Sustainability of Habitat Housing Project at Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City: An Extension Service Assessment

Sustainability of Habitat Housing Project at Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City: An Extension Service Assessment

Abstract

This study focuses on the assessment of the sustainability of Habitat Housing Project at Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City. The study made use of the descriptive method of research. As a result, the success of the construction of the housing project was credited by strong linkage with various extension services and supports from local and international schools; government and non-government groups; and other agencies. However, a change is felt in the consciousness and the lives of resettlers who are now the owners of the housing project. They are now bounded by problems on how to maintain or sustain the housing project as evidenced by their lack of livelihood, lack of education, lack of other source of income, etc. Thus, extension services should continue to play even after the construction of the project to support the beneficiaries establish themselves in sustaining the housing project through the guidance of best practices and positive experiences in relocating communities.

1. Introduction

   According to the study of Gilles (2012) [5]of the University of the Philippines, there is an urgency to address the needs brought about by urbanization: rapid growth of the city driven by high population growth and an influx of rural migrants attracted by the economic opportunities available in metropolitan cities especially Metro Manila that includes Pasig City.

   Gilles (2012) [5] further emphasized that improving the lives of slum dwellers is socially and economically beneficial to society and the nation as a whole, through harmonious urbanization–a synchronization and integration of all of the Earths assets, whether physical, environmental, cultural, historical, social or human. Harmonious urbanization refers to the development of a city that preserves intangible assets, cultural life, inter-generational relationships and different forms of societal relations and resources. A society cannot claim to be harmonious if large sectors of its residents are deprived of basic needs while other sectors wallow in opulence, if some groups possess all the resources while others remain impoverished and

   marginalized. Metro Manilas urban poor have increased considerably in the last few decades starting from the 1960s due to the deficiency of job opportunities in the rural areas. There are 1.4 million informal settler families in the Philippines, and Metro Manila has a large 51% share of these informal settlers. The squatters have frustrated much of the Metro Manila Development Authoritys (MMDA) goals. They are found all over the place: by the riverbanks, along the walls of Manila Bay, under and over bridges, in public parks and along railroad tracks. Many have organized themselves into slums that have withstood pressures from either the city or municipal halls and the rightful landowners. The more durable slums have survived for many decades in the 17 towns and cities. At least 85,000 squatter families have congregated in the greater Manila area due to the pull of the city, poverty in the hometown, the governments failure to develop the regions and its hollow policy on land and home ownership.

   Despite government efforts to solve problems in relocation, even at times by forceful means of demolition and abrupt eviction, these informal settlers gained strong political will and have learned to defend themselves of their inviolable right to shelter and housing. Various attempts of the government and non- government organizations have been made at relocating these slum dwellers. However, about 30 to 40 percent of the resettlers prefer to return back to their place of origin due to few job opportunities and their other needs are not met at these relocation sites. Studies suggest that improving the lives of slum dwellers is both socially and economically beneficial in the long run and can go a long way in making cities more productive. Decent shelter is a direct or indirect contributing factor to the promotion of the social well- being of the individual. Consequentially, a humanized housing project is an important component of the economic progress of the Filipino people (Gilles, 2012) [5].

2. Background of the Study

   The United Nations Agenda [11] states that designing projects such as the Habitat Housing Project at Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City that is expected to provide

   sustainable benefits has long been a primary concern. However, sustainability has been on its agenda for some time, there remain significant obstacles to designing and implementing projects that are sustainable in all aspects.

   The Habitat Housing Project at Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City was initiated through joint undertaking of Pasig City and Habitat for Humanity Philippines Foundation, Inc. (HFHPFI) in October 2008 as an alliance in building medium-rise buildings in Pasig City for needy families, with the view of increasing the effectiveness of their concerted efforts in all stages of the project and thereby achieving each others objectives. This is in line with the poverty reduction program- a priority concern of the Philippine government under the Presidents people empowerment trust that mandated various government agencies and other sectors to fast track the delivery of basic services to depressed communities (MOA, 2008) [7].

   Moreover, the project had been identified by the city as one of their priority project indicated in the City Development Plan. This project has the objective of providing an integrated and pro-active program that will provide quality and affordable housing for vulnerable, disadvantaged and low income populace, and offer holistic framework to manage housing concerns of the city. (Pasig City Devt. Plan, 2010) [8]. Also, in the year 2007, the Rizal Technological University (RTU)- College of Engineering and Industrial Technology (CEIT) has expanded its extension services by providing technical assistance in the construction of the housing projects of HFHPFI. Thus in January 2009, the RTU through its Department of Extension Services/CEIT have signed an agreement with HFHPFI to establish partnership so that the energy, talent and skills of the youth/students shall be properly channeled and mobilized through character building and development activities; and to provide simple, decent and affordable shelter to the

   economically depressed population (MOA, 2009) [9]. Thus, the parties have identified Barangay

   Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City as one of the locations for the construction of two (2) medium-rise buildings using Concrete Interlocking Blocks (CIB) technology that generated 120 family dwelling units in accordance with the approved plans, structural design, specifications and program of works. Presently, the housing project named as Pasig LGU-Habitat for Humanity Philippines Condominium Housing Project was completed and turned over to the LGU and then to the beneficiaries through the Pasig Habitat 1 Association, Inc. with an amortization of P1,000 to P1,200 payable in twenty

   (20) years. The beneficiaries of the project are the qualified residents of the city who were evaluated

   based on the criteria established by the city and the HHPFI. Based on the evaluation, the beneficiaries were mostly the residents of the city living in the squatter aeas along Pasig river who need to be relocated to have better access to socio-economic opportunities and thereby attain better quality of life.

   The project was implemented through funding from the different sponsors of the HFHPFI under their funding scheme for the construction of building. The funds are solely for the materials and payment for the engineers, contractors, technology experts and paid laborers. The land was donated by the City of Pasig.

   The program focus its services more in the spirit of volunteerism wherein various local and international schools, other agencies and individuals are coming in as part of their services, and for others as part of their humanitarian service.

   RTU-CEIT volunteered in the HFHFPI Housing Program, however, due to its limited budget for materials and supplies, RTU-CEIT committed to provide its available manpower the students, as part of their practicum or application of their learning in engineering subjects and the faculty as experts in construction development and management. They provided labor and consultancy for the program including fares going to the project site.

   The program of the HFHPFI focused on the use of appropriate technology and its social responsibility to the community which contributed to the mission, vision, goals and objectives of the RTU-CEIT. The activities were undertaken in a voluntary and participative approach, which involved various stakeholders such as engineers, youth, students, contracted laborers and workers, local officials and the home owners or beneficiaries. The activities are orientation of stakeholders on the HFHPFI program vis-à-vis RTU CEIT mandates; training/transfer of technology to the students, beneficiaries, and contract workers or laborers by the expertise and engineers prior to the actual work; scheduling of works and assignments; actual work on site; performance evaluation and reflection. Working days of the RTU- CEIT faculty and students were scheduled accordingly in coordination with HFHPI program coordinators and engineers. As part of the pre-implementation stage of the project or every start of the work for those who are new volunteers, training for the application of technologies conducted to ensure proper and economical use of all the resources for the construction such as concrete inter blocks fabrication and curing; steel bar fabrication/formation; carpentry and masonry works; and safety construction management.

3. Literature Review

   1. United Nation Habitat Agenda and Istanbul Declaration

      The commitment of the United Nation Habitat Agenda to global plan of action for housing is to mandate government and non-government organizations to support efforts of people to produce shelter and self-build housing. Further, the Istanbul Declaration and the United Nation bind the government to the twin and closely interlinked commitments of providing adequate shelter for all and ensuring sustainable human settlements in an urbanizing world. According to the United Nations Agenda, designing projects that provide sustainable benefits has long been a primary concern. While sustainability has been on its agenda for some time, there remain significant obstacles to designing and implementing projects that are sustainable in all aspects. In an effort to move towards more sustainable programming, it has sought clearer structure and guidance to enhance the effectiveness of their development efforts (Springer, 1996) [12].

   2. RTU Extension Agenda

      In line with the global mandate, the RTU Extension Agenda commit to create teaching learning situations whereby students, faculty and staff, and the community learn from each other; render outreach services to the larger community; and promote self supporting livelihood projects to uplift the quality of life of those it serves. It responds to the call for social transformation by serving the poorest of the poor, the less privileged, the deprived, and the oppressed. It also strives to ensure that the outreach activities such as housing project shall collectively contribute to the development of the region and promote positive impression of the University (RTU-ESPM, 2008) [10].

   3. Pasig City Development Plan

      Housing project for vulnerable, disadvantaged and low income populace of Pasig City is one of the priority project commited in the City Development Plan. This project has the objective of providing an integrated and pro-active program that will provide quality and affordable housing, and offer holistic framework to manage housing concerns of the city (Pasig City Devt. Plan, 2010) [8].

   4. Effects of Urbanization

      According to Gilles (2012) [5] the positive effects of urbanization contributes to the national development

      and economic growth and drive national economies by creating wealth, enhancing social development and providing employment. While, the negative effects results in not well planned or well-governed cities; cities become exclusive rather than inclusive; contribution to economic and social development is lost when these cities generate extreme inequalities; cities become repository of societys ills, a breeding ground for poverty, exclusion, environmental degradation, crime and social unrest.

   5. Key Shelter Agencies

      1. HUDCC (Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council). Highest policy making and coordinative body on housing and urban development mandated to serve as the lead agency to assist the President in formulating the national objectives, policies and strategies for housing and urban development.

      2. HLURB (Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board). Enhances rational land use and housing and real estate delivery through policy development, planning and regulation.

      3. NHMFC (National Home Mortgage Finance Corporation). Develops and provides secondary mortgage market.

      4. HDMF (Home Development Mutual Fund). Created primarily to address two of the nations basic concerns: generation of savings and provision of shelter for the workers.

      5. HGC (Home Guaranty Corporation). Created to operate credit insurance and mortgage guaranty system by assisting private developers undertake low and middle-income mass housing production; operating mortgage insurance program and insuring mortgages and loans SHFC (Social Housing Finance Corporation) Administers the Community Mortgage Program (Fuentebella, 2011).

   6. Studies on Rehabilitation of the Pasig River Accordingly, there are around 60,000 families or 300,000 to 350,000 people living along the banks of Pasig River, all of them belonging to what is classified as illegal or informal settlers or squatters. They have no access to clean water supply and have to buy or tap illegally for their drinking needs. With households having no connection to the main water supply also imply that they have no sanitary or sewer lines to dispose of their domestic waste, with which Pasig River is transformed into a giant sewer. The river and its tributaries are heavily polluted by domestic sewage (60%), industrial waste (35%) and solid waste (5%). There is an estimate that the Pasig Squatters

      transfer daily approximately 35 tons solid and 150 tons liquid waste into the river.

      To revive and bring back Pasig River its dignity and historico-cultural heritage, the program of establishing Environmental Preservation Areas (EPAs) along the 10-meter easement of the main river and 3-meter easement of its tributaries (esteros) have been carried out. For the Pasig River Rehabilitation Project that is partially funded by the ADB, the establishment of EPAs along both banks of the river has affected about 10,000 informal households. There have also been designated Urban Renewal Areas (URAs) where the rehabilitation and resettlement housing programs have been implemented for the families living along its riverbanks. But efforts to resettle these illegal settlers was not totally successful. In the 1990s, some 30% to 40 % t the beginning of the program and even up to 80% of the relocatees left their tenement houses and returned to the banks of the river due to low work opportunities. About 63% of these are owners/co- owners of affected structures, 23% are tenants and the remaining 14% live without paying any rent (Santelices, 2009).

   7. Practices in Resettlement or Relocation Housing Project

      1. ABS-CBN Social Community Development Project. ABS-CBN President Charo Santos-Concio and ABS-CBN Foundation, Inc. (AFI) Managing Director and Pasig River Rehabilitation Commission (PRRC) Chairman Gina Lopez initiated Bayanijuan sa Calauan which is about showing how the Filipino spirit can be, how can all work together (in the spirit of bayanihan). This project synergizes Bayan Microfinance and other programs –Bantay Bata 163, Bantay Kalikasan, E-Media, and Sagip Kapamilya– into one. It provide shelter, livelihood, child welfare, environmental initiatives, microfinance and disaster- risk reduction programs to the relocated families. There are currently 3 sites, although Sites 1 and 3 are those that are more advanced in terms of development. Each site has a community organizer under which are several block leaders. There is a weekly monitoring system and update held at the Livelihood Community Center wherein reporting of the current status of each component is done by all the key players involved. A lot of local and international interest has been generated primarily due to the social impact of the project as presented through the media. Livelihood is mostly through sari-sari stores for the housewives, construction workers for the men, school teachers for the women of the community. Some projects which are income-generating (initiated via microfinancing) are

         being offered in the Livelihood Center (Gilles, 2012) [5].

      2. Habitat for Humanity Shelter Program. Habitat for Humanity International (HFHI), generally referred to as Habitat for Humanity or simply Habitat is an international, non-governmental, and non-profit, which was founded in 1976. Habitat has been devoted to building "simple, decent, and affordable" housing, a self-described "Christian housing ministry," and has addressed the issues of poverty housing all over the world. In the Philippines, the first local affiliate of Habitat for Humanity International was established in 1988 named Habitat for Humanity Philippines Foundation, Inc. (HFHPFI). Since then, HFHPFI has rallied the youth, the business sector, church groups, and other organizations in different build projects all over the country. Today, HFHPFI has built more than 40,000 houses nationwide. HFHPFI launched the I BUILD Campaign on March 12, 2011 in celebration of its 25 years of helping Filipino families in need of decent shelter. Accordingly, they have served as a unifying catalyst in creating a community building and development model and achieved milestones through innovative and sustainable housing solutions. Further, HFHPFI enlarged its stake in creating a holistic and sustainable shelter solution in a national scale. Taking its vision to every city in the Philippines, Habitat for Humanity launches its second phase of the I Build Campaign I BUILD MY CITY, I BUILD MY PHILIPPINES. By advocating for a comprehensive city-wide shelter program, in partnership with the private and public sectors, it can provide a sustainable shelter solution for the next decade (Habitat, 2012) [6].

      3. Gawad Kalinga Projects. The Gawad Kalinga (GK) housing projects under the Community Infrastructure Program (CIP) was initiated by the Couples for Christ Movement. The GK aims to build brightly painted homes in sustainable communities for the poorest of the poor. Homes and other communal facilities (multiple purpose centers, school buildings, clinics, etc.) are built through a combination of skilled paid labor and sweat equity of the GK residents themselves such that there is a sense of ownership, and it is one way for to build relationships by helping build their neighbors house. This is to ensure the sustainability of the homes because the families take great efforts to maintain the beauty of their environment since they all worked on it together.

         Accordingly, the factors contributed to the sustainability of the GK housing projects were its clean, safe homes and job training that restore self- respect and human dignity. Enhancement programs and

         continuous education offered through the Community Centers lead to long-term community growth and self- reliance. Sharing unity and community spirit in daily life, values of stewardship, accountability, inspired each other to work together toward their common goal of a healthy, strong, and productive future for themselves and their families. However, the problem of GK housing project lies in the dependence of these communities on GK even after years. Effective turn- over system should be established to make resettlement or relocation a successful one (GK, 2012) [4].

      4. NHA Resettlement Projects. According to the study conducted by Ballesteros, M. and Egana, J. entitled Efficiency and Effectiveness Review of the National Housing Authority (NHA) Resettlement Program NHA resettlement projects are undertaken in four phases: (1) Pre relocation/Social Preparation (2) Relocation; (3) Post relocation and (4) Estate Management. Phases 1 to 3 cover the project development activities. Estate management starts upon turnover of the site and housing to the families or community. They observed that the first phase is the most critical stage in project development consisting of twelve (12) main sub activities and involves the creation of committees and sub committees at the local government and community level. This phase requires the longest time because of the several activities as well as agreements that have to be made by NHA with the LGU, community and developer and NHA and developer. However, their overall assessment, for site with about 1,000 families, project development can be undertaken within one year. Also, project development may be delayed due to several factors notably the following: (1) resistance from communities; (2) longer social preparation because households may take longer time to get their acts together; (3) failed bidding (4) termination of subcontractors by winning bidder. Based on annual utilization of NHA budget allocated for new works, it appears that many planned projects for the budget year are not completed or possibly even not started on the same year. Average utilization rate for 2007 to 2011 is roughly 40%.

         They also noted that a major component of the resettlement budget is housing support, which includes capital outlay for livelihood facilities. Livelihood assistance is provided in consideration of the displacement or dislocation of families due to relocation. The livelihood expenditure includes the capital outlay for construction of livelihood facilities usually consisting of livelihood center, tricycle, jeepney or transport shed and/or market talipapa center. In addition to livelihood infrastructure, NHA also allocates about P3,000 per beneficiary household for

         capacity building or skills training from its administrative budget. NHA acts as facilitator, resource integrator and planner. NHA basically links the resettled communities to skills training, job placements, scholarship programs, livelihood-based projects including credit or loan assistance of concerned agencies. So far, the NHA has served or assisted a total of 63,000 beneficiaries of resettlements sites in Cavite, Laguna and Rizal on skills training, job placements, livelihood programs and grants but this represents only at most 20% of households in the mentioned resettlement sites (Fuentebella, 2011) [3].

   8. Addressing Sustainability Issues on Resettlement or Relocation Housing Project

      According to the United Nation Sustainability Development Agenda, designing projects that provide sustainable benefits has long been a primary concern. While sustainability hasbeen on its agenda for some time, there remain significant obstacles to designing and implementing projects that are sustainable in all aspects. In an effort to move towards more sustainable programming, it has sought clearer structure and guidance to enhance the effectiveness of their development efforts (Springer, 1996) [12].

      Further explained by Gilles (2012) [5], the factors contributing to failure in relocation are social disharmony and unrest presence of conflict in the relocation sites; social disparity or inequality unequal opportunities for the new residents; lack of urban, economic, social, environmental, cultural-generational and spatial harmony very small space allocation for each family, not allowing for expansion; lack of proper transition and integration into the new relocation community; absence of livelihood or employment opportunities within the vicinity of the resettlement site.

      Some countries have been more successful than others in reducing the number and proportion of these informal dwellers perhaps due to various local ingredients specific to each country but the rate of success usually depends on the political commitment from the top leadership and pro-poor reforms aimed to tackle basic shelter deprivations. The difficulty that hounds the proponents of the resettlement programs lies in the perception that upgrading the slums has been considered a costly investment that does not yield economic gains in the short term. There is an obvious need to listen to and be responsive to the basic needs and requirements of the resettlers in order to achieve success and to attain the objectives set among all the key players in the relocation programs. The ultimate

      solution lies in the overall planning rather than the piecemeal engineering of resettlement schemes.

4. Methodology

   1. Method

      The descriptive research method was used in the study because of its appropriateness. This method is appropriate in ascertaining status of people or conditions under study. It includes study that purports to present facts concerning the nature and status of anything, a group of persons or a number of objects.

   2. Participants in the Study

      The purposive sampling was utilized in determining the respondents of the study. The respondents with a total of 100 were the family-beneficiaries of the housing project who are fully involved and aware of the implementation of the housing projects under study. It also includes key persons directly involved in the housing project such as from NHA, Pasig City, HFHPFI as well as heads or representatives of the informal settlers groups in order to confirm information for the completion of the study.

   3. Instrument

      The data collection instrument used was the researchers made survey questionnaire which were distributed to 100 family owners or beneficiaries to solicit information related to family status and sustainability of the housing project after turn-over by the LGU.

   4. Research Procedure

      Majority of the data was gathered through interview, desk research and mapping inventory from pertinent websites. Survey questionnaires were distributed to 100 family-beneficiaries to solicit their problems in sustaining the housing project and their possible solutions. Data on demography were also considered in the survey. Research from the United Nation Habitat Agenda, Istanbul Declaration, RTU Extension Program and best practices in relocating communities were conducted for the purpose of assessing the sustainability of the project. Interviews were also conducted with key persons from NHA, Pasig City, HFHPFI who were involved in the resettlement housing project, and focus groups of the informal settlers to confirm information for the completion of the study. An ocular inspection of the project was also conducted.

   5. Data Analysis

      The data and information gathered were classified, tallied and tabulated. The tabulated data constituted were analyzed and interpreted using the following statistical tools: Frequency count and percentage were used to describe the distribution of the respondents by groups. Identification and ranking were utilized in obtaining data on problems and solutions for the sustainability of the housing project after turn over by LGU.

5. Results and Discussions

   1. Demography of Respondents

      Demography of Respondents were described according to the frequency and percentage distribution by gender, age, civil status, monthly family income, number of children and occupation.

      1. Gender

         Table 1

         Frequency Distribution of Respondents Based on Gender

         GENDER	FREQUENCY	%
         Male	30	30
         Female	70	70
         Total	100	100

         Table 1 shows the frequency distribution of respondent based on gender. It can be gleaned that 30.00% of the respondents were male and 70.00% were female. It shows that majority of respondents were female.

      2. Age

         Table 2

         Frequency Distribution of Respondents Based on Age

         Age	Frequency	%
         24- 28	7	7.00
         29- 33	13	13.00
         34- 38	17	17.00
         39- 43	14	14.00
         44- 48	19	19.00
         49- 53	18	18.00
         54-Above	12	12.00
         Total	100	100

         Table 2 reflects the frequency distribution of respondents based on age. It reveals that most of the respondents were at age 44- 48 years old with an

         equivalent of 19.00% followed by age 49- 53 years old with an equivalent of 18.00%.

      3. Number of Children Per Family Household

         Table 3

         Frequency Distribution of Respondents Based on Number of Children

         No. of Children	Frequency	%
         None	3	3.00
         1	16	16.00
         2	21	21.00
         3	19	19.00
         4	18	18.00
         5	14	14.00
         6	9	9.00
         Total	100	100

         Table 3 shows the frequency distribution of respondents based on number of children. It reveals that most of the family-beneficiaries have 2 children with an equivalent of 21.00% followed by family- beneficiaries with 3 children with 19.00%.

      4. Monthly Family Income

         Table 4

         Frequency Distribution of Respondents Based on Monthly Family Income

         Income (P)	Frequency	%
         Below	7	7.00
         3,000- 7,000	14	14.00
         7,001- 11,000	32	32.00
         11,001- 15,000	17	17.00
         15,001- 19,000	14	14.00
         19,001- 23,000	11	11.00
         Above	5	5.00
         Total	100	100

         Table 4 shows th frequency distribution of respondents based on monthly family income. It reveals that most of the family-beneficiaries have monthly income ranging from P7,001- P11,000 with an equivalent of 32.00%.

      5. Occupation

         Table 5

         Frequency Distribution of Respondents Based on Occupation

         Occupation	Frequency	%
         Govt. Employee	8	8.00
         Security Guard	6	6.00
         Laborer	8	8.00
         Janitor	7	7.00
         Sari-Sari Store/Vendor	7	7.00
         Technician	5	5.00
         Welder	4	4.00
         Jeep Driver	6	6.00
         Mechanic	4	4.00
         Farming	3	3.00
         Utility Man	4	4.00
         Factory Worker	3	3.00
         Messenger	2	2.00
         Tricycle Driver	5	5.00
         Sewer	6	6.00
         Unemployed	5	5.00
         Housewife	17	17.00
         Total	56	100

         Table 5 reflects the frequency distribution of respondents based on occupation. It reveals that most of the respondents are housewife with an equivalent percentage of 17.00% followed by respondents having an occupation as government employee and laborer equivalent to 8.00%.

         1. Problems Encountered by the Beneficiaries which Directly and Indirectly Affect the Sustainability of the Housing Project

            1. Housing Facilities. Lack of materials for finishing (tiles, paints, wood, etc.); dilapidated lavatory, comfort rooms, ceiling and flooring; insufficient electrical wiring; leak water pipes; and rough walls.

            2. Health. Cataract cases; children suffering from cough and colds/flu/fever, asthma , high blood, heart disease; lack of vitamins and medicines; malnutrition; absence of clinic facility; and skin diseases (water born).

            3. Environment. Clog drainage system; lack of planters; insufficient waste disposal facility; and noise pollution.

            4. Source of Income. Lack of capital, income to pay bills and house amortization, and livelihood opportunities; and unemployment.

            5. Education. Lack of scholarship opportunities, school allowance and supplies; and drop-outs.

            6. Organization/Association/Leadership. Lack of leadership capability and unity.

            7. Peace and Order. Noise pollution; no curfew time for the youth; dirty surroundings; absence of security guard; and family conflict.

               Rank	Projects
               1	Livelihood such as buy and sell of construction and electrical materials; construction services; and convenient store/sari-sari store
               2	Painting of the house
               3	Cement finishing of the house
               4	Tile finishing of the house
               5	Repair/renovation of ceiling, partition, roof, doors and windows
               6	Repair/Improvement of comfort rooms
               7	Installation/repair of electrical facilities
               8	Installation/repair of water facilities
               9	Establishment of clinic
               10	Repair/improvement hallways.	of	pathways,	stairs,
               11	Improvement of the surroundings (playground, planters, wall fence, and gate
               12	Strengthening of homeowners association
               13	Provision of scholarship program
               14	Medical and dental mission
               15	Trainings on disaster preparedness; dressmaking; computer education; tutorial/remedial classes; youth development and leadership; entrepreneurial business; carpentry/masonry; and technology development

               Rank	Projects
               1	Livelihood such as buy and sell of construction and electrical materials; construction services; and convenient store/sari-sari store
               2	Painting of the house
               3	Cement finishing of the house
               4	Tile finishing of the house
               5	Repair/renovation of ceiling, partition, roof, doors and windows
               6	Repair/Improvement of comfort rooms
               7	Installation/repair of electrical facilities
               8	Installation/repair of water facilities
               9	Establishment of clinic
               10	Repair/improvement hallways.	of	pathways,	stairs,
               11	Improvement of the surroundings (playground, planters, wall fence, and gate
               12	Strengthening of homeowners association
               13	Provision of scholarship program
               14	Medical and dental mission
               15	Trainings on disaster preparedness; dressmaking; computer education; tutorial/remedial classes; youth development and leadership; entrepreneurial business; carpentry/masonry; and technology development

         2. Priority Projects Identified by the Beneficiaries for the Sustainability of the Housing Project

         over of the housing project in order to assist beneficiaries establish the identified livelihood projects, activities and programs for the sustainability of the housing project. This can be done through strong linkage with HFHPFI, government and non- government organizations, and other agencies such as NHA and Pasig City. Also, for other colleges of RTU and other schools, to provide extension services to the beneficiaries in consonance with the best practices in resettlement or relocating communities. For HFHPFI and other concerned agencies to be aware of the result of the study for proper actions and policy consideration. Further, for other researchers, to conduct studies for the successful implementation of the identified projects.

6. CONCLUSIONS

   This research concludes that most of the project beneficiaries do not have the capacity to sustain the housing project as a clean, healthy and safe place for the family. Thus, RTU-CEIT plays a vital role in the realization of the beneficiaries goal to make the housing project a simple, decent and affordable shelter for their families through the provision of extension services.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

For the RTU-CIT to continue at a given period its extension services even after the construction and turn-

References

1. Ballesteros M & Egana J. (2012). Efficiency and Effectiveness Review of the National Housing Authority (NHA) Resettlement Program DBM Publication. [Online] Available from http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp- content/uploads/DBM%20Publications/FPB/ZBB-2012/e.pdf

2. Brockhoff M. (2006). Squatting in Manila, United Nations Study — Pasig now one of the worlds most polluted rivers, Philippine Daily Inquirer, November 11, 2006. [Online] Available from http://www.heinzkuehnstiftung.de/pdf/jahrg15/7.pdf

3. Fuentebella F. W. (2011). Housing and Urban Development in the Philippines

4. Gawad Kalinga Annual Report 2011-2012 (GK), June 2012. [Online] Available from http://gk1world.com/Media/PDFs/GK_Annual_Report_Jan_2 011_to_Jun_2012

5. Gilles N. (2012). Humanizing Socialized Resettlement Housing Programs: A Challenge Towards Sustainability Practices in Urban and Rural Communities. University of the Philippines, April 2012. [Online] Available from http://search.conduit.com/results.aspx?q.pdf (November 19, 2013)

6. Habitat for Humanity International mission statement and principles (Habitat), August 2012. [Online] Available from http://www.habitat.org/how/mission_statement.aspx

7. Pasig City and Habitat for Humanity Philippines Foundation, Inc. Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), 2008

8. Pasig City Development Plan, 2011

9. RTU and HFHPFI Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), 2009

10. Rizal Technological Univeristy- Extension Service Program Manual (RTU-ESPM), 2008

11. Santelices M. (2009). A Dying River Comes Back to Life, The Southeast Asian City, Praeger Publishers, New York December 2, 2009. [Online] Available from http://www.pia.gov.ph/philtoday/pt01/pt0103,htm.

12. Springer J. (1996). Cities and Homes for All: The Habitat Agenda. United Nations Conference on Human Settlements, Habitat II Istanbul, Turkey, June 1996

ESRSA Publication © 2012 http://www.ijert.org