
Women's Association leader (if applicable) 1 1 1 1 1 5
SK Chairperson or Youth Leader 1 1 1 1 1 5
IP Leader (if applicable) 1 1 1 1 1 5
PLWD Chapter Leader (if applicable) 1 1 1 1 1 5
Homeowners' Association President (if applicable) 1 1 1 1 1 5
Market Vendor's Association President (if applicable) 1 1 1 1 1 5
Public / Private School Head (if applicable) 1 1 1 1 1 5
PTA President (if applicable) 1 1 1 1 1 5
Environmental NGO or CBO officer (if applicable) 1 1 1 1 1 5
TOTAL 13 13 13 13 13 65

In the actual FGDs conducted, 80 community leaders and members (28 males, 52
females) participated in their respective barangays. Participants were composed of Barangay
Captains, Barangay Kagawad, Day Care Workers, Youth Leaders, Teachers, Street Educators,
Purok Leaders, Homeowners Association Leaders, PWD Leaders, project beneficiaries, and
community volunteers involved in solid waste disposal and relevant concerns.

Total FGD Participants

# Areas Date Conducted Female Male Total Pax
1 MBRH 11/24/2021 8 3 11
2 Poblacion 11/26/2021 8 8 16
4
3 RH1 11/23/2021 10 4 14
4 RH4 11/25/2021 8 8 16
5 RH6 11/22/2021 18 5 23
TOTAL 5 days 52 28 80

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 7

 The key informants were selected purposively from among project partners and
stakeholders who have specific knowledge relevant to project objectives and indicators and
the covered areas.

Organization Respondent Target Number

LGU/CENRO Engr. Crisanto Saavedra (or his representative) 1
BARMM MENRE Minister Abdulraof Macacua (or his 1
representative)
Ministry of Trade, Investment, Minister Abu Amri Taddik 1
and Tourism (MTIT)
Private Material Recovery or From within Cotabato City or those operating 5
Recycling Companies in Cotabato City

In the actual field work, 20 respondents (13 males, 7 females) participated as key
informants providing information relevant to the Solid Waste Management implementation in
Cotabato City, as well as “value chain actors” in the area who are potential partners of the
communities in project implementation.

# Barangay Date Interviewed Sex Organization Position

1 RH X1 11/19/2021 Male City Environment and Natural Public Services Officer II
Resources Office
2 Rosary 11/19/2021 Male MENRE - Environment Senior environmental
heights 7 management services management specialist
3 Rosary 11/19/2021 Female MTIT BARMM TIDS
Heights 4
4 Poblacion 4 11/20/2021 Male ESNAIN ABDUL store Owner
5 Poblacion 4 11/20/2021 Male Jura store Owner
6 Poblacion 4 11/20/2021 Male Trader Charcoal Owner
7 Poblacion 4 11/20/2021 Male Trader of Firewood Owner
8 Poblacion 4 11/21/2021 Male Mark Store Owner
9 Poblacion 4 11/20/2021 Female Phoenix Super LPG Administrative Staff
10 Rosary 11/20/2021 Female No name store Owner
Heights 4
11 RH -9 11/16/2021 Male Sammy Junkshop Owner
12 Rosary 11/16/2021 Male DR Battery Junkshop Owner
heights 11
13 MBRH 11/16/2021 Female Nurharis junkshop Owner
14 Rosary 11/17/2021 Male RCA Junkshop Owner
Heights 1/PC
Hill
15 Rosary 11/17/2021 Female Nur Haris Junkshop 2 Owner
Heights 1/PC
Hill
16 RH -9 11/16/2021 Male Sammy Junkshop Owner
17 Rosary 11/16/2021 Male DR Battery Junkshop Owner
heights 11
18 MBRH 11/16/2021 Female Nurharis junkshop Manager
19 Rosary 11/17/2021 Male RCA Junkshop Manager
Heights 1/PC
Hill
20 Rosary 11/17/2021 Female Nur Haris Junkshop 2 Manager
Heights 1/PC
Hill

Data Analysis

Data collected from the field were processed through the following data analysis stages:
# Data Analysis Process Description
1 Tabulation and Quantitative data were automatically encoded in the
consolidation online questionnaire used by the interviewers or the

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 8

 respondents online. The spreadsheet provides the
tabulated and consolidated data collected from the
field.
2 Data clean-up The tabulated and consolidated data was treated for
review and checking of errors. The data was cleaned
from test run and duplicates in the spreadsheets.
3 Translation The cleaned up data was treated for translation from
the vernacular responses to English.
4 Data distribution Simple distribution of data were calculated using
frequency tables for all quantitative data from the
field.
5 Data Disaggregation Data disaggregation used gender, area, and other
applicable attributes based on the need for data
analysis and data presentation.
6 Carbon Footprint Calculations of household carbon footprint was done
calculations using components such as food consumption, energy,
and transportation. Emission factors were also
included for each of the components to calculate the
carbon emission per household and per individual at a
monthly and annual rate.
7 Data analysis tables and Data analysis tables and graphs were generated to
graphical interpretations present the results in a systematic and organized
process.

Limitations

3. Baseline results (4-5 pages)

HOUSEHOLD SURVEY RESULTS

Demographics

A total of 403 household respondents from five areas of Cotabato City participated in
the baseline study. Of this number, 67% were females while 33% were males.

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 9

 67.5% of the respondents identify as Roman Catholic, 26.1% identify as Islam, 3.5%
are Evangelical, 1.0% are affiliated with Episcopal Church, 0.7% are Seventh Day Adventist,
0.5% identify as Iglesia Ni Cristo, 0.5% Protestant, and 0.2% identify as T’duray.

45.7% of the respondents identify as Bisaya, 20.6% as Maguindanaon, 10.7% as

Ilonggo, 6.9% Tagalog, Cotabateño 6.5%, and 3.0% are T’duray. There were also 2.2% who
identified as Chavacano, 1.7% Ilokano, 0.7% Maranao, 0.5% Tausog, 0.2% Subano, 0.2%
Bagubo, 0.2% Bol-anon, 0.2% Cebuano, and 0.5% Iranun.

The overall average family size is 6 which was the same for MBRH, Poblacion 4, and
Rosary Heights 4. Rosary Heights 1 and 6 have an average of 5 for each barangay.

RH
Family Size MBRH Pob4 RH1 RH4 Total
6
1 0 2 1 0 6 9
2 7 8 5 2 7 29
3 7 13 9 7 8 44
4 16 11 11 7 10 55
5 30 18 10 3 12 73
6 15 12 13 10 22 72
7 9 14 6 5 4 38
8 2 6 5 6 7 26
9 7 7 1 6 5 26
10 5 4 3 3 1 16
11 0 3 2 0 3 8
12 1 1 0 0 0 2

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 10

 13 0 0 0 1 0 1
14 1 0 0 0 1 2
16 0 2 0 0 0 2
TOTAL RESPONDENTS 100 101 66 50 86 403
AVERAGE FAMILY
SIZE 6 6 5 6 5 6

Household Income

29.8% of households are earning from labour work, 29.4% from wage employment,
and 23.8% from sari-sari (general variety) store, trading, or vending. 4.0% of households are
earning from direct selling, 5.7% are receiving pension, 2.0% are earning from sale of own
produce, 1.5% from rental fees, 0.2% are government employees, 0.2% have online business,
and 1.3% are earning from other sources. 0.7% were unemployed and 1.3% of the
households have no answer.

The average monthly income of households is Php 6,639. Rosary Heights 6 has the
lowest average monthly income of households at Php 5,162 while Rosary Heights 1 has the
highest average monthly income at Php 8,592.

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 11

This depicts the carbon footprint of each barangay in the study based on the average
household size of 6. As shown, the highest contributor is Rosary Heights 6 with a monthly
average carbon footprint of 326.56 kg. The second highest is Poblacion 4 with the monthly
average carbon footprint of 305.26 kg. Then Rosary Heights 1 with an average carbon
footprint of 268.73 kg. MBRH has an average carbon footprint of 260.6 kg and Rosary
Heights 4 has an average carbon footprint of 235.71 kg.

Rosary
Poblacion Rosary Rosary Unit
CARBON FOOTPRINT MBRH Heights OVERALL
4 Heights 4 Heights 6 s
1/PC Hill
HH Carbon Footprint -
26,059.88 30,831.32 17,467.59 12,021.17 27,757.59 114,137.56 kg
Monthly Total
HH Carbon Footprint -
260.60 305.26 268.73 235.71 326.56 282.67 kg
Monthly Average
HH Carbon Footprint -
312.72 369.98 209.61 144.25 333.09 1,369.65 t
Annual Total
HH Carbon Footprint -
3.13 3.66 3.22 2.83 3.92 3.39 t
Annual Average
Per Capita Carbon
Footprint - Annual 0.75 0.74 0.72 0.49 0.88 0.73 t
Average
Average HH Size 6 6 5 6 5 6  

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 12

PROJECT GOAL

Objective: Decrease solid wastes dumped open space and dumpsite through community-led
SWM in contribution to climate change solutions

Indicators:
SWM in the city with successful reduction of:
1. %tage of volume of garbage
2. %tage of families practiced WM

The volume of garbage disposed of by the household every week as estimated, with an
average total of 4.93 kg in an average family size of 6. That shows 0.13 kg of garbage
contributed to each individual per week.

Estimated Volume of Rosary

Rosary Rosary
Garbage disposed by the MBRH Poblacion 4 Heights TOTAL
Heights 4 Heights 6
family per week (in kg) 1/PC Hill
1 2 15 1 5 8 31
2 6 19 4 3 33 65
3 15 8 17 7 33 80
4 13 6 9 4 3 35
5 30 23 12 7 4 76
6 8 5 4 2 0 19
7 6 5 4 2 1 18
8 4 1 3 1 0 9
9 0 0 0 0 1 1
10 12 11 7 5 1 36
11 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 1 0 2 1 4
13 0 0 1 0 0 1
14 0 1 0 0 0 1
15 1 1 0 0 1 3
16 0 0 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 2 0 2
19 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 2 2 2 2 0 8
20+ 1 2 1 1 0 5
no answer 0 1 1 7 0 9
TOTAL 100 101 66 50 86 403
AVERAGE VOLUME PER
5.63 4.90 5.55 6.36 3.00 4.93
WEEK per HH (in kg)
AVERAGE FAMILY SIZE 6 6 5 6 5 6
AVE waste generated per
0.14 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.13
individual (in kg)

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 13

There are 89.3% of the household population who practiced reducing their garbage in their
homes every day and 10.7% who do not.

Rosary Rosary
Families reduce their Rosary
MBRH Poblacion 4 Heights Heights TOTAL
garbage Heights 6
1/PC Hill 4
Yes 73 98 59 45 85 360
No 27 3 7 5 1 43
TOTAL 100 101 66 50 86 403

Of the total household population, 96.5% were knowledgeable on proper waste segregation
while 3.5% were not.

There are 84.6% of the household population that says they segregate their garbage at
home, and there are 15.4% that do not.

Rosary Rosary
Poblacion Rosary
Garbage Segregation MBRH Heights Heights TOTAL
4 Heights 4
1/PC Hill 6
Yes 56 95 65 39 86 341
No 44 6 1 11 0 62
TOTAL 100 101 66 50 86 403

94.0% of the households generate non-biodegradable solid waste, 90.1% biodegradable, and
6.0% hazardous.
Rosary
Poblacion Rosary Rosary
Types of HH Solid Wastes MBRH Heights TOTAL
4 Heights 4 Heights 6
1/PC Hill
Biodegradable 90 89 55 47 82 363
Non-Biodegradable 99 94 60 43 83 379
Hazardous 6 4 11 2 1 24
Don't Know 0 1 0 1 0 2
No answer 0 0 1 0 0 1

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 14

The table below depicts the manner of the household in disposing of their segregated
garbage. 96.5% said their garbage were picked up by a garbage truck, 22.8% compost it, and
17.4% burn it.

Rosary Rosary
Poblacion Rosary
Method of Garbage Disposal MBRH Heights Heights TOTAL
4 Heights 6
1/PC Hill 4
Burning 2 0 4 2 62 70
Compost 4 8 10 8 62 92
Garbage Truck 99 98 64 44 84 389
Don't Know 0 1 0 0 0 1
No answer 0 0 1 4 0 5

96.5% know proper waste segregation while 3.5% do not.

Rosary Rosary Rosary
Knowledge on proper waste Poblacio Heights Heights Heights
segregation MBRH n4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Yes 87 100 66 50 86 389
No 13 1 0 0 0 14
Total 100 101 66 50 86 403

Among the households, 57.6% segregate biodegradable waste from non-biodegradable

waste, 18.0% separate sack/container for different types of wastes, and 12.3% had other
waste segregation and disposal practices.
Rosary Rosary Rosary
Proper waste segregation and Poblacion Heights Heights Heights
disposal MBRH 4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Adapt 3Rs 6 2 3 1 1 13
Separate sack/ container for
different types of wastes 15 20 9 9 4 57
Signage in each sack 0 0 1 1 0 2
Segregate biodegradable from
non-biodegradable 26 39 31 27 59 182
Segregate recyclable waste,
residual waste, biodegradable.
Special waste 0 0 1 0 0 1
Participate in World Vision
project 0 0 1 0 0 1
Recycle plastics 1 0 0 0 0 1
Implement composting 7 1 2 0 0 10
Designate a garbage container in
key areas in the community 0 1 0 0 0 1
Others 7 12 3 4 13 39
Don’t know 8 0 0 0 0 8
No answer 0 0 0 0 1 1
TOTAL 70 75 51 42 78 316

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 15

Waste segregation and disposal was learned by 69.3% of the household population through
orientation/seminar at the barangay, by 11.1% through seminars conducted by World Vision,
and by 5.1% through experience.
53. How did you learn about Rosary Rosary Rosary
waste segregation and disposal?
Poblacion Heights Heights Heights
MBRH 4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Orientation/ Seminar at the
Barangay 49 48 34 10 61 202
Seminar by World Vision 13 11 8 3 0 35
TV, Radio, other media 2 1 1 2 1 7
Learned at school 4 2 3 6 0 15
From the Govt/ MENRO/
CENRO/ LGU 6 1 3 2 2 14
Learned from the family 0 0 3 1 2 6
Learned from experience 4 0 2 3 7 16
Learned as an initiative 1 0 0 0 0 1
Internet, social media, youtube 2 0 0 3 0 5
Others 1 0 1 3 1 6
No answer 0 0 0 0 2 2
None 7 0 0 0 0 7
TOTAL 89 63 55 33 76 316

As to the regularity of garbage collection, 98.1% of the household population reported that it
is done regularly. On the other hand, 1.3% said it is not collected regularly.
Rosary Rosary Rosary
Poblacio Heights Heights Heights
Are your garbage collected regularly MBRH n4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Yes 98 95 64 30 83 370
No 0 3 0 1 1 5
Don’t know 1 0 0 1 0 2
TOTAL 99 98 64 32 84 377

According to 83.5% of the household population, their barangay LGU collects their garbage.
Meanwhile, 13.2% said that it is their city LGU that collects their garbage.
Rosary Rosary Rosary
Poblacio Heights Heights Heights
Who collects your garbage MBRH n4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Barangay LGU 94 98 52 28 83 355
City LGU 11 0 34 6 5 56
Home-owners' Association 0 0 1 3 0 4
No one 0 0 0 2 0 2
No answer 0 0 0 6 0 6
Others 0 0 0 2 0 2
TOTAL 105 98 87 47 88 425

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 16

With regard to the day in which their garbage are collected, 32.2% said it is done on
Mondays, 20.5% said it is done on Wednesdays, and 18.3% said it is done on Fridays.
Rosary Rosary Rosary
Poblacion Heights Heights Heights
Days that garbage are collected MBRH 4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Monday 36 91 48 14 54 243
Tuesday 17 4 4 0 21 46
Wednesday 17 89 12 16 21 155
Thursday 31 3 48 0 19 101
Friday 19 88 3 10 18 138
Saturday 4 26 14 2 0 46
Sunday 0 2 1 23 0 26
TOTAL 124 303 130 65 133 755

When asked about the frequency of garbage collection per week, 46.6% of the respondents
said garbage is collected only once weekly, 24.9% said twice weekly, and 19.4% said thrice
weekly.
Number of times garbage is collected every Rosary Rosary Rosary
week (RECODED) Poblacio Heights Heights Heights
MBRH n4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
1 84 6 1 21 68 180
2 10 12 62 7 5 96
3 3 60 1 11 0 75
4 1 18 0 3 1 23
5 1 1 0 0 9 11
6 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 1 0 0 0 1
TOTAL 99 98 64 42 83 386

Asked about problems or issues in garbage collection in their community, 50.4% said they
have not experienced any such problem or issue, 16.9% said there are garbage truck
issues/problem, while 13.2% said garbage collection is sometimes delayed or missed.

Rosa Rosa
Rosary ry ry
Problems or issues in Garbage collection in the Poblaci Heights Heig Heig TOT
community MBRH on 4 1/PC Hill hts 4 hts 6 AL
Flooding due to clogged canals 0 1 2 0 1 4
Garbage collection is sometimes delayed or missed 15 16 9 4 9 53
Garbage collection point is far from houses 0 1 0 1 0 2
Garbage truck issues/problem 38 12 2 4 12 68
Health issues - garbage left without containers 1 2 2 5 0 10
High volume of solid wastes 5 0 0 0 0 5
No proper containers for garbage 3 2 1 2 2 10
Only one garbage truck - cannot cater to all
households 1 2 0 1 0 4
Some days there are no garbage collector on duty 0 0 1 0 2 3

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 17

 Some days there is no driver on duty for garbage
collection 0 0 0 0 14 14
Some garbage were left uncollected 0 0 2 0 0 2
Stray dogs mess up the garbage 0 1 1 1 0 3
Unpaid monthly dues of households for the
garbage collection affects regularity of schedules 0 0 0 1 0 1
Unsegregated garbage were not collected 2 0 11 2 1 16
Don’t know 1 0 2 0 0 3
None 34 64 33 29 43 203
no answer 0 0 0 0 2 2
TOTAL 100 101 66 50 86 403

As regards resolving garbage collection problems/issues, 77.7% said that such

problems/issues have not been addressed yet, 4.1% said the city LGU truck was borrowed,
and 3.6% said the city LGU collected the garbage.
Rosary
Heights Rosary Rosary
Poblacion 1/PC Heights Heights
How the problems/ issues were resolved MBRH 4 Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Reminded garbage collectors to collect
all garbage 0 0 1 0 0 1
Segregated the garbage 0 0 2 0 0 2
Support from family members 0 0 1 0 0 1
Garbage that were left on the streets
without containers were shoveled to the
truck 1 0 0 0 0 1
Reminded the households to pay
monthly dues 0 0 0 1 0 1
The barangay had the truck repaired 2 0 0 0 2 4
Borrowed truck from the City LGU 8 0 0 0 0 8
The city LGU collects the garbage 7 0 0 0 0 7
Used sacks as alternative container 0 0 0 3 0 3
Provided sacks at every corner of the
streets 0 1 0 0 0 1
Recycled some of the waste materials 1 0 0 0 0 1
Other vehicle (Multicab) of the barangay
was used for garbage collection 0 0 0 2 0 2
Other vehicle (Sikad) of the barangay
was used for garbage collection 0 2 0 0 0 2
Filed a complaint at the barangay to get
solutions 0 0 0 2 0 2
Other vehicle (Multicab) was used for
garbage collection 0 0 0 1 0 1
HH only bring their garbage out when
the truck came 0 0 1 0 0 1
Not addressed yet 45 31 24 10 40 150
Don't know 0 1 4 0 0 5
TOTAL 64 35 33 19 42 193

Asked about who helped in resolving/addressing garbage collection issues, 57.9% said
barangay officials did and 11.3% said people in the community did.
Who helped resolve/ address the issues MBRH Poblacion Rosary Rosary Rosary TOTAL

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 18

 Heights
1/PC Heights Heights
4 Hill 4 6
Barangay officials 79 53 42 26 57 257
Purok leader 0 0 3 0 0 3
People in the community 2 23 2 5 18 50
City Government 8 0 3 0 2 13
CENRO 8 2 2 0 1 13
Solid Waste Management Committee 1 3 0 0 7 11
Family members 0 3 3 0 2 8
Garbage Collectors 6 0 2 0 1 9
Street Sweepers 0 0 1 0 0 1
World Vision 0 13 0 0 6 19
None 0 0 5 2 1 8
Don't know 0 1 4 4 1 10
Not Applicable 1 1 2 3 1 8
No answer 2 15 2 12 3 34
TOTAL 107 114 71 52 100 444

On the issues in the community relevant to solid waste management, 43.9% indicated that
there is no such issue while 19.2% said that there is no proper garbage segregation.
Issues in the communities relevant to solid Rosary
waste management Heights Rosary Rosary
Poblacion 1/PC Heights Heights
MBRH 4 Hill 4 6 TOTAL
No proper segregation of garbage 45 4 13 5 2 69
High volume of garbage because people do
not adapt 3Rs 16 0 0 0 0 16
HH have no proper waste bins to dispose
garbage 3 4 2 2 0 11
No trash bins provided at key public areas in
the community 0 0 1 0 0 1
Garbage is not collected on schedule 0 4 1 0 3 8
Some people do not pay the monthly dues 0 0 0 0 1 1
People do not follow the law on proper
waste disposal 5 3 0 1 2 11
Canals are clogged with garbage 1 0 1 0 3 5
People are burning their trash 0 0 0 1 0 1
Garbage Truck is not sufficient to collect
garbage in the community 0 1 0 0 0 1
Garbage Truck is under repair and no
alternative collection is done 2 2 0 0 0 4
Stray dogs mess up the garbage on the
streets 2 0 0 0 0 2
Misunderstandings on people's roles 0 0 0 0 7 7
Flooding in the community 0 0 0 0 1 1
None 7 51 33 13 54 158
Don’t know 3 0 4 4 1 12
No answer 6 21 3 19 3 52
TOTAL 90 90 58 45 77 360

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 19

To address issues, 26.4% of the respondents said consultation meetings were held, 16.2%
said public announcements were made, and 14.8% said garbage segregation was done.

Rosary Rosary Rosary

Resolutions done in the community to Poblacion Heights Heights Heights
address issues MBRH 4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Adapted 3Rs 1 0 2 0 1 4
Consultation meeting 13 10 2 2 46 73
Segregated the garbage 6 7 10 4 14 41
Incentives given to those who recycle waste
materials 0 0 0 0 1 1
HHs were informed to put garbage outside only
during the scheudle of collection 0 0 0 1 0 1
Proper collection of garbage 0 0 0 0 1 1
Garbage collection for biodegradable and Non-
bio is collected on different days 0 0 1 0 0 1
Teach the community on proper waste disposal
4 3 5 2 2 16
Teach the community to segregate 4 4 3 3 1 15
Recycling of waste materials 1 2 1 0 0 4
Conducted orientation/ seminar on Solid Waste
Management in the community 3 10 12 1 1 27
Barangay leaders set example/ role model in
proper wste disposal 0 0 1 0 0 1
Conduct Public Announcement (RECORRIDA)
29 10 4 2 0 45
Barangay used sikad if truck is under repair 0 2 0 0 0 2
Put up signs on segregation of garbage 0 0 1 0 0 1
Bayanihan / Clean up drive 1 6 1 1 0 9
Implemented penalties to violators of the law 6 0 0 0 0 6
Made and implemented an ordinance on solid
waste management 2 1 1 1 0 5
Implemented the solid waste management 2 0 0 1 1 4
Created the committee on Solid Waste
Management 0 0 0 0 1 1
Garbage truck maintenance 0 0 1 0 0 1
Borrowed truck from the city LGU 1 0 0 0 0 1
Don’t know 4 0 3 5 0 12
Not addressed yet 1 1 0 0 0 2
No answer 0 0 0 0 3 3
TOTAL 78 56 48 23 72 277

76.4% of the respondents said that families have strategies to reuse waste materials while
17.5% said they do not have any.

Rosary Rosary Rosary

Do families have a strategy to reuse waste Poblacio Heights Heights Heights
materials MBRH n4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Yes 74 76 55 35 68 308
No 26 9 11 9 16 71
No answer 0 16 0 6 2 24
TOTAL 100 101 66 50 86 403

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 20

When asked if their family recycles waste materials, 72.7% of the respondents said yes while
21.3% said no.

Rosary Rosary Rosary

Poblacio Heights Heights Heights
Does the family Recycle waste materials MBRH n4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Yes 72 76 57 41 47 293
No 28 8 8 4 38 86
No Answer 0 17 1 5 1 24
TOTAL 100 101 66 50 86 403

Rosary Rosary Rosary

Poblacio Heights Heights Heights
Types of waste materials recycled by families MBRH n4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Plastic 63 73 55 34 45 270
Glass containers 52 62 44 36 45 239
Metal 23 49 37 26 41 176
Paper, Carton boxes 21 64 30 26 44 185
TOTAL 159 248 166 122 175 870

When asked if families earn from recycling, 57.7% said yes while 42.3% said no.
Rosary
Heights Rosary Rosary
Poblacion 1/PC Heights Heights
Do families earn from recycling MBRH 4 Hill 4 6 TOTAL
Yes 43 46 42 21 17 169
No 29 30 15 20 30 124
TOTAL 72 76 57 41 47 293

19.5% of the respondents sell 5 kilograms of waste materials per month for recycling, 12.4%
sell more than 20 kilograms, while 10.1% sell 4 kilograms.
Rosary
Heights Rosary Rosary
Monthly Volume of waste materials sold Poblacion 1/PC Heights Heights
for recycling (in KG) MBRH 4 Hill 4 6 TOTAL
0 0 1 0 0 4 5
1 1 6 3 3 3 16
2 2 2 4 1 5 14
3 5 5 4 1 0 15
4 5 3 9 0 0 17
5 8 14 8 2 1 33
6 6 1 3 1 0 11
7 6 0 2 0 0 8
8 1 1 2 0 0 4
9 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 2 3 2 1 1 9

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 21

 11 1 0 0 0 0 1
12 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 2 0 0 1 3
16 0 0 1 0 0 1
17 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 3 0 0 3
20+ 6 6 1 7 1 21
No answer 0 2 0 5 1 8
TOTAL 43 46 42 21 17 169
AVERAGE volume of recyclable wastes sold 5.3 4.8 5.9 3.8 2.9 5.0

By selling recyclable waste materials, 42.6% of the respondents earn between P101 and
P1000, 27.2% earn between P1 and P50, and 26.6% earn between P51 and P100. Overall, the
average earnings from selling recyclable waste material is P220.48.
Rosary Rosary Rosary
How much did the family earn from selling Poblacio Heights Heights Heights
recyclable waste materials (Php) MBRH n4 1/PC Hill 4 6 TOTAL
1 to 50 8 28 3 3 4 46
51 to 100 15 12 6 9 3 45
101 to 1000 19 3 32 8 10 72
1001 to 3000 1 2 1 1 0 5
3001 to 5000 0 1 0 0 0 1
5000+ 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 43 46 42 21 17 169
AVERAGE earned from recyclable waste
materials ₱220.93 ₱237.85 ₱239.79 ₱202.33 ₱147.06 ₱220.48

4. Discussion and Conclusions (2-3 pages)

Instructions: This chapter should present a balanced discussion of significant baseline

findings (including possible explanations of key findings supported by evidence
collected). No new results should be presented in this section. A good discussion should:

 Highlight important issues in the results, especially surprising/unexpected results

 Offer explanations of important results (including explanations related to program
design and other external factors)
 Outline key implications of baseline findings in relation to program design (theory
of change, target beneficiaries, partnerships, advocacy, program M&E, advocacy ,
faith and development, etc.,)
 Describe any significant limitations of the baseline design that are believed to have
influenced the way baseline findings are interpreted and used.

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 22

 5. Recommendations (1-3 pages)

Instructions: Use baseline findings to generate recommendations aimed at enhancing the

quality of designs of TPs baselined (including strengthening focus, technical projects/project
models, beneficiary targeting, TP adaptation by APs, overall programme delivery and M&E).
Recommendations should also outline how NOs/PSTs can use baseline information to
strengthen focus of the NO strategy; NO investment priorities; advocacy efforts; community
engagement/participation/accountability; external engagement/donor relations; resource
development/grant acquisition, etc.

6. Lessons learned from the baseline process (1-2 pages)

Instructions: Summarize key lessons WV and partners have learned during baseline planning,
implementation and utilization of baseline findings. These lessons should include
recommendations aimed at enhancing the quality of planning and execution of future baseline
efforts.

7. References

Instructions: List references to all important documents/audio-visual resources mentioned in

the report. Minimum references should include: author; date; title and; source/URL reference.

8. Appendices

Instructions: Include important appendices i.e., data collection tools, list of tables/charts, etc.
All appendices should be numbered and titled. See example below.

8.1. Appendix A (List of Tables and Charts)

Baseline Report  Cotabato CCA 23