World Bank Documentdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/... · document of the world bank for official use only report no. 7871 project completion report philippines third livestock

Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No. 7871

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

PHILIPPINES

THIRD LIVESTOCK AND FISHERIES CREDIT PROJECT(LOAN 1894-PH)

JUNE 28, 1989

Agriculture Operations DivisionCountry Department IIAsia Regional Office

This document has a restrited distribution and may be used by rci ens only in the perfonnance ofthew officd duties. Its contents may not othermise be dislosed without World Bank authoidzaon.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

ABBREVIATIONS

BAI - Bureau of Animal IndustryBFAR - Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic ResourcesDBP - Development Bank of the PhilippinesERR - Economic Rate of ReturnFAOICP - FAO/World Bank Cooperative ProgrammeFIDC - Fisheries Industry Development CouncilFRR - Financial Rate of ReturnGOP - Government of PhilippinesIBRD - International Bank for Reconstruction and DevelopmentMAP - Ministry of Agriculture and FoodMNR - Ministry of Natural ResourcesM&E - Monitoring and EvaluationMT - Metric TonsPCR - Project Completion ReportSAR - Staff Appraisal ReportTA - Technical AssistanceWP - Working Paper

GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES FISCAL YEAR

January 1 - December 31

THE WORLD BANK FOR OFFICIUL USE ONLYWashtngton. D.C 20433

U.S A

omc of Ov.ctntG.sfiOpeatui4 Evuutwn

June 28, 1989

MEMORANDUM TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND THE PRESIDENT

SUBJECT: Project Completion Report on "hilippines ThirdLivestock and Fisheries Credit Project (Loan 1894-PH)

Attached, for information, is a copy of a report entitled*Project Completion Report on Philippines Third Livestock andFisheries Credit Project (Loan 1894-PH)" prepared by the Government ofthe Philippines, with an overview memorandum prepazed by the AsiaRegioral Office. No audit of this project has been made by theOperations Evaluation Department at this time.

Attachment

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only mn the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

FOR OFMCIL USE ONLY

PRILIPPINES

TRID LIVESTOCK AND FISUERIES CREDIT PROJECT (LOAN 1894-PH)


Table of Contents

Page No.

Basic Data Sheet ........................................... Li

....... viiiIntroduction .................... viiiProject Background ..................... viiiProject Objectives... .......... ... ..... .. .... ... .. ixProject Costs and Financing. ..... oo... .... .ooo .......... x

Project Management Performance.............................. xivBank Perfomance............................... xivInstitutional Impact..o.... .. ....... ........ .....o.... xivEconomic and Financial mpact. ....... ............... Z....... xviIssues and Lssons.......... ............. . ....... xviiAnnex I - Project Achievements for DPB Subloans........... xviiiAnnex II -Actual Project Costs............................ovoooooo. xixAnnex III - Working Papers.. ..... ...o...o.. ... ...... o. * xx

BORROWER'S COMPLETION REPORT (Agricultural SupervisionDepartment, Development Bank of the Philippines,October 1986)

Attachment I - Borrower's Comments

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authodzation.

- L -

PHILIPPINES

'lBE) LIVESTOCK AND FISHERIES CREDIT PROJECT (MLAN 1894-Pjl

PROJECT CC4PLPTION REPORT

Preface

This Project Completion Report (PCR) reviews implementation of theThird Livestock and Fisheries Credit Project in the Philippines, for whichLoan 1894-PH, in the amount of US$45.0 million, was approved on July 15,1980. The oviginal loan closing date of June 30, 1984, vas extended twicefor the non-credit component of the project only, to June 30, 1986. Due toinsolvency of the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), theimplementing agency for the credit component, the uncommitted balance ofthe credit component, of US$20.4 million, was cancelled effective October17, 1984. The final disbursement for the non-credit component was made onJanuary 17, 1987, when the unutilized balance of US$1.1 million was alsocancelled.

This Report consists of an Evaluation Summary, Basic Data Sheetand Overview prepared by staff of the Bank's Asia Regional Office, and aBorrower's PCR prepared by the Agricultural Supervision Department of theDBP. The Borrower's PCR provides a detailed review of the project,focussing on the credit component, which accounted for about 90X of totalproject costs. The Overview agrees with the major findings of the PCR,although it concludes that the project had a more negative Impact on DBP'sfinancial status than the PCR would suggest. The Overview alsoincorporatits the findings of a separate report by the Bureau of AnimalIndustry (BAI), concerning non-credit project activities in the livestocksubsector.

This PCR vas read by the Operations Evaluation Department (OED).The draft PCR wa sent to the Borrower for comments and they are attachedto the Report (Attachment I).

PHILIPPINES

LIVESTOCK AND FISHERIES CREDIT PROJECT (LOAN 1894-PH)

BASIC DATA SHEET

KEY PROJECT DATA

Appraisal Actual or Actual a. X ofepecetation current estimate appraisal estimate

Proiect costs CUSS millionl 140.7 831.2 8.0Con amount (U i mi lon) 4. 2.5 52.

Date pohsscsl components COmpleted 12/13 12/80troortion then comp leteda __

Economic rate of return ( 28 to 1uU+1 18 to GoInst tutionel performance anauateApronomWc performance Adeduat

mploynt nerwted (man-year 7 727 4 1uu 93

CUMULATIVE DISBURSEMENTS

FY81 FY82 FY83 FY64 FY8S FY8N FY6?

Appraisal esttimate (USt ILillion) 4.0 19.0 35.0 46.0 45.0 451.0 45.0Actua (US3mion 4 12.3 1. 20. 2Actual as a of estimat * 112 es 53 45 47 _' 52Date of final disbursement U1/17/87

PROJECT DATES

Project Brief /19/79Apraital Report No. 2828-PH _ Ol/1 /8HPe of Netsotiaixions Otl/09/80

Dtt 8arld Approvel 07/1S/80 ~bianin: 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~11 06/I480teof effectivenessI 9

oan Closina Date e 63_ 304

STAFF INPUT (Staff tWees)

FY80 FY81 FY82 FY63 FY84 FY85 FY86 FY67 Tote 1

pr,eap?raisal 2.4 - -- -2.4

Aoprasisal 93.9 8 - - - - _ 93Negotiation ~~~~~3.2 1.6 - - - 5.0

urwvilsion 1 . - 12.6 32.2 18.8 12.9 7.9 2.0 9.0 89.5uther .1 .1 3.2 .4 3_ .7 - 4 4

Total 99.6 14.5 35.4 19.1 13.2 8.6 2. .0 195.'4

MISSION DATA

DatO No. of Mon-days SpeOialzastIons Performance TyD ofMis_*on tmo/yr) p erons In ield represented I/ rattns /b Trend /c Problems /dIdsntifieati,n/ l016 E. 8 E.LJ_F o r (FADOCP_

reartool 8/79 9 Fin. 2L.F.C 2E.For_

UD rvW*on 08-1 2 N C-sPrvirion 3 0Cf79 2 U a2i4dFn 1 1060 2Fn 1 2 Fui trsion 5 3 W°1 I a5u rv ion 7n 12

Su rvion 1 n a 2 pubtota 2

Total 559

OTHER PROJECT DATAorrowe overnment of the PhilippinDo (COP)Executina eg4ncoes: e-ve nt Bank of t 0hilooines BP)

Burau o Animal ndusty pBAIBureau of es orie and ustoc Resource1risncriesn suatrev ve op nt CouncillICFtical yar -of borrower Caloncer y ar

Name of curr*ev (abbrv vi a Ps P eAp r ** z ear avilrq.M _ __.40) _ W Intervonin year.is aeg_ US31 Q I77Completion year evera*" (1986L US51.00 a 20F-4

Follow-on project:Name ~~Agricultural Credit Prolect

Loancredit nmber2 -Pon cr dit am*ount m m onDate Boara ros 1

La E a economist; L a livestock specialist; Fin * ;Inancial analyst; F a fieherie *pecialist; C a creditspecialist; M * management specialist, For a forester.I a problem-free or minor probiema; 2 a moderate roblema; and 8 a major problem.1 : improving; 2 a stationary; 8a deterioratinb.F financial; M a managerial; T a technical; P = political; and 0 = other.

- iv -

ZHILIPUI

THIRD LIVESTOCK AND FISHERIES CREDIT PROJECT (LOAN 1894-PH)

JCT' COMPLETION REPORT

Evaluation SummarW

Pro1ect Objectives and Content

1. The project aited to support the Philippine Government's goal ofincreasing animal protein supply, by providing medium and long-term creditthrough the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) for livestock andfisheries, and institutional support to DBP and other official agenciesresponsible for policy formulation in these subsectors. It followed sevenother agricultural and five industrial operations which the Bank hadchannelled through DBP during 1971^79. The project was identified andprepared by FAO/CP in October 1978 and March 1979, respectively, and wasappraised by the Bank in late-1979. Loan 1894-PH, of US$45.0 million, wasapproved by the Executive Directors on July 15, 1980 and became effectiveon November 5, 1980.

2. The project was designed to allow DBP greater latitude inallocating loan proceeds than had been the case under the Bank's preceding.agricultural credit operations, thereby indicating increased delegation ofresponsibility from the Bank to DBP. The Bank reserved the right tcwapprove detailed annual programs defining lending priorities for regions,commodities and beneficiaries and to review DBP's annual lending rates, andrequired an action plan for dealing with DBP arrears. This project alsowent further than preceding credit operations for livestock and fisheriesby including financial and technical assistance for key subsectoralagencies and institutional strengthening to DBP. It comprised two majorcomponents:

(a) credit through DBP for small and medium-scale productionof pigs and other small livestock; cattle breeding andfattening; construction and equipping of fishing vessels;construction, rehabilitation and expansion of fishponds;and other credit activities to be identified duringproject implementation; and

(b) non-credit activities, including (i) livestock planning andsubsector studies and development programs to be implementedby the Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI); (ii) fisheriessubsector studies by the Fisheries Industry DevelopmentCouncil; and (iii) technical assistance to DBP for studiesand promotion of provincial feed mills, development of aproject monitoring and evaluation system, and trainingprograms for agricultural staff and in-house trainers.

Project Costs and Pinancinj

3. The project was to be implemented over three years, from mid-1980to mid-1983, at a total cost of US$140.7 million, with a 16% foreignexchange component. Bank Loan 1894-PH would finance 32% of the total cost,with GOP/DBP providing US$81 million (58%), and sub-borrorers of the creditcomponent financing US$15 million (11%). Due to insolvency of DBP, onlyUS$19.6 million of the credit component was disbursed and the uncommittedbalance of US$20.4 million was cancelled on October .7, 1984.The original loan closing date of June 30, 1984 was extended twice for thenon-credit component of the project only, to June 30, 1986. Totaldisbursements for non-credit activitias were US$3.9 million; the unutilizedbalance of US$1.1 million was cancelled on January 17, 1987. The totalproject cost at completion was only US$81.2 million equivalent, or 58% ofthe cost estimated at appraisal, with the Bank disbursing only 52% of theoriginal loan amount. Both the Bank's and DBP's shares of credit componentfinancing were lower than anticipated at appraisal because DBP laterdecided to require a larger equity participation by sub-borrowers.

Project Results

4. In May 1983 the Bank had to request DBP to refrain from making newsubloan commitments due to the intermediary's precarious financialsituation: DBP's liquidity had deteriorated to the extent that, beginningin August 1982, it had practically ceased all lending operations other thanthose financed under World Bank credit lines. DBP subsequently requested,but the Bank did not agree, to resume subloan commitments. Finally, inrecognition of the gravity of DBP's financial crisis, it was decided duringthe 1984 World Bank-IMF Annual Meeting to cancel the unconmitted balancesof the credit components of all ongoing Bank-financed DBP projects (Loan1894-PH, one other agricultural credit line and an industrial credit line).Despite this suspension and cancellation, the credit component achieved 71%of the appraisal targets in terms of number of sub-projects and 85% of theappraisal estimate in terms of volume of sub-project investment. The onlyactivity which fell substantially below appraisal expectations was lendingfor marine fisheries, both because credit demand in that subsector wasslack and because DBP discouraged financing of fishing vessels due to itspoor sub-loan recovery experience.

5. Implementation of the DBP technical assistance activities was verysuccessful. DBP's monitoring and evaluation effort was expanded to covernot only project-financed credit, but also improvement and computerizationof DBP's overall management information system, which proved vital tosubsequent Bank-supported restructuring of DBP. On the other hand, theFIDC fisheries studies were never carried out due to reorganization of GOPfisheries agencies and eventual abolition of FIDC itself. Also,implementation of livestock activities by BAI fell quite short of appraisalexpectations, principally because of BAI's inability to execute the cattledispersal program (which accounted for 50% of project support to BAI) onthe scale anticipated. Chronic budgetary problems also plagued BAI, whichwas never able to procure the vehicles and facilities it needed.

- vi -

6. Re-estimated ERRs for all credit sub-project categories werepositive and within the range of original ERR estimates in the SAR, exceptfor cattle and fishing vessel sub-projects for which original estimateswere a bit higher than actuals. The re-estimated FRRs for the sub-projectswere close to the corresponding ERRs and approximate appraisal PRRestimates. The overall financial impact of the project on DBP is, however,likely to be negative due to expected subloan defaults.

7. Although the Borrower's PCR indicates losses on DBP's project-funded livestock and fisheries portfolio only during 1980-81 and a profitduring 1982-84, the Region disputes these estimates, which implicitlyassume no subloan default. Based on data in the PCR, 722 of the number ofproject accounts (involving 692 of total subloan principal outstanding)were in arrears as of mid-1985. If only arrears of over one year wereconsidered, the ratios would still be 30S of accounts and 381 ofoutstanding principal (the PCR shows 262, although the Region was unable toreplicate this computation). In any case, DBP's arrears ratio for theproject loan portfolio, although better than the corresponding ratio forits overall agricultural loan portfolio and significantly better than itsindustrial portfolio, far exceeds the 20X ceiling used by the Central Bankin qualifying commercial banks for rediscounting.

Borrower Performance

8. From the narrow standpoint of the project itself, DBP'sperformance was highly professional. However, its overall management wassubject to severe political pressure and therefore demonstrated poorjudgement in dealing with the institution's basic structural and financialproblems. The economic crisis of 1983, which caused a severe liquidityshortage in the Philippines, aggravated DBP's already grave financialsituation to the point where it required a GOP/Central Bank-out. Toforestall the closure of a large number of investments it had financed, DBPtook over their operations and ploughed in additional resources, furtherincreasing its exposure. To show operating profits, it resorted tocreative accounting and booking of a large proportion of non-cash income,causing confusion, lack of confidence, and eventually loss of managementcontrol over the financial information generated. The performance of BAIwas merely adequate in most instances, with the clear exception of theresearch staff who succe-4fully carried out their tasks with impressivededication, despite severe budget constraints and adverse workingconditions.

Bank Performance

9. By concentrating too narrowly on analysis of the expected projectcash flow and DBP's agricultural loan portfolio, rather than DBP's overallfinancial situation, the Bank did not detect early enough the extent of theintermediary's financial problems, stemming mainly from its numerous non-performing large-scale industrial subloans. Subsequently, as the Bankbecame aware of DBP's deteriorating financial position, it should havemoved more expeditiously and given more emphasis to serious restructuringefforts. On the other hand, the Bank's decision to maintain support for

- vii -

the non-credit component, even when credit activities had to be cancelled,was a good one, particularly as regards technical assistance to DBP whichlater provided vital support to restructuring efforts.

Issues and Lessons

10. Scope and Coverage of the Credit Component. The scope andcoverage of the credit component should have included all agriculturalactivities rather than only livestock and fisheries. Project focus onthese two subsectors led DBP staff to spend too much time on suchsubprojects, at the expense of adequate-- evaluating, monitoring and3upervising its overall agricultural loan portfolio.

11. Institutional Issues. The Bank did not sufficiently appraiseDBP's financial condition, BAI's implementation capability or the potentialdelays in the budgetary process; consequently, problems which alreadyexisted at the time of appraisal later surfaced and obstructedimplementation. Appraisal and supervision missions need to be morediligent in their institutional analysis of implementing agencies, withrespect to financial performance, organizational capabilities, and the leadtime involved in obtaining budgetary approvals to undertake projectactivities on the scale propo ed.

12. Progect Financial Impact on Implementing Agency. Appraisals ofcredit operations should explicitly assess whether, and under whatconditions, project implementation might negatively impact on theintermediary, and project design suld ensure that such situations areavoided. For DBP, a combination of subloan pricing policies (which chargedlower interest rates for smaller subloans that were more expensive toadminister), high operating expenses and high sublcan arrears and defaultrates, all contributed to the institution's deepenirg financial crisis inthe early 1980s.

- viii -

-HTLIPPItNEs

THIRD LIVESTOCK AND FISHERIES CREDIT PROJECT (MOM_ 1094-PE)

PROJECT OtMPLETION REPORT

Overview

Introductir8n

1. This Overview is based primarily on the PCR for the ThirdLivestock and Fisheries Credit Project (Loan 1894-PH) prepared by theAgriculture Supervision Department of the Development Bank of thePhlippines (DBP), dated October 1986. The PCR provides a detailed reviewof the project, focusing on the credit component which accounted for about90%X of the total pLoject cost. The Region agrees with the major findingsof the PCR with regard to project performance and results, although itconcludes that the project had a more negative Impact on DBP's financitAatatus than does the PCR. The Overview also incorporates the findings of areport by the Bureau of Animal Industries (BAI), concerning non-creditproject activities in the livestock subsector, as well as informationavailable in the Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) and Loan Agreement for thisproject, and in other internal memoranda and documents in Bank projectfiles.

Proiect Backaround

2. The Bank began lending to DBP through its loan to the Governmentof the Philippines (GOP) in 1971 for the First Rice Processing and StorageProject (Loan 720-PH). As of the appraisal of the Third Livestock andFisheries Project in 1979, DBP had been the channel for seven agriculturaland five industrial credit projects financed by the Bank (Loans 720, 823,891, 998, 1048, 1120, 1190, 1225, 1269, 1270, 1,06 and 1572-PH), for atotal loan amount of US$317.8 million. Two of these previous Bark loanshad been for livestock (Loans 823 and 1225-PH) and two for fisheries (Loans891 and 1270-PR). Concurrent with the Third Livestock and FisheriesProject, DBP was also implementing three other Bank-financed credit linessthe Second Smallholder Tree Farming Project (Loan 1.506-PH), the ThirdIndustrial Investment Plroject (Loan 1572-PH), and the Third Small andMedium Scale Industry Project (Loen 2169-PH).

3. In mid-1978, when the outstanding balances under the then ongoinglivestock and fisheries development proSects were about to be fullycommitted, GOPIDBP requested additional Bank financing for thesesubsectors. Following internal review in the Bank, it was decided to widenthe scope of the new project from that of a simple credit operation, byincluding some financial and technical assistance to the subsectoral lineagencies and institutional strengthening of DBP. The FAOICP identified theproject in October 1978 and assisted a joint GOP agency task force withproject preparation in March 1979.

- ix -

4. The project was appraised as a broader livestock and fisheriescredit line (i.e., not limited to strictly prescribed subloan investments),so as to allow DBP greater latitude in allocating loan proceeds, therebyIndicating increased delegation of responsibility from the Bank to DBP.The Bank would approve a detailed annual program which would define lendingpriorities for the regions, commodities and beneficiaries. Long-terminstitutional strengthening to improve sub-project appraisal, monitoringand evaluation (M&E), and an action plan for dealing with arrears were alsoincluded under the project. At the time, it was not foreseen that theextent of these arrears would ultimately threaten DBP's creditworthiness.

5. A proposed graduated disbursement schedule to provide DBP withincentives to lend to smallholders was rejected by Bank management, whichalso requested a revision of the project economic justification and betterdefinition of the DBP institutional strengthening component. Consequently,the initial project appraisal document, which had been completed in January1980, was revised with regard to both farm models (to reflect lesserreliance on imported feedgrains for livestock and to lower constructionstandards for animal housing and fishponds) and DBP institutionalstrengthening (modification and clarification of DBP arrears actionprogram, training plan and lending policy, etc., including annual Bankreview of DBP onlending rates). Based on the revised SAR of June 13, 1980(Report No. 2828-PH), the Board approved a loan of US$45.0 million on July15, 1980, which became effective on November 5, 1980.

Prolect Obiectives

6. The project was designed to support GOP's goal of increasinganimal protein supply, by providing medium and long-term credit through DBPfor livestock and fisheries, and institutional support to DBP and other GOPagencies responsible for policy formulation in these subsectors. Theproject would also promote better coordination between these agencies andDBP. The project included two major components, the credit componentimplemented by DBP and the non-credit component implemented by DBP, theBureau of Animal Industry (BAI) and the Fisheries Industry DevelopmentCouncil (FIDC). Credit through DBP was for: (a) small and medium-scaleproduction of pigs and other small livestock; (b) cattle breeding andfattening; (c) construction and equipping of fishing vessels; (d)construction, rehabilitation and expansion of fishponds; and (e) other sub-projects in the livestock and fisheries subsectors to be identified in thecourse of project implementation. The non-credit component comprised: (a)livestock planning and other subsector studies, and livestock developmentprograms including BAI cattle dispersal, cattle markets development, cattlebreed stock upgrading, small livestock nutrition research, and pasture andlegume seed propagation schemes; (b) fisheries subsector studies includingFIDC fishing gear technology and review of marine regulations; and (c)technical assistance to DBP for studies and promotion of provincial feedmills, cevelopment of a project M&E system, and development of agriculturestaff training programs and training of tn-house trainers.

-x -

Lrotect Costs and Financing

7. The project was to be Implemented over three years, from mid-1980to mid-1983. Total project cost was estimated at Pesos 1.04 billion(US$140.7 million equivalent), with a 161 foreign exchange component. TheBank loan of US$45 million was to finance 321 of the total project cost,with GOPIDBP providing US$81 million to finance 582, and the balance ofUS$15 million, equivalent to 11 of total project cost, to be financed byproject beneficiaries as sub-borrowers of the credit component.

8. Table 1 below compares estimated and actual financing of theproject components:

TABLE 1: ESTIM&TED AND ACTUAL PROJECT FINANCING

(US$ Millions)

Credit Non-Credit TotalSource Component Component

A. SAR Estimate

IBRD 40.0 (331) 5.0 (271) 45.0 (321)DBP/GOP 67.3 (551) 13.3 (731) 81.6 (582)Sub-Borrowers 15.1 (121) - ( 01) 15.1 (101)

Total 122.4 (1001) 18.3 (1001) 140.7 (1001)

B. Actual

IBRD 19.6 (292) 3.9 (271) 23.5 (291)DBP/GOP 33.3 (502) 10.7 (731) 44.0 (541)Sub-Borrowers 13.7 (212) - ( 01) 13.7 (171)

Total 66.6 (100%) 14.6 (1001) 81.2 (1001)

The total project cost at completion was only US$81.2 million equivalent,or 581 of the cost estimated at appraisal. The shortfall was primarily dueto the cancellation of the balance of the credit component (para. 9) andthe low volume of marine fisheries subloans prior to the cancellation.Although investment in the non-credit component also fell short ofappraisal estimates, the effect on overall project status at completion wasless significant (since the non-credit component accounted for only 131 oftotal project cost at appraisal and 181 of the actual total project cost).The Bank's and DBP's shares of credit component financing were lower thananticipated at appraisal, due to DBP's subsequent requirement that sub-borrowers have a larger equity participation.

- xi -

ImDlementation Hxverience

9. Implementation of the credit component began promptly andproceeded on target until May 1983, when the Bank requested DBP to refrainfrom making new subloan commitments due to DBP's precarious financialsituation. DBP's solvency was in doubt and its liquidity had deterioratedto the extent that, beginning in August 1982, it had practically ceased alllending operations other than those under World Bank-financed credit lines.After the Bank's denial of repeated GOP requests for permission for DBP toresume subloan commitments, and in recognition of the gravity ̂f DBP'sfinancial crisis, it was agreed d-aring the 1984 Bank-IMF Annual Meetingthat the unc*mmitted balances of the credit components of all ongoing Bank-financed DBP projects (including two agricultural credit lines, Loans 1506and 1894-PH, and one industrial credit line, Loan 2169-PH) should becancelled. Therefore, effective October 17, 1984, US$20.4 million of theuncommitted balance of the credit component of Loan 1894-PH was cancelled,reducing the total loan to US$24.6 million and leaving an undisbursedbalance of US$4 million.

10. Implementation of DBP non-credit component activities was slowerthan expected due to delays in consultant selection and negotiation, andchanges In project concept (expansion of project M&E activitios to includeimprovement and computerization of DBP's overall management informationsystem). Livestock studies and development programs Implemented by BAIwere delayed by over two years due primarily to budgetary constraints. Theproposed FIDC fisheries studies underwent numerous reviews and changes inconcept and were then delayed because of a reorganization of the GOPfisheries agencies, which led to their transfer from the Ministry ofNatural Resources (MNR) to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food (MAP) andthe abolition of FIDC Itself. Ultimately, the fisheries studies were notundertaken due to dolayed budget releases. The loan closing date for thenon-credit component of the project was extended twice, from June 30, 1984to June 30, 1986. The final loan disbursement was made on January 17,1987, resulting in a total disbursement of US$23.5 million and cancellationof a final US$1.1 million of the unutilized balance of the loan.

11. Credit Component. Despite the suspension of DIP commitmentauchority in early 1983 and the eventual cancellation of 51t of the creditcomponent, the project accomplished most of its sub-project investmenttargetst 711 of the appraisal estimate in terms of number of projects and85X of the appraisal estimate in terms of volume of sub-project investment,as illustrated in Table 2 below. Specifically, at project completion, sub-project investment in the livestock subsector was 122% of the appraisalestimate of number of sub-projects and 1081 of the estimated volume ofinvestment. Sub-project investment in inland fisheries was 1561 of theappraisal estimate of number of sub-projects, but was only 62X in terms ofamount of investment, indicating much smaller sub-projects and sub-loansthan expected. The one activity for which the sub-project investmenttarget was not met was marine fisheries, where only 31 of the estimatednumber of sub-projects was actually financed, in ar. amount equivalent toabout 16% of the estimated investment (reflecting. larger sub-projects than

- xii -

anticipated). The shortfall in marine fisheries investment was caused byboth a slack in credit demand in that subsector and DBP's policy ofdiscouraging the financing of fishing vessels due to its poor sub-loanrecovery experience.

TABLE 2: ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE CREDIT COMPONENT

Subsector Est. Lendinx a/ Actual Lending Act./Est.Lendinx (Z)No. USSM No. US$M No. Subproi. Loan Amt.

SmallLivestock 21,250 34.0 1,551 33.7 691 99SCattle 110 2.3 1,328 9.2 1.200X 400%Sub-totalLivestock 2,360 36.4 2,877 43.0 1221 1182

InlandFisheries 450 27.0 702 16.8 1561 621

Marine F. 2,334 14.6 65 2.4 32 16SSub-totalFisheries 2,784 41.6 767 19.2 28Z 462

Sub-totalOthers - - n.a. 4.4 +S +S

TOTAL 5,144 78.0 3,644 66.6 711 852

a/ Based on SAR, Annex e, Table 3, Indicative Lending Program. Figures donot include contingencies which were added on to arrive at the estimatedproject cost and financing.

12. Non-Credit Component. Appraisal targets for the non-creditcomponent were not met in spite of the two-year extension of the loanclosing date (para. 10). The consolidated cost of the non-creditcomponent, US$13.9 million, or 801 of the appraisal estimate, somewhatobscures the variable performance of individual sub-components. The DBPtechnical assistance activities were very successful, especially withregard to improvement of the management information system, which provedindispensable to the subsequent Bank-supported restructuring of DBP. Onthe other hand, the FIDC fisheries studies were never implemented due toreorganization of the GOP fisheries agencies and bureaus and abolition ofFIDC. Finally, investment in and implementation of livestock developmentactivities by BAI fell far short of appraisal targets, due to extensivedelays and shortfalls in budgetary allocations, as well as BAI's limitedcapacity to implement the cattle dispersal program (which accounted forabout 50% ot total project-supported BAI activities) on the scale

- xiii -

anticipated. Table 3 below compares estimated and actual loan utilizationof the non-credit component. As data on the total cost of the non-creditcomponent was not included in the PCR, the actual cost figures used in thisOverview were derived from disbursement records available at the Bank,assuming the same project cost-sharing arrangements as at appraisal (e.g.,73S GOPIDBP and 27% IBRD).

TABLE 3: ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE NON-CREDIT COMPONENT(US$ Millions)

IBRD Loan DisbursementsSub-Component SAR Estimate Actual Act/Est. (l)

BAI Activities 4.1 1.9 46ZFIDC Studies 0.1 0.0 0%DBP Tech. Assistance 0.7 2.1 300S

TOTAL 4.9 4.0 82Z

13. Chantes in Proiect Scope and DesiRn. The project credit componentwas originally based on indicative amnual lending programs prepared by DBPin consultation with other GOP agencies involved in the subsectors. Theseprograms served only as broad guidelines and were not binding, so that noreal change in project design was required in the course of implementation.Actual lending operations were, thus, responsive and tended to reflect thechanging economic environment and expectations in the country. In aneffort to attract backyard and small commercial producers to participateunder the project, DBP reduced the minimum equity requirement, liberalizedcollateral appraisal and lowered interest rates for smaller sub-projects.As a result of the annual reviews of its lending program, DBP made someminor alterations in lending strategy (e.g., reorientation from financingof small piggery and poultry commercial producers, who became increasinglyless competitive because of rising prices for imported feedgrains, toexpawtion of medium and large-scale enterprises; promotion of piggery andpoultry producers in corn-producing areas, in addition to major consumptioncenters; increasd emphasis on financing of cattle financing sub-projects;and promotion of polyculture, instead of monoculture, fishfarming).

14. There were several changes in the non-credit component. Supportfor DBP's project M&E effort was expanded to cover improvement andcomputerization of DBP's overall management information system, whichincluded, in addition to agricultural loan monitoring and evaluation, thedesign and installation of an automated billing system and computerizedloan management in support of the arrears reduction program. Also, someUS$0.4 million of the unutilized balance of US$1.2 million for the cattle

- xiv -

dispersal progran was reallocated to supplement the originally very smallallocation (US$0.15 million) for breed stock upgrading.

Protect Mnsaement Performance

15. DBP's performance in managing both the credit and non-creditcomponents of this project was highly professional and should be commended.DBP's overall management was, however, subject to severe political pressureand therefore demonstrated poor judgement in dealing with the institution'sbasic structural problems and financial crisis. DBP's portfolio ofsubloans as measured by the arrears ratio and loan recovery was very poor.Nevertheless, according to DBP records, subloans financed under the projectperformed better than DBP's agricultural loan portfolio which, in turn, wasbetter than DBP's total loan portfolio (netting out the effect ofrestructuring of many large industrial accounts, which involved booking ofaccount income and collection without actual cash inflow to DBP). Theperformance of BAI 'ias merely adequate in most instances, with the clearexception of the BAI research staff who successfully carried out theirtasks with impressive dedication, despite severe budget constraints andadverse working conditions.

Bank Performance

16. The Bank should have detected the extent of DBP's financialproblems, stemming mainly from its numerous non-performing large-scaleindustrial subloans and investments at an earlier stage and these shouldhave been brought to the attention of Bank Management, prior to or atappraisal of this project. By concentrating too narrowly on the analysisof the expected project cash flow and DIP's agricultural loan portfolio,rather than DBP's overall financial situation, the preparation andappraisal missions failed to eppreciate the seriousness of the agency'srapidly deteriorating position. Subsequently, the Bank's supervision ofthe project itself was satisfactory, and the decision to maintain supportfor the non-credit component, even when credit activities had to besuspended and later cancelled, was a good one. In particular, thecontinuation of technical assistance to DBP proved vital. A total of ninemissions supervised the project (twice a year during the peak of projectimplementation). The skill mix of credit specialist, financial analyst,livestock specialist and management specialist on the various supervisionmissions was appropriate. However, given the Bank's intimate knowledge ofDBP's weak financial position, its efforts to assist DBP in improving itsoverall financial structure and condition could have been better, i.e.,should have started much earlier and been given more emphasis, even beforesuspension of the credit component.

Institutional Impact

17. Credit Component. As indicated above, the extent of DBP's weakfinancial condition, i.e., the fact that DIP was insolvent, was not fullygrasped at appraisal. The project technical assistance component tostrengthen DBP's staff training and management information system, and the

- xv -

Bank's insistence on an arrears reduction plan, although beneficial, werefar from adequate in addressing DBP's poor and rapidly deteriorating loanand investment portfolio. Based on Bank estimates derived from data In theBorrower's PCR, as of June 30, 1985, 722 of the number of project accounts(involving 69S of the total subloan principal outstanding) was in arrears.If only arrears of over one year were considered, the ratios would be 302of the accounts and 382 of the outstanding principal. The DBP-computedratio of arrears (262 for both) is presented in the PCR separately forlivtRtock and fisheries subprojects, but the Region was unable to replicateDBP's computation from the given data. the closest proxy (see Annex III,Working Papers 2-4) was the ratio of total past due amount, includingprincipal and interest past due plus penalty and other charges, over totalprincipal outstanding--which comes to 252 for the livestock and 282 for thefisheries sub-projects, or an overall ratio of 262.

18. Although this ratio indicates the amount of overdue collection, itdoes not provide a meaningful indication of portfolio quality. However,since no data are available on actual cash collection, ratios of currentcollectionlcurrent collectible and past due collection/past duecollectible, and recovery from foreclosure accounts, etc., no furtheranalysis of the portfolio and arrears situation is possible. In any case,DBP's arrears ratio for the Third Livestock and Fisheries loan portfolio(according to both Bank's and DBP's own calculations), althoughsignificantly better than the corresponding ratio for its overallagricultural loan portfolio, far exceeds the 202 ceiling used by theCentral Bank in qualifying commercial banks for rediscounting, i.e., forqualifying commercial banks as being reasonably sound. The poor portfolioquality implies a correspondingly low collection ratio and, ultimately, ahigh subloan default rate.

19. The economic crisis of 1983, which caused a severe liquidityshortage in in the Philippines, aggravated DtP's already grave financialcondition to the point where it became illiquid, requiring a GOP/CentralBank bail-out. But for this economic and liquidity crisis, DBP might havebeen able to continue with the semblance of normalcy for a while longer.However, as a consequence of its attempt to appear healthy despite itsinsolvency, DBP's operation was quite unsound and generally detrimental tothe economy. To forestall the closure of a large number of the operationsfinanced by its loans and investments, DBP took over their operations andhad to plough in additional resources, further increasing its exposure,despite the bleak potential for business and loan recovery. To showoperating profits, DBP had to resort to creative accounting and booking ofa large proportion of non-cash income, causing confusion, lack ofconfidence, and eventually loss of management control over the financialinformation generated. Staff morale worsened, which had an adverse impacton its day-to-day operations, as evidenced by extended leaves taken anddisappearances of files, loans, security documents, etc.

20. Non-credit Component. The project overestimated BAI'simplementation eapacity, especially with regard to the cattle dispersalprogram, which was the single largest non-credit activity. Although the

- xvi -

loan included financing for vehicles and facilities for field staffinvolved in this program, BSI could not procure the needed vehicles andfacilities and was therefore able to execute only about 10% of theestimated program. In fact, BAI activities did not receive budget approvaluntil the third year of the project. Further, there was a temporaryinformal ban on capital expenditure, and thus BAI could not procure itemswhich it needed for implementation of the cattle dispersal program.Project design did not anticipate these problems, hence the project made noimpact on the budget process and received no special treatment. Theproject was, however, successful in introducing an M&E system for BAI'ecattle dispersal and breed stock upgrading programs, laying the essentialgroundwork for program evaluation and future expansion.

Economic and Financial Imiact

21. It is estimated that, at full development, the livestock andpoultry sub-projects financed under Loan 1894-PH would supply about 28,500MT of meat, 61 million chicken and duck eggs, and 293,500 liters of milkannually. Output from the fisheries sub-projecto is estimated at about34,600 MT of marine fish, 7,600 MT of farm fish and prawns, and 12,600 MTof salt annually. Incremental employment is estimated at 4,100 jobs, or53% of the appraisal forecast. Sub-project ERR is estimated at 182 forpiggeries, 33% for cattle, 40% for fishing vessels (trawlers), 302 for iceplants, between 40-54% for fishponds, 202 for layers, and 62% for contractbroilers. These are within the range of ERR estimates in the SAR, exceptfor cattle and fishing vessel sub-projects for which the ERR estimates inthe SAR ranged from 30-1002.

22. The FRRs for the sub-projects are close to the corresponding ERRsand approximate appraisal FRR estimates. The financial impact of theproject on DBP is, however, likely to be negative due to expected subloandefaults (based on the high proportion of arrears as of mid-1986).According to the PCR, DBP incurred losses on its project-funded livestockand fisheries portfolio in 1980-81, the first two years of operations, butthereafter showed a profit during 1982-84. The pro forma statement ofearnings and expenses for the portfolio also showed a profit throughout,with an expected IRR of 112. The Region disputes these estimates, whichimplicitly assume no subloan default, and predicts an overall negativefinancial impact on DBP based on its analysis of the loar portfolio (paras.17-18). The extent of the financial impact of the project on DBP dependson its spread and, most importantly, the cost of default, which the Regionbelieves to be relatively large. As data on subloan collection are notavailable, the Region has not attempted to estimate the exact Cost of thedefault or the magnitude of the expected negative financial impact.

- xvii -

Issues and Lessons

23. Scope and Coverag, of the Credit Comnonent. With the benefit ofhindsight, the scope and coverage of the credit component should not havebeen liited to livestock and fisheries, but should have included allagricultural activities. Project focus on these subsectors led DBP staffto spend more time and effort on evaluation, monitoring and supervision ofsuch sub-projects, at the expense of its overall agricultural loanportfolio. Annual lending programs were prepared for the livestock andfisheries sub-projects only, as required under the Loan Agreement. However,it would have been preferable to promote an overall agricultural lendingstrategy which could be trwaslated into lending programs and targets foreach subsector, including livestock and fisheries, rather than to focusattention narrowly on these subsectors.

24. Institutional Issues. As mentioned in paras. 17-20 oninstitutlonal impact, the Bank did not sufficiently appraise DBP'sfinancial condition, BAI's implementation capability or the potentialdelays in the budgetary process. Consequently, institutional problemswhich already existed at the time of appraisal later surfaced andobstructed implementation. Future project appraisals and supervisionsshould be more diligent In their institutional analysis of implementingagencies, with respect to their financial performance and condition,institutional constraints and capabilities, and the lead time required forthem to obtain the necessary budgetary approvals to undertake projectImplementation on the scale proposed.

25. Financial Impact on Implementing Atency. Appraisals of creditoperations should explicitly assess whether, and under what conditions,project implementation would have a negative financial impact on theintermediary. Project design should ensure that such situations areavoided. For DBP, a combination of subloan pricing (which charged lowerinterests for smaller subloans that were more expensive to administer),high operating expenses and, most importantly, high subloan arrear anddefault rates caused the project to impact negatively on DBP, therebycontributing, although only marginally so, to its financial woes.

ANNEX I

- xviii -

PROJECT ACHIEVEMENTS FOR DSP SUBLOANS

Actual an 2 ofIndtcative lending propramla Actual /b *apraisal estimateNo0. of No. of No1. of1

subprojects USS million subprojects USS million subprojects USS milLi

Small LivestockPiggery 1,850 30.2 906 22.0 49 73Poultry - layer 300 2.7 209 11.0 70 407

- other 100 1.1 352 0.3 352 2tGoat - - 84 0.4 + +

Subtotal Small Livestock 2.250 34.0 1.551 33.7 69 99

CattleHZIT-beef 65 1.9 lot 3.0 278 158Village 45 0.4 1,002 4.3 2,227 1,080Coco-beef - - 142 1.3 + +Dairy - 2 0.6 + +Slaughterhouse - I 0.0 + +

Subtotal Cattle 110 2.3 1 328 9.2 1.200 400

Subtotal Livestock 2.360 36.4 2.879 43.0 122 108

Inland FisheriesFishponds 450 27.0 698 16.7 155 62Saltbeds - - 3 0.1 + +"LAmbak lad" - - 1 0.1 + +

Subtotal Inland 450 27.0 702 16.8 156 62

Marine FisheriesVessels & iceplant 76 9.2 63 2.3 83 25Bsuecas 2,250 2.2 - - - -Traps 4 gear 8 3.2 - - - -Iceplant - - 2 0.2 + +

Subtotal Marine 2.334 14.6 65 2.4 3 16

Subtotal Fisheries 2.784 41.6 767 19.2 28 46

Subtotal OtherProjects /c n/a 4.4 + +

Total Investment froara. 5144 78.0 3-646 66.6 71 85

/a From SAR Anmex 3, Table 3, Indicative Lendieg Program, adjusted to reflect US$11.0 dillion, or about 122 expect.average contribution of subbarrouwcs. Reflected in this table is the estimated DSP subloaca.

/b Fto Table Se. page A-12 of the PCR.

/c This iteo reconciles the d4acrepancy between total subloan and disbursemnt figures and the detail figures bycategory of subproject provided in the PCR.

ANNEX II

- xix -

ACTUAL PROJECT COSTS

(US$ million)

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 Total

Credit components /a 3,134 35,939 31,611 6,080 1,313 644 78,721

Noncredit components /b 178 11 403 561 748 188 2,089

Total 3.312 35,950 32,014 6,641 2,061 832 80,810

/a Estimated from total DBP subloans adjusted for the average sabborrdWer'sequity contribution of 21%.

/b According to the PCR, the Bank financed 100X of the noncreditcomponents. This is inaccurate. Although the Bank financed 100X of thestudies and consultancy contracts, it fLnanced only a proportion of DBPcomputerization, breeding stock upgrading, cattle dispersal and livestockmarket development programs. It is estimated that the overheads and otherexpenses associated with these programs came to 252 of total Bankfinancing of the noncredit components. Therefore, the costs shown hereare based on Table 3, page A-4 of the PCR and adjusted for the DBP andGovernment contribution to the components.

WORKING PAPER NO. 1

Total Releases and Outstanding Principalas of June 30, 1985

(Pesos millions)

LDP FCP TOTAL LFP Mll

Total Outstanding Total Outstanding Total Outstandingitstanding oReleases Prlncipal Releases Principal Releases Principal Principal

Baltane 8alance Balance Balance '4

(X}

Regular Accounts 282.2 263.2 113.0 108.6 395.2 371.7 82.8X vRestructured Acconts 29.3 28.7 16.4 15.9 45.7 44.7 10.0OAccounts in Litigation 6.2 6.0 2.2 2.2 8.3 8.1 1.8X mAcquired Assets 16.1 16.0 8.3 8.3 24.4 24.3 5.4X 3

Total 333.7 313.9 139.9 134.9 473.6 448.8 100.0Z

* Reproduced from Table 11, page B-9 of PCR.

2n2

WORKING PAPER NO. 2 *

Status of Loan Portfolio of Livestock Subprojectsas of June 30, 1985

(Peses mill ions)

Past Due Ratio of Arrears 08P-Computed PossibleNo. of Outstanding .-....-....----..-.-.--.-- Totalt . - ...............- Ratio Basis of

Accounts Balance It Principal Interest Penalty & Arrears Principal/ Total Arrears/ of DSP'sOther Charges Outstanding Outstanding Arrears Ratio

Loans in releasing stage 7 2.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3X 5.21 5.2S 0.1 ILoans under grace period 688 47.4 (1.0) 9.7 2.3 11.0 -2.0X 20.5S 18.7X 8.9Loans repaying regularly 107 12.4 (0.1) (0.0) 0.0 (0.1) -1.0O -0.1 0.8X 0.1Loans in arrears for:

0-3 months 97 5.2 (0.3) 0.3 0.1 0.2 -4.8 5.9X 10.1X 0.5 5)4-6 months 685 47.5 1.7 4.4 0.7 6.8 3.6X 9.2X 11.71 5.67-12 months 555 24.1 2.0 4.0 1.1 7.1 8.11 16.81 21.31 5.113-24 months 415 63.2 7.1 19.1 5.4 31.6 11.2X 30.2X 31.81 20.1over 2 years S23 35.8 8.9 20.7 8.1 37.7 24.8X 57.81 52.4S 18.7

Others (insufficient data) 4 0.2 (0.0) (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 1.21 -0.4X 0.6X 0.0

Total Livestock Subprojects 3081 238.0 18.3 58.3 17.9 94.5 7.71 24.S 2S.91 61.6o

Past DueNo. of Outstanding .---- ..--....- ..-- TotalAccounts Batance I/ Principal Interest Penalty 8 Arrears

Other Charges

Total loans in arrears 2275 175.8 19.4 48.5 15.4 83.3

(X of total) 73.81 73.91 105.91 63.1t 86.21 88.1S(X of repaying loans) 95.51 93.41 100.6X 100.01 99.9X 100.11

Total loans in arrears for:over I year 938 98.9 16.0 39.8 13.5 69.3

(X of total) 30.41 41.6X 87.21 68.21 75.41 73.31(X of repaying loans) 89.81 88.91 100.81 100.01 99.9X 100.2X I

- *4 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~mower 2 years 523 3S.8 8.9 20.7 8.1 37.7

(X of total) 17.01 1S.01 48.51 35.51 45.11 39.81(X of repaying loans) 83.01 74.31 1u1.4X 100.01 99.91 100.3S

It It is assueed that this reprewents outstanding principal balance. This assu'ption is made after cowparing the total of livestock andfisheries subprojects (see W no. 4) ,bich is less than the total outstanding principat cf Pesos 448.8 million shown in UP no.

* Produced using data from TabLe 12a, page B -19 of PCR.


Status of Loan Portfolio of Fisheries Subprojectsas of Jun 30, 1985

(Pesos miltions)

Past Due Ratio of Arrears 8P-Coxputed PossibleNo. of Outstanding. .......................... Totalt .....................- tatio Basis of

Accounts *Blanco I/ Principal interest Penalty & Arrears Principal/ Total Arrears/ of D0P'sOther Charges Outstanding Outstanding Arrears Ratio

Loans in releasing stage 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0X 0.0X 0.0X 0.0Loans tuindr grace period 268 45.9 (0.3) 11.5 3.2 14.4 0.oX 25.0% 20.5% 9.4Loans repayirg regularly 29 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0Loans In arrears for: I

0-3 months 4S 3.7 (0.1) 0.3 0.2 0.5 -1.9% 8.1% 9.2% 0.3 o4-6 months 127 18.0 0.5 1.6 0.4 2.5 2.7% 9.1X 10.8% 1.97-12 months 114 14.7' 0.8 3.2 0.9 4.9 5.5% 21.8% 22.5% 3.3 .

13-24 'otbhs 86 13.9 1.0 4.3 1.6 7.0 7.4% 31.2X 29.4% 4.1 z a

over 2 years 16S 26.7 5.7 14.4 6.1 26.1 21.2% 53.8% 48.8% 13.0 Others (insufficient data) 3 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 4.7% 47.1% 34.9 0.1 la $

Total Fisho. eas stuprojects 838 126.9 7.6 3S.5 12.5 5S.5 6.0% 27.9X 26.5% 33.7 r x

CA'

Past DueNo. of 0utstsWing. ............................... Total 0

Accounts Balanme 1/ Principal Interest Penaltty & ArrearsOther Charmea n

Total loans in arrears S37 77.0 7.9 23.8 9.2 41.0

(a of total) 64.1% 60.7% 103.6% 67.2% 74.2% 73.8%(X of repynmig loans) 94.9% 95.5% 100.0X 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Total loans in arrears for:over 1 year 251 40.6 6.7 18.7 7.7 33.1

(2 of total) 30.0% 32.0% 87.5% 52.7% 62.0% 59.6X(2 of repaying loans) 89.6 918% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% z

mover 2 years 165 26.7 S.? 14.4 6.1 26.1

(X of total) 19.7% 21.0X 74.1% 40.5% 49.2% 47.0%(2 of repaying loans) 85.1% 88.1% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0X 100.0% '.

1/ It is assueed that this represents outstanding principal bialane. This assumption Is mode after comparing the total of livestock and

fisheries sihprojects (see UP no. 4) which is less than the total outstanding principal of Pesos 448.8 million shown in IPMO. 1.

* rroauced using data from Table 13a, page 8-25 of PCR.


Status of Loan Portfolio of DBP Third Livestock and Fisheries Credit Projectas of June 30, 1985

(Pesos millions)

Past Due Ratio of Arrears DBP-CixputeGNo. of Outstanding..................... ... Totalt .--------.---.-----.----- Ratio No. of Outstanding

Accounts Balance 1/ Principal Interest v & Arrears Principal/ Total Arrears/ of Accounts Balancearges Outstanding Outstanding Arrears

Loans in releasing stage 8 2.3 0.0 0.1 O.I. 0.3 0.3X 5.2X n/a OX 1XLoans uwder grace period 956 93.3 (1.3) 21.2 ;.5 25.4 -1.4X 22.7X nJa 24X 26XLoans repaying regularly 136 ;6.0 (0.1) (0.0) .0 (0.1) -0.7K -0.1 n/a 3K 4XLoans in rrears for:

0-3 months 142 8.9 (0.3) 0.6 0.4 0.6 -3.6X 6.8K nla 4X 2a 04-6 months 812 65.5 2.2 6.0 1.1 9.3 3.4X 9.1S n/a 21X 18K7-12 months 669 38.8 2.8 7.3 2.0 12.0 7.1X 18.7K n7a 17X It %13-24 months 501 77.0 8.1 23.4 7.0 38.6 10.5X 30.4K n/a 13$ 21X Z Iover 2 years 688 62.5 14.6 35.1 14.2 63.8 23.3K 56.1K n/a 18X 17X G

Others (insufficient data) 7 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 2.7X 31.2X n/a OX OX -0

Totat D8P L&F fit 3919 364.9 26.0 93.8 30.3 lS0.l r.,1x 25.7X % 100 Io rn .

0 I

Past DueNo. of Outstanding .---..-------..----------------- Total 0Accounts Balance 1/ Principal Interest Penalty & Arrears It

Other Charges

Total loans in arrears 2812 252.8 27.3 72.3 24.7 124.3

(K of total) 71.8X 69.3X 105.2X 77.1X 81.3K 82.8X(K of repaying loans) 95.4K 94.1X 100.4K 100.0K 100.0 100.1K

Total toans in arrears for:over 1 year 1189 139.5 22.7 58.5 21.2 102.3

(K of total) 30.3X 38.2X 87.2X 62.4x 69.9K 68.2X(X of repaying loans) 89.7X 89.7X 100.5K 100.0 100.0 100.12

over 2 years 688 62.5 14.6 35.1 14.2 63.8

(K of total) 17.62 17.1X 56.0X 37.4X 46.8X 42.5K z(K of repaying loans) 83.5X 79.72 100.8X 1OO.OX 99.9X 100.2X r

1/ It is assumed that this represents outstanding principal balance. This assumption is made after cooparing the total of livestock andfisheries sstbprojects (see wP no. 4) which is less than the total outstanding principal of Pesos 448.8 million shown in WIP nl. .

* This Working Paper is a consolidation of Working Papers Nos. 2 and 3, pp. 14-15.

is--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7 .-4 . 't .'_' ,

'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'l ..

ROSE7qq@. OnM4.P4 R-V. R.

de~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~WV mo -vS t tf i {.\w

* )x PVolUPPI1NES 9*r

ig- HwStRD .izl`V-E S T'OC K --7rp-I ELPME /

.EIS H E R E5S ED JEtT

~~~~~~~A >6 '%.vi;.,

',N~~~~.,,','

'.,' S .,t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4

-tv e-...^%g- - "v_. ;,! seves*eW

IBANGKO SA PAGPAPAUNLAD NG PI LIP WAS

P R O J E C T C O t P L E T I O N R E P O R T.

PHILIPP INES

THIRD LIVESTOCKt DEVeLOPMENT/FISEERISS CREDIT PROJECT

LOAN NO. 1894-PH

October 1986

Prepared By:

. 7RICULTURAL SUPERVISION DEPARTMENT

./

T A B L E 0 v C O N T E N T S

CHAPTER/SECTION OPIC PAGE

I INTRODUCTION

A Background 1B Identification and Preparation 1C Appraisal, Negotiation and Approval 2D Project at Appraisal 3E Procurement 4P F Implementing'Agencies 4.* G Lendiag Terms 5H Benefits, Justification and Risks 5

II . IMPLEMENTATION

A Start-up 7B Loan Availments 12C Supervision of Sub-projects 12D Revisions 13E Implementing Schedule 14F Reporting 15G Procurement 15H Costs 15I Farm Invdstments 16

III PROJECT IMPACT

A Institutional 17B Agricultural 22

IV RATES OF RETURNS

A Livestock and Poultry 24B Fisheries 25

V INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE ANDDEVELOPMENT

A Institutional Design and Growth 27B Supporting Services 27C Staff Training 29D Farm Credit 29KS i' ' * Accounting/Reporting 30r Financial Performance and Returns 30G Cost Recovery 31H Institution Building 33

VI SPECIAL ISSUES

A Operational Status of Sub-projects 35B Sub-project Supervision 36

4

VII CPANGES IN REPEATER PROJECT 38

VIII CONCLUSIONS 41

Ix RECOMMENDATIONS 47

A N N t 'x t S

TABLE NO.

A. LOAN STATISTICS

1. - WP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Quarterly Targetand Actual Disbursement of Funds,1981 to 30 June 1986 49

2. - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Quarterly Availmentof Funds, 1981 to 30 June 1986 51

3. - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Quarterly Availmentof Funds, Non-Credit Component,1981 to 3J June 1986 52

4. - IDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Appraisal and ActualProject Cost, By Source of Fund,1980 to 30 June 1986 53

5. - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Actual Vs. TargetNumber of Sub-Projects Financed andAmount of Sub-Loans 54

5a.- LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Target and ActualNumber of Sub-Projects, By Year,

.1980/81 to 1982/83 56

-Sb.-.LDP.FCP III (Loan IIo. 1894W-P!): Target and ActualW, <Number of Sub-Projects, By Sub-Sectnr

-and Year, 1980/81;to 1982/83 57

.. . 5c.-. W?/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Target and Actual* * ; .*<- g : Sub-Loan Releases, BW Sub-Sector

and Year, 1980/81 to 1985/86 59

5d.- LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Target and ActualSub-Loan Releases, By Year 1983/81to 1985/86 61

5e.- LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Stock and FishpondArea Financed 62

6. - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Actual Amount ofSub-Loan Releases, By Sub-Sector,1980 to 1985 .63

6a.- IDP IIT (Loan No. 1894-PR): Number of Accountsand Amount of Livestock Sub-LoansApproved, By Branch and Sub-ProjectType 64

6b.- FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Number of Accountsand Amount of Fibberies Sub-LoansApproved, By Branch and Sub-ProjectType 76

B. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

7. - 1DP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Results ofOperations Per Audited Statementsof Earnings and Expenses For theYears 1980 to 1984 79

8. - IDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PR): Results ofOperations After Cost of Punds withPercentage of Growth Rate For theYears 1980 to 1984 80

9. - LDP/FCP III (Loan N. . 1894-PH): Results ofOperations After Cost of Funds withPercentage of Average Investment Forthe Years 1980 to 1984 81

10. - IDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Projected Statementof Earnings and Expenses For theYears 1985 to 2000 82

lOa.- LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Projected Statusof Accounts For the Years 1985to 2000 85

lOb.- 1DP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PU)4- Schedule ofAmortizations 86

11. - LDP/FCP TII (Loan No. 1894-PH): Total Releasesand Outstanding Principal As of30 June 1985 87

12. - DP III (Loan No. 1894-PR): Sma-Ary of Agesof Arrears, By Branch, For theQuarter Ended 30 June 1985 88

12a.- LDP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Status of AccountsFor the Quarter Ended 30 June 1985 90

13. - FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Sunmary of Ages ofArrears, By Branch, For the QuarterEnded 30 June 1985 98

13a.- FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Status of AccountsFor the Quarter Ended 30 June 1985 100

C. PRODUCTION/LABOR STATISTICS

14. - WP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Projected Va.Actual Volume of Livestock andFisheries Production 104

15. - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PR): EmploymentGenerated 105

D. RATES OF RETURNS

16. - WP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Rates of Returnsof Sub-Loans, By Type of Sub-Project, 1904-85 106

-6a.- LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Pi"gery ModelIncreasing Sow-Level From 5 to 23,1984-85 108

l6b.- WP/FC? III (Loan No. 1894-PR): 400-Ha. HillbeefModel Increasing Breeder Level From25 to 50 Read, 1984-85 110

16c.- LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): 50-Cattle BreederModel Under Village 'Paiwi" Scheme,1984-85 115

16d.-. lDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PR): Poultry Layer ModelIncreasing Capacity From 540 to 1,260Birds, 1984-85 117

16e.- IDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): 500-Broiler ContractGrowing Model, 1984-85 119

16f.- WP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): New Fishpond Models,By Type of Culture, 1984-85 121

16g.- DP/fCP III (Loan No. 1894-PR): Traditional 5-H.a.Milkfish Fishpond Models, 1984-85 122

16h.- LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Marine Vesselsand Ice Plants Models, By Capacity,1984-85 123

Attachment I 125


PRILIPPINES THIRD LIVESTOCK DEVEWPMENT/FISHERIES CREDIT PROJECT (IDAN NO. 1894-PH)

I. DNIRODUCTION

A. BACKGROUND

1.01 The World Bank (WB) granted the Government of the Philippines(GOP) four (4) credit lines for the development of itslivestock and fisheries industries. These loans were theLivestock Development Projects I (Loan No. 823-PH) and II(Loan No. 1225-PB) and Fisheries Credit Projects I (Loan No.891-PH) and II (Loan No. 1270-PH).

1.02 The Third Livestock Development/Fisheries Credit Project(Loan No. 1894-PH) was the outcome of the request ofPhilippine Government for assistance to the Development Bankof tne Philippines (DBP) to finance the promotion oflivestock and fisheries development in the country. It wasdesigned to support over a period of three years theGovernment's policy of increasing the animal protein supplythrough the provision of medium- and long-term credit to tnelivestock and fisheries sub-sctors (Part A). At the sametime provisions for strengthening planning and implemen-.tation of the Project, as well as of other projects, wereincluded for the two subsectors' specialized agencies within

-the Government, namely, the Bureau of Animal Industry or AI,Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources or BFAR, andFishery Industry Development Council or FIDC; and DBP (PartB).

1.03 This completion report evaluates the results of the implemen-tation of the Project, highlighting Part A.

B. IDENTIFICATION AND PREPARATION

1.04 Ix mid-1978, while Loan Nos. 1225-PH and 1270-PH were stillunder implementation, a proposal for additional financial

-. assistance from WB for further development of the livestockand fishery industry was prepared by the Development Bankof the Philippines with the assistance of a task force com-posed of representatives- from the following government agen-cies:

a. Livestock Development Council (LDC)b. Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI)c. Ministry of Natural Resources (MRR)d. Fishery Industry Development Council (FIDC)e. Bureau of Forest Development (BFD)f. Philippine Fisheries Marketing Authority (PFHA)

-2-

Re: Phil. 3rd IDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

In October-November 1978 an FAO/WB Cooperative ProgramMission visited the Poilippines to assist the Government inidentifying livestock and fisheries projects suitable for WBfinancing. The mission was comprised of P.R. Crossing, C.M.Giles, P.J. Pryke, T. Vessel Dase and E. Oswald.

1.05 Another mission composed of P.R. Crossing, J. Fyson, C.Giles, P. Wilson, P. Pryke, and J. Maynard in March-April1979 helped in the preparation of the credit line aspects ofthe proposed Project.

The proposal was revised in line with the concept of WB thatthe Project would be the first in a series of project pre-parations for broader lending programs for agriculture. Asfinalized, the Project broadened the scope for lending andprovided for intensified institutional and infrastructuraldevelopment. Moreover, it required closer and more formal-ized involvement of the Ministry of Agriculture and Ministryof Natural Resources in the establishment of DBP's overallagricultural lending priorities and regional agriculturallending program.

C. APPRAISAL, NEGOTIATION, AND APPROVAL

1.06 The Project was appraised in August-September 1979 by a WBteam headed by Mr. J. Gregor with the assistance of Messrs.B. Berman, S. Dase, L. Sprague, and T. Yip. The final reviewof the Project's economic aspects was conducted by Mr. G.Ablasser of WB. The WB team was assisted by a team ofConsultants, namely, Messrs. R Ayre-Smith, G Irvin, K. Neilsand P. Wilson.

1.07 A delegation from the GOP composed of J.V. de Ocampo,M. M.Songco, L.G. Cabling, A. J. Arquenza, M. del Rosario,Z. Santos, D. Trinidad, P. Tan and D. Tadeo negotiated withthe World Bank panel in June 1980 for the Project. Duringthe negotiation the Philippine Delegation requested IBRD toincrease the loan from US $ 45 Million to US $ 60 Million tocover approximately 501 of total project cost (excludingsub-borrower equity). However, the World Bank was unableto grant the request because of resource constraints. Inview of this, the GOP agreed to provide DBP part of the pro-ceeds of the Yen Bond 8eries No. 1 Issue an equivalent amountof US $ 15 Million to constitute part of the foreignfinancing for the project.

1.08 The wan Agreement between GOP and WB for the Project wassigned on 4 August 1980 and became effective on 5 November1980. The Subsidiary Loan Agreement between GOP and DBP wasexecuted on 10 October 1980. The target closing date ofwithdrawal from the IBRD loan was 30 June 1984.

-3-

Re: Phil.. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan N4o. 1894-PH)

D. PROJECT AT APPRAISAL

1.09 Of the Total Project Cost, US $ 45 M was proposed for WBassistance to finance the following:

(a) 372 of total sub-loans;(b) 1002 of foreign expenditures for equipment, vehicles and

materials, consultancy; and(c) 501 of local procurements.

Of the IBRD loan, US $ 42.220 M was earmarked as a subsidiaryloan for agricultural credit (Part A) and technicalassistance (portions of Part B) to be administered by DBP.The balance of US $ 2.78 M was allocated for the sub-projectsof SAI and BFAR/FIDC under the Project.

1.10. The Subsidiary Loan Agreement empowered DBP to administerUS $ 42.22 M for the following purposes:

Amount of theLoan Allocated

(Expressed in Dollar Z of ExpendituresCategory Equivalent) to be Financed

i. Subloans under 40,000,000 372Part A of theProject

Ui. Equipment, vehicles 150,000and materials underPart B of the Project

(a) Directly imported 1001 of foreignexpenditures

(b) Locally manufact- 1001 of foreign*ured expenditures

(en factory)

(c) Locally procured .501

.- iii. Consultant services. 1,150,000 100lunder Part B of theProject

iv. Unallocated 920,000

Total 42,220,000

-4-

Re: Phil. 3rd lDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

E PROCUREMENT

1.11 Consistent with WB guidelines and/or Government procedures,procurement criteria for the Project follow:

a International competitive bidding for fishing vesselsconstructed from material other than wood and any singleitem of equipment estimated to cost more than 7300,000under Part A;

b International competitive bidding for cattle breeding stockon quotations from at least three countries accredited byGovernment and WS as free from hoof-and-mouth disease underPart B;

c International/domestic competitive bidding for vehiclesand materials under Part B; and

d International prudent shopping for pasture and legume seedsunder Part B.

P. IPLEME!TING AGENCIES

1.12 The DBP implemented Part A within the scope of the followingactivities:

a Small and medium-scale production of pigs and other smalllivestock;

b Expansion of the national cattle herd through developmentof cattle breeding in pasture and transfer of young stockto the village for fattening and/or breeding;

c Construction and equipping of fishing vessels to supplyboth domestic and export markets;

t Rehabilitation and expansion of inland fishponds, andestablishment of fishpond estates; and

a Other sub-projects in both sub-sectors identified during thecourse of the Project period.

1.13 Under Part B, technical assistance to DBP was realized throughthe following activities:

a Conduct of a study on provincial feedmills;

b Conduct of a study on the viability of fishpond projectsin Samar and Leyte;

c Establishment of a Management information System;

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-Pi)

d Establishment of a Monitoring and Evaluation System; ande Formulation of an agriculture staff training program.

1.14 The participating Government agencies were to implement thefollowing programs under Part 8 of the Project:

a Sectoral Development Program, Cattle (SAI)

i Cattle Dispersal Programii Breed stock Upgrading

b Other SAI Programs

i Small Livestock Nutrition Researchii Pasture and Legume Seed Productioniii Cattle Markets

c FIDC and BFAR Programs

i - Fishing Gear Technology and other studiesii Review of Marine Regulations

G. LENDING TERMS

1.15 The common repayment period for the WB loan and the subsidiaryloan spans 20 years (including 5 years grace), during whichsemi-annual amortizations are made by GOP to WB. Repaymentsinclude the following:

a Interest oan the loan at 8.252 per annum on the principelamount of the loan withdrawn and outstanding from time totime;

b Principal amount of the loan, starting 15 February 1986 andending 15 August 2000; and

c Comituent charges at the rate of 3/4 of 1 oan the prin-cipal amount of the loan not withdrawn from time to time.

R. BNSEFITS, JUSTIPICATION, AD RISKS

1.16 Based on an indicative lending program, the composite economicrate of return was tentatively calculated by the WB at 282. Thealternative use of an indicative lending program was prompted byuncertainty in the final mix of sub-projects to be financed asDBP was granted flexibility in its lending program.

-6-

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP. (Loan No. 1894-PU)

The realization of returns on the project further implied theneed for DBP to:

a. continue to apply stringent appraisal criteria;

b. strengthen its analytical capability in the economic field;and

C. take into account in its lending policies weasures tocounter risks against high cost of feeds and/or availabi-lity of feeds for the livestock sub-sector.

1.17 The involvement of various government agencies in the formulationof lending programs for the Project was expected to minimize therisk of inadequate coordination that may arise among theinteractors.

1.18 Another risk foreseen for the Project was the narrowing profitmargin for small and medium-scale enterprises because of theprice ceilings imposed by the government on certain productprices.

., ~ ~ ~

~~~s

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

II. D4PIEMENTATION

A. START-UP

2.01 The agricultural credit component of the subsidiary loanwas implemented upon completion of the Annual LendingProgram (ALP) for September to Decembe- 1980 and CalendarYear 1981. Nevertheless, retroactive financing under theproject startqd with approved sub-loans that could-nolonger be accomodated in LDP II and FCP IT but had beenscheduled for first release on or after 4 August 1980.

Tha ALP had been a pre-implementation condition set by both;.greements for DBP to detail the broad scope of the projectand provide a prescribed lending program in terms of sub-project categories. Its preparation involved consultationsamong DSP, the participating agencies, Technical Board forAgricultural Credit (TBAC) and National Economic andDevelopment Authotiry (NEDA).

2.02 Implementation was ordered temporarily suspended by theWorld Bank (WB) in May 1983 amid reports on the merging ofthe Philippine National Bank (PNB), Land Bank of thePhilippines (LBP) and DSP. Suspension was to last untilsuch time as the effect of the DBP reorganization could bedetermined, as the proposed merger had been envisioned as aGovernment reform for the financial system during thenationwide economic crisis.

Nevertheless, even after the suspension of implementation,DBP continued releasing funds to sub-projects alreadyapproved as of May 1963. Releases to these sub-projectsvere reimbursed by the World Bank in accordance with theLoan Agreement.

The suspension created a shortage of loan fund forlivestock and fisheries sectors.

2.03 Financial constraints led the Development Bank of thePbilippines to sake representation with the Minister ofFinance and Prime Minister of the Philippines to requestIBRD the cancellation of the unavailed balance of thecredit line. IBiD approv,d&the eancellation of US $20.44 Mon 17 October 1984.

le: Phil. 3rd LDPIFCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

L.04 TIplementation of LDP/FCP ttt was covered by a specialfinancing program approved by the DBP Board of Governorsunder Board tesolutioa No. 2591 dated 9 July 1980.Tnvolved in implementation were 48 branches, and 7 compactbranches, the Agricultural loans Department (ALD) and theAgricultural Supervision Department (ASD). Of the totalnumber of branches and compact branches that implementedthe agricultural credit program, 20 are in Luzon; 15 in thieVisyas, and 20 in Miodanao.

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO DBP

2.05 Implementation of the Son-credit Component was delayed fromthe start-up date of 1 January 1981. The earliest programto be implemented was the agriculture staff training of !BPin mid-1981. Delays for DBP were due to loog processesinvolved in negotiations with consultancy firms.

2.06 A consultancy firm, Technosphere, was engaged by DBP toconduct a study promoting feedmill construction and opera-tion in rural areas. The contract between DBP andTechnosphere was signed on 26 may 1982, enforced untilDecember 1982, and renewed for another three (3) monthsending in Mfarch 1983. Because of additional researchrequired by DBP, however, the study was completed only in1985.

2.07 Tne study on the viability of fishpond projects in Samarand Leyte was undertaken to determine the issues andproblems confronting the fishpond industry in those pro-vinces. It was conducted by DBP jointly with.-the TechnicalBoard for Agricultural Credit (TBAC) ind the now defunctFishery Industry Development Council (FIDC) in February toSeptember 1983.

2.08 Consultancy services for the development of agriculturestaff training program and training of in-house trainorswere provided by-the Canada-based firm CEGIR, INTER SAcontracted for the purpose by DSP in December 1980 throughthe anpower Development Center (later Development BankingInstitute, now Department of Manpower Development).

. .;'.*- Formulation of the program and implementation of pilottrainings were undertaken in mid-1981 and 1982 bj the firmjointly with DBP. lbe program and trainings since thenhave been integrated into the regular operations of DBP.

-9-Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

2.09 Establishment of a Management liformation System (MIS)under the Project was realized in the operationalization ofthe DBP Data Center Inc. (DCI) in 1983. The sub-projectsimplemented by DCI included the following:

a. Computer Hardware and Software System. TLe Projectfinanced the acquisition/development of computer hard-ware to expmid the Uaited capacity- of facilitiesexisting in 1982. As implemented, this sub-projectenabled the replacement of the existing IBN S/360 withan IBM 4361 and the purchase of additional tapes anddisk drives and eight nits of IBM S/34 mi4icomputersinstalled moatly in the Branches.

T- support the implementation of the MIS the Data BaseManagement System and the NSA General Ledger Systemwere acquired while the Loan Management System wasdeveloped in-house.

b. Data Base Management System (DBMS). ADABAS was acquiredfor the Loan Management System (LMS) to facilitateefficient storage and retrieval of loan information tosupport day-to-day lending operations of Head Office.The IMS was expected to be implemented in the thirdquarter of 1986. On the other hand, two other systemsusing ADABAS are now being implemented to supportgeneral administrative services. These systems are,namely, (1) DBP Personnel Information System; and (2)DBP Equipment, Furniture, and Fixtures Inventory System.

c. MSA General Ledgar System (MSA/GLS). The system wasintended for reducing to minimum level the problemspreviously inherent in the manual system.

d. SGV Consultancy. The Sycip, GorTes and VelayoConsultancy Group (SGV) provided the initial design onwhich the development of the LX1 by the D8P Data Centerwas based.

Total disbursements procure4 for the MIS has been esti-mated at US $1.5 Million, including costs of consultancy,equipment, software and peripheral, as of 30 June i986.

v.2,10 A farm-level Monitoring and Evaluation System (MES) forLDP/FCP III was established by the Agricultural SupervisionDepartment (ASD) in 1984 using DBP funds. The IBRD loanfor this purpose was utilized for the partial procurementof computer hardware for the MIS.

-10-


The MES had been conceived as a systematically organizedinformation and monitoring network with the capacity toassist Project Management in the following:

a. Supervising Project implementation;b. Taking corrective action, as need arises;c. Reacting to unanticipated consequences; andd. Planning future projects.

It constitutes continuous reporting, recording, and analy-sis of predesigned Key wAnagement Indicators for randomlyselected sample sub-loat*s with farm records as data collec-tion instrument. Data processing and analysis, and reportpreparation are centralized at ASD.

The MES covers a pilot area comprising the jurisdiction ofAID and six branches, namely, Dagupan, Cabanatuan, Masbate,Roxas, Bacolod and Butuan. Coverage will be expanded andoperations, decentralized as soon as experience in thesystem can sufficiently provide the basis for operatingguidelines in the Branches.

BAI AND BPAR/FIDC PROGRAMS

2.11 Most of the programs of the Bureau of Animal Industry (BAT)were started in the fourth quarter of 1983 while those ofthe Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources(BFAR)/Fishery Industry Development Council (FIDC) navenot been started. The drawbacks in implementation ofprograms were difficulty of GOP in raising cbunterpartfunds, abolition of agency (viz, FIDC) and/or delay inreleasing funds. So as not to disrupt Project implemen-tation the closing date for Part B was initially extendedfrom 30 June 1984 to 30 June 1985 and finally to 31December 1986.

2.12 With the abolition of FIDC, implementation of the hi4terystudies under technical assistance from the Project wasassumed by the Office of the Minister for Agriculture andgood. The Ministry instituted changes that entailedcompliance with certain official requirements which was notyet completed as closing date of the Project neared.

Revisions included the expansion of the study, Review ofMarine Resource and Technology Evaluation, cancellation ofthe Study on Fishery Regulations, and reallocation of fundsfor the latter study to the former. As of May 1986 govern-ment counterpart funds have not yet been released nor hasthe consultancy contract been signed between MAP andInternational Center for Living Aquatic ResourcesManagement (ICLARM).

- 11 -


2.13 In support of the cattle dispersal program, the Projectassisted BAI in acquiring young stock for distribution toselected villages in preparation for their participation incredit achemes similar to DBP's village cattle productionprogram. Under the project a total of 1,690 head has beendispersed, representing 802 of target as of 31 December1985. The rest were either ready for distribution or undernegotations for delivery.

2.14 Tbe program for breed stock upgrading involved importationof purebred cattle stock to improve BAI's existing herd atthe Bureau's dairy farm in Sorsogon. From June 1984 toDecember 1985, the Project enabled importation of 130 neadof Sahiwal Friesian pregnant heifers and production of 112yearlings, 58 heifers, 54 bulls and 60 calves.

2.15 The objective of BAI's research program on small livestocknutrition was to bring down cost of livestock and poultryproduction by utilizing the more abundant and non-conventional feedstuffs available in the country. Thefollowing sub-projects were undertaken by BAI under theProject:

a. Duck nutrition and research using energy and proteinsource for meat and egg production in the Philippines;

b. leaf protein concentrate as a source of protein forpoultry feeding;

c. Nutritive evaluation of cassava leaf meal (CLN) forpoultry feeding;

d. Utilization of Azolla for swine and poultry feeding;

e. Utilization of biogas sludge for swine and poultry; and

f. Goat feeding and feeding anagement.

2.16 The objective of the pasture and legume seed production anddispersal program was to increase beef production throughdevelopment of existing pasture resources. Assistance fromthe Project enabled BAI to establish and equip a

.- g, 100-hectare pasture seed production farm, of which 501 hasbeen seeded as of 31 December 1985. A total of 2,630

.*' ' e^ X .s -^. ' ; ,.r440grams of -goot quality pasture seeds has been producedi ine'e 1983.

- 12 -

Re: Pnil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1694-PH)

2.17 The livestock 'auction" market development project wasaimed at improving the servicing of farmers and buyers byproviding centralixed marketing facilities which includeweighing scales, sheds, pens/corrals, etc. Through theProject, EAI has provided 40 livestock markets in operationwith weighing scales; dccredited 93 livestock auctionmarkets; and identified 62 livestock pooling places for

- establishment and development.

B. * AN AVAIUIENTS -

2.18 Effective 4 April 1984 an Amendatory Agreement was enforcedreducing the amount of the subsidiary loan from US $42.220million to US $42.193 million. The equivalent of US$27,000 was utilized for a comprehensive study of thelivestock milling industry undertaken by the AsianInstitute of Management (AIM) for the ninistry ofAgriculture and Food. As a result the amount of theunallocated loan proceeds was reduced from US $0.920 M toUS $0.893 M.

2.19 A second Amendatory Agreement executed on 25 October 1985finally established the amount of the subsidiary loan at US$21.76 M.

This amount comprised actual availments, brokendown asfollows:

a.' US S19.559 M for the on-lending program;b. US $2.193 M for consultancy services; andc. US $0.005 M for the unallocated portion.

2.20 Of the total allocation of US $40.000 M for on-lending theunavailed balance amounted to US $20.441 M, which wasapproved by World Bank for cancellation. Actual availmentstotalled US $19.559 14, additionally involving US $0.005 Mforeign exchange rate differentials re-classified

; "Unallocated".

-.2.21 Actual availments for.consultancy services exceeded theoriginal allocation of US $1.150 M by US $1.043 M, whichexcess was charged against original allocation for equip-

-. wment, vehicles and materials (US $0.150 M) and the unallo-cated portion (US $0.893 )0.

C. SUPERVISION OF SUB-PROJECTS

2.22 As a standard operating procedure, supervision of sub-projects is undertaken by DBP in two stages: the first,during the sub-loan releasing period; and the second, afterfull release of the sub-loan.

- 13 -

Be: Pbil. 3rd LDP/FCP (loan No. 1894-PH)

Supervision during the sub-loan releasing period involvesassessment by DBP of the progress of sub-project implemen-tation by the sub-borrower to determine when the subsequentdisbursement will be made. The first-stage supervision

* also ensures that a sub-loan relesse is utilized for the-t 't ^ approved purposes as possible deviations are imediately

prevented/corrected. Post-disbursement supervision isusually conducted 30 days after the final sub-loan releaseprovided necessary manpower is available. The second-stagesupervision looks into the completion of the sub-project,

t' *4 i<'- * ' uccess potential of the sub-project in future operations,and other conditions.

D. REVISIONS

2.23 During Project implementation there was a continuingincrease in the price of imported feedgrains, so use oflocally grown corn was promoted. Priority for financialassistance was given to piggery and poultry sub-projectslocated in the corn-producing areas. Project sites hadpreviously been concentrated within 100-km radius frommajor consumption centers.

2.24 High feed costs discouraged small commercial producers fromparticipating in the Project, although the aim was toreach this segment. As a result, financing was re-channelled to the expansion of medium and large scalepiggery and poultry enterprises.

During Project preparation, one of the objectives was theredirection of assistance to backyard/small commercial pro-ducers, which would be achieved by addressing this groupdifferently from large-scale commercial producers. Wbilethe former was to be given credit and market access, thelatter was to be assisted through a more comprehensiveapproach involving supplementary services. Recognizing theimbalance that had persisted between the development oflivestock produc$ion and the feed sub-sector, the Project

would provide some. seed money for studies and related acci-:* vities. Safeguards against risks brought about by high

feed costs were to be instituted by DBP in terms of lendingv~ > policies. -

'' '^ : Efforts of DSP to attract 'ackyerd/small cormercialprodu-cers in the iaitial stage of Project implementation werereflected in a'liberalized lending program, features ofwhich included the following:

a. Minimal equity participation;b. Nonrestrictive collateral appraisal; andc. Low interest rates.

- 14 -

Ba: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (loan No. 1894-PH)

2.25 In 1981-32, effective demand for pork and poultry meat wasnet thereby slowing down loan availments for piggery andbroiler production. abis made it possible to finance agreater number of village cattle fattening sub-projectsthan expected. However, most of these sub-projects haveshifted to cattle breeding because of shortage of feederstock.

2.26 Financing of broiler sub-projects had been de-emphasized inthe Project because of the monopolies on production inputsby integrators. Nevertheless, 343 broiler producers soughtfinancinal assistance under the Project and among them wasa uizeable number of cont'ract growers.

2.27 The polyculture of milkfish with prawns and the alternatingproduction of milkfish and solar salt were encouraged underthe Project to improve viability of fishpond operations.

2.28 During the implementation of the Project, DBP made repre-sentation with the Ministry of Finance to reouest WorldBank for certain revisions in the Loan Agreement. Amongthe significant requests approved by the World Bank are:

a. Submission of audited financial statement covering thefinal year of disbursement only;

b. Financing the computerization of the DBP ManagementInformation System as well as the development of a LoanManagement System and Data Base Management System; and

c. Beallocation of US$ 1.043 Million from 'ategory 2(Equipment, Vehicles and Materials) and Category 5(Unallocated) to-Category 4 (Consultant's Services).

S. DMPLEMENTING SCHEDUIE

2.29 The bulk of the sub-projects financed was approved duringthe initial year of Project implementation. Accountingreports indicate that all the 767 fisheries sub-projectsand 771 of the 2,877 livestock sub-projects financed wereapproved during this period (1980/81). More than 222 ofthe total number of livestock sub-projects was approved in1981/82 and less than 12 in 1982/83. (Table 5e)

The number of sub-projects financed in 1980/81 exceededthe annual target set in the TBRD Indicative Program forthe Project by 751. The overage is attributed chiefly tothe accelerated assistance for cattle sub-projects. At theend of the financing period, realization rates were 71S forthe project; 1222 for the livestock sub-sector; and 282 forthe fisheries sub-sector. (Table Sb)

.r . ..............- *...

- 15 -

Re- Phil. 3rd LDP/PCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

2.30 A preliminary analysis of implementing schedule in terms ofinvestments indicates annual lags between target and actualdraxwdown. However, this trend should be 'tributed to anunderstatement in actual investment. The figure for agiven year is a composite of partial sub-loan releasesfor different sub-projects approved within the year or sub-sequent sub-loan releases for sub-projects approved duringprevious years. On the other hand, yearly target invest--uents constitute total project costs for a given year.

These constraints should be observed in using the data pre-sented in Table Nos. 5, Sc and 5d.

F. REPORTING

2.30 Separate accounts and records for the Project wereestablished and maintained by DBP in accordance withgenerally accepted and sound accounting procedures.Reporting was strengtlhened with the installation of an MSAGeneral Ledger System as part of the development of a bank-wide MIS under the Project.

G * PROCUREMENT

2.31 The items procured for the Project were few in number anddiverse in nature and could not be bulked to attract inter-national bidding. Procurement for farm development was,therefore, made by farmers through local suppliers.Commercial outlets were adequate for the main inputs suchas construction materials, feeds, medicines, vaccines, andfishing gears.

2.32 Computer hardware purchased directly with IBRD funds wasprocured through International Competitive Bidding (ICB).On the other hand, computer facilities initially procuredwith DBP funds but re-imbursed by World Bank were acquiredlocally through negotiated purchase.

B. COSTS

2.33 Total Project Cost vas US $140.656 sillion, of which 32% orUS S45 H would be re-imbursable from IBRD. Fifty-seven per-cent (57Z) or US $80.531 H would be financed by DSP and 112or US $15.125 M, by sub-boirowers' counterpart funds.

As a result of the suspension of the Credit Component inMay 1983 and the subsequent cancellation of thte unavailedbalance of the IBRD loan, Total Project Cost decreased toUS $68.548 M. The IBRD loan was reduced to US $ 21.526 M;DBP funds, US $33.312 M; and sub-borrowers' equity, US$13.710 M. Percentage-wise, the average contribution ofassisted sub-projects ranged from 5S to 351 as A result ofDBP policy effective since 1981. On the other hand, theshares of IBRD and DBP decreased to 31S and 40%,respectively. (Table 4)

- 16 -


I. FARM INVES1IENTS

2.34 The number of sub-projects financed totalled 3,644, ofwhich 791 or 2,877 were for livestock development; and 212or 767, fisheries development. As a result of mid-courserevision, assisted livestock development sub-projects werepredominantly beef cattle. This sub-project type accountedfor 46t or 1,325 of the total number of livestock sub-loans. Of the total number of fisheries sub-projectsassisted 911 or 698 were fishpoands. (Table 5)

2.35 The total amount of loans approved was about Y531.5 M, ofwhich 69X or P366.1 M financed livestock developent sub-projects; and 31Z or 7165.4 M, fisheries development sub-projects. Because of higher investment cost, piggerysub-projects shared 542 of total amount of livestock/poultry loans approved despite accounting for only 32%of total number of sub-projects assisted. On the otherhand, beef cattle sub-projects utilized only 192 of totalamount of livestock/poultry loans approved. Fishpond sub-projects contributed 891 of total amount of fisheries loansapproved as lending for fishing vessels was, otherwise,delimited by increased construction costs. (Table 6)

. . .~~~~-1

-17-

Re: Phil 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PX)

III. PROJECT IMPACT

A. INSTITUTIONAL

BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY (BAI)

3.01 In addition to expanding the national breeding stock base fordairy cattle production, the cattle dispersal program supportedlivelihood projects such as the Bakahang Barangay by augmentingfarmers' income from milk and calves sold.

3.02 The BAI stock farm in Sorsogon (Bicol Region) has been a sourceof upgraded cattle breeders for the milkshed areas. It hasfurther developed into a demonstration and training cetter forstudents and farmers in the Region and other parts of thecountry.

3.03 Of six sub-projects comprising the research program of BAI forsmall animal nutrition (Para. 2.15) four were completed and onewas still on-going as of January 1986. Two out of three studiesincluded in another sub-project could not be undertaken because ofthe delay in processing of required documents for the purchase ofequipment for the production of leaf protein concentrates. Thesubstitute mechanical method of producing leafmeal concentratewas tried but recovery was low and processing slow, hence thestudies were discontinued.

Three studies constituting the goat nutrition and feeding manage-ment research are expected to be completed on 30 June 1986.Delays were caused by biological/budgetary constraints and drawnout processing of papers for the procurement of supplies,materials and equipment.

3.04 Nevertheless, from the researches/studies undertaken by BAI,conclusions are that cost of production of livestock and poultrycan be reduced with the use of non-conventional feedstuffs whichare locally abundant, without adversely affecting growthi,meat/egg production, and mortality. The Project-funded studieshave provided 8AI with new technological packages for furtheradoption by the livestock and poultry sub-sectors.

3.05 The targets for Project assistance to the pasture legume seedproduction of BAI were not fully attained because of delays inthe release of counterpart funds and in the purchase/delivery ofequipment. Nevertheless, the Bureau was able to minimize depen-dence an imported seeds for distribution to farmers. Moreover,the experience developed the expertise of technical staff involvedin the Project and strengthened BAI's capability to meet theseed requirements of its cooperators. Newly gained expertiseenabled modification of pasture legume seed production/dispersaltechnology then existing to suit local conditions. Finally,farmer cooperators' awareness of the value of pasture develcp-ment in improving animal productivity was increased.

- 18 -


3.06 Significant advances made by BAI in tee past in developing live-stock auction markets were heightened by the Bureau's accomplish-ment under the Project.

DKEVWPPMENT &*1K OF TIE PRILIPPINES (DBP)

3.07 The Project supplemented DBP resources for on-lending to thelivestock/poultry and fisheries sub-sectors in the equivalent-amount of US $33.32 million with US $ 19.565 million. In addi-tion the equivalent amount of US $15 from the proceeds of the YenBond Series No. 1 Issue was made available to DBP by GOP. Theadditional funds would have fixed the share of total foreignfinancing at 50Z of total project cost (excluding sub-borrowers'equity) had the proceeds been allocated for on-lending. Thescheme had been intended as an alternative to the arrangementrequested by GOP during negotiations for World Bank to increasethe loan from US$45 M to US$60 N for the same purpose but whichthe latter could not grant due to resources constraints.

Inasmuch as funds from the Yen Bond Flotation were utilized forother purposes by DBP, the amount of foreign exchange financingfor the Project remained at 36Z of total project cost (excludingsub-borrower's equity), which was IBRD's counterpart.

3.08 A self-assessment made by the DBP Data Center, Inc. (DCI) onthe implementation of the integrated computer-based ManagementInformation System (MIS) and the acquisition of better hardwareand software attributed the following impacts to this Projectsub-component:

a. The computerization efforts of DBP made substantial gains.

b. User satisfaction was improved due to the decrease in turn-around time and error occurrence levels.

c. On-line systems catering to financial requiiements of DBP on anationwide scale gave management immediate access to currentinfonmation necessary for decision-making.

Out of the implementation of the NSA General Ledger System, theKfollowing becefits have been realixed:

A. A reduction in the manpower requirement from 10 to 4;

b. Reduction in the time to complete financial reports from 2-3months to one week after end-of-month; and

c. Up-to-date posting of daily transactions.

- 19 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP,FCP (Loan No. 1894-PR)

3.09 Feedback information from 14 DBP user departments showed thefollowing results:

a. Immediate access to current information has generally beenconfirmed.

b. Seven user departments reported improved quality, accessibi-lity and timeliness of data as a result of the computeri-cation.

c. Satisfaction has been indicated by users of the GeneralLedger System, a packaged system.

d. Twelve user departments reported that errors still occur intheir computerized systems. These are primarily due toprogram bugs, input errors, specification errors and changesin specification, particularly DBP lending policies. Theseerrors are presently being addressed by DDCI.

e. Ten user departments complained of increased costs due to thecomputerization effort. This could be explained by the factthat most systems developed by DDCI are either:

(1) Still in the conversion stage wherein expenses accumulatewhile no benefits are yet realized;

(2) Or, within the payback period wherein thebenefits/savings being experienced are still paying offthe original investment.

f. Indications show that systems developed in-house are not yetefficient. Most systems are still in the stabilizationperiod wherein remaining system bugs are attended to anderrors in masterfile data which were erroneously convertedare corrected. Users and DC operations are also monitored byDC during this period to ensure conformance to predefinedsystem operating and control procedures.

It is expected that these systems will be fully efficientafter this period when operations have stabilized withrespect to the computerized environment.

g. There vere a few occasions when systems were discontinuedbefore full implemaentation. An example is the ASD ReportingSystem which was discontinued due to the followiug reasons:

(1) Significant reduction in the number of World Bank reportsrequired from 200 to 56. The system was, therefore, toocostly to operate for the benefit of the remainingreports.

- 20-


(2) Too much time covered to convert from manual to com-puterized files (6 months per quarter) since data frombranches are usually delayed or invalid.

(3) Time/cost savings were not realized, instead expensesaccumulated due to the errors during conversion period.

(4) Errors were noted on worksheets, listings and statisticalreports. These errors were attended to by DC upon noticefrom ASD. However, too much time was spent correctingthese errors such that final reports outdated their use-fulness to the end-users.

3.10 Rationalization of departmental responsibilities in the imple-mentation of the credit component facilitated upgrading of tnequality of loan appraisal standards and streamlining of loanprocessing for faster results.

3.11 The Monitoring and Evaluation System (MES) required by WorldBank to be established under LOP 11 by the defunct AgriculturalPlans and Programs Staff (APPS) was finally realized underLDP/FCP III with tbe transfer to ASD of certain functions ofthe Agriplan Unit. In May 19S3 ASD was reorganized with thetransfer of the following functions from the Agriplan Unit tothe former:

a. Monitoring and evaluation of ADB/WB-assisted agriculturalprograms, including the undertaking of project completionreports;

b. Preparation and periodic review and evaluation of theAnnual lending Program (ALP) of Read Office and Branchesfor the agricultural sector; and

c. Preparation of program proposals to World Bank for thefinancing of the agricultural sector.

Since its operation in 1984, the MES has provided the basis forcourses of action to alleviate distressed conditions of samplesub-projects. The MES has generated current data on businessactivities of various types of livestock, poultry and fisheriessub-projects on which the models used in this PCR had beenbuilt on. These models will eventually be the bases forupdating technical and financial parameters in future lending.

Also, the MES staff assisted in the collection drive of DBP.Finally, the exercise has provided ASD with the capability inproject monitoring and evaluation and the basis forestablishing a similar system for the ADB/OPEC-Assisted Lagunade Bay Fishpen Development Project.

- 21 -

Re: PhiD. 3rd LDP/PCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

3.12 Hiring of consultants' services (Para. 2.08) further enhancedthe institutional capability of DBP in handling developmentinvestments, particularly in the field of agriculture. Forone, a tra.ning program on basic livestock, crop and fisheriesproduction and marketing was designed and implemented toimprove technical competence of Branch personnel who did nothive formal education in agriculture but were neverthelessinvolved in the evaluation and supervision of various agri-cultural projects. Also, a group of agricultural staff of DSPunderwent special training/workshops to improve their knowledgeand skills to be effective trainors. They were given adequateinputs to broaden their perspective in their respective areasof specialization within the framework of developmentfinancing.

3.13 Seminars/workshops conducted under the training program from19$1 to 1984 were participated in by technical staff of DBPHead Office and Branches and seven private development banks.Tne largest participation was drawn by training courses in pro-j,'ct evaluation and supervision. About 32% of the 1,100 par-ticipants who attended the training program during thefour-year period was trained in this field. Ranking second wastraining in financial analysis which accounted for 28%; ttiird,livestock-crop-fisheries systems, 152 and the rest or 252, com-puterization for MIS,. basic accounting, and economic analysis.

3.14 The research study, "Viability of the Fishpond Industry inSamar and Leyte", provided the basis for formulating Guidelinesfor Evaluating Fishpond Projects. Tne guidelines have beenadopted by DBP since 1983 in the rehabilitation/restructuringof distressed accounts.

3.15 Tne study on the promotion of regional feedmills provided DBPwith clearer insights into and better undertaking of theproblems besetting the hog and poultry industries. It pointedout direct relationship of the livestock sector with the feed-mill industry where the success of one depended much on theother. Moreover, the study recognized that in the selection of

. feedmill sites, the financial viability of the bog and poultryfarms has to take precedence. Ekxistence of a wall-establishedseaport in a region and a surplus production of yellow cornwere likewise cited as two important considerations in theselection of feedmill sites.

That the financial viability of a 16-ton capacity feedmillrequires that it be tied up to at least a 500-sow hog farm wasin itself a recognition of the difficulty in catering mainly tothe independent small producers no matter how numerous the hogsmay be. By implications, the study would seem to emphasize theimportance of having some forms of cooperative associationamong small producers so that they may be able to integratefeedmilling in their livestock operations.

- 22 -


B. AGCICULTURAL

3.16 Through the credit component, DBP financed the acquisition of2.1 million animal/poultry stock and the development/improve-ment of 5,000 hectares of fishpond. It also assisted theestablishment of saltbeds and construction of fishing vessels,"lambaklad", and support facilities such as slaughterhouses,ice plants end slipways. (Table 5e)

3.17 Indications are that project output for 1980 to 1985 contri-buted the following percentage shares to national productionand annually fed a number of consumers:

2 Share to Number of ConsumersNational Production fed per annum (dO0)

Project Output 1980-85 1986 & after 196J-o5 1986 &(Per Annum) tRan8e after

Pork 0.96 5.70 86- 289 289Poultry Meat 2.64 3.90 590- 2,114 2,114Beef 4.78 6.00 645- 2,215 2,215Chicken/Duck eggs 1.56 2.57 76- 1,530 1,530Inland fish 0.74 1.25 16- 174 213Marine fish 2.00 2.00 1,006 1,006Prawns 1.45 2.18 2- 12 12Solar salt 0.95 0.95 1,815 1,815Ice 0.27 0.27 N.A. N.A.

3.18 Assuming that the six-year average national product.on forthese commodities is sustained in 1986 and onwards, share ofProject output is likely to increase since by then all theassisted sub-project would be fully productive, as shown by thefigures above (Para. 3.17). Wor Project commodities whose pro-duction started levelling off in 1983, i.e., marine, solar saltand ice, shares to national production would likely be main-tained in 1986 and thereafter.

3.19 It is estimated that at full development, the assistedlivestock and poultry sub-projects would supply the countryannually with about 28,359 metric tons of meat; 60.5 million

* . .pieces of chicken and duck eggs and almost 293,500 liters of.*cow and goat milk. (Table 14)

On the otber-hand, primary output from the assisted fisheriessub-projects includes 34,600 metric tons of marine/commercialfish and 7,500 metric tons of milkfish annually. Productionof secondary fishpond products is estimated at 141 MT ofprawns, tilapia and siganids and 3,630 MT of solar salt yearly.Ice would be produced at the rate of 12,640 MT every year.(Table 14)

- 23 -


3.20 Actual volume of production would be below appraisal targetbecause the number of participants is less than expected asDBP suspended the acceptance of loan applications in August1982 or about one and one-half years before closing date.Nevertheless, value of production is expected to be high

- because of increases in the price of output.

3.21 Deviations in the nature of output as a result of shiftings torelated operations have proven to be beneficial to sub-borrowers. The production of solar salt, prawns, tilapia orsiganids as secondary fishpond crops has provided additionalincome to operators. This also applies to the conversion ofcattle fattening to cattle breeding operations; and commercialbroiler raising to the contract growing scheme of broilerproduction.

3.22 Based on actual financed level of operations, the creditprogram provided employment for approximately 4,100 workers.This represents 53S of the appraisal estimate of 7,727 man-years, at 300 working days per year at appraisal. (Table 15)

.,_

- 24 -

Re: Phil. 3rd IDP/PCP (Loan No. 1894-PR)

IV. RATES OW RETURNS

4.01 Data for updating costs/prices and technical parameters ofselected appraisal models were generated through the Monitoringand Evaluation System (HES) of ASD. More importantly, the MESbaS provided current data for establishing new models for'fisheries sub-projects that evolved during Project implemen-tation. Sources of data were farm records accomplished monthlyby 52 sample sub-borrowers in a pilot area comprising thejurisdictions of six Branches and the Agricultural LoansDepartment (AID). Timeframe covered a 12-month period spanningCalendar Years 1984 and 1985. From these base data, rates ofreturns were calculated. (Table 16)

A. LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY

4.02 Of four (4) appraisal models so updated, indications are thatonly the piggery sub-project (increasing sow level from 5 to 20head) has slightly increased in IRR. This is attributed tosustained satisfactory technical performance resulting fromimproved management practices adopted in operations.

4.03 On the other hand, high expectations from cattle sub-projectshave not materialized particularly for village cattle produc-tion under the "paiwi" scheme. In practice, a sub-borrower orowner of the breeder stock does not realize sales revenues frommilk produced as these accrue to the caretakers-cooperators.Among others, such deviation from the prescribed sharingarrangement of 50-50 on calves and milk produced has con-siderably reduced IRR to the owner from 52% to 14.3%. Rates ofreturn for the sub-project type are shown in Table 16c.

4.04 With an IRR of 592 and ERR of 61.9%, broiler production throughcontract growing has proven to be more technically feasible andfinancially viable than commercial broiler production by inde-pendent growers. Financing of contract growers was an innova-tion adopted during Project implementation in which onlyinvestments for fixed assets were provided by DBP. Workingcapital was obtained by sub-borrowers from integrators.

4.05 The attraction of poultry broiler contract growing lies in theprovision of inputs and production incentives by integrators togrowers. Tn this scheme, the former supplies the latter withday-old chicks, feeds, and other inputs to raise broilersaveraging 1.3 kilograms liveweight. Finished broilers arebought back by integrators at a guaranteed payment of 71.50 perbird weighing an average of 1.3 kilograms.

- 25 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. l894-P?)

Buying price is computed at 19.50 per kilogram for every unitliveweight in excess of the initial 1.3 kilograms. Inputsrequired for additional weight gain are provided by thegrowers.

Finisied broilers produced'by assisted contract growers average1.6 kilograms liveweight.

4.06 Indications are that performances of the different types oflivestock sub-projects have been adversely affected byincreased capital investments and operating capital, especiallycosts of feeds and feed ingredients. Compounding this problemis the control of livestock product prices by integratorsand/or major producers. Slow increases in sales revenues havebeen exhibited by layer, hillbeef and broiler (commercial) sub-projects.

Nevertheless, efforts were exerted by some sub-borrowers toreduce costs by substituting imported feeds and feed ingre-dients with locally grown raw materials.

4.07 In general, the livestock/poultry sub-projects under LDP/FCPIII are very sensitive to a l0S decrease in selling price morethan to an equal percentage increase in cost of inputs.However' except for backyard piggery, these are within accep-table ratios. Backyard piggery sub-projects are very sensitiveto price and cost changes because of high dependency on grainsand by-products, which are expensive.

B. FISHERIES

4.08 The flexibility in financing allowed by IBRD under LDP/FCP IIIenhanced the development of six other fishpond models in addi-tion to the four appraisal models. Fishpond sub-projects tra-ditionally assisted through the past credit lines wererepresented by 15-hectare models either for new construction,major reconstruction, partial reconstruction. or minorrehabilitation. -

4.09 The models recently developed included the (a) monoculture ofmilkfish on an expanded area of 25 hectares; (b) polyculture of: ilkfish with prawns; and (c) combination of fishpond andsaltbed operations. These sub-projects were assisted eitherfor new construction or expansion.

4.10 Of the traditional fishpond sub-projects financed, indicationsare that existing fishponds assisted for minor rehabilitationhave the highest IRR And ERR. Except for new constructionfishpond sub-projects, the three others have higher TRR/ERR atcurrent costs and prices.

-26-

Re: Phil. 3rd IDPIFCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

4.11 Of the new models, existing fishponds had higher IRR/ERR thanthose of the newly established ones. Among the six models,existing polyculture fishponds had the highest IRR (44Z) andfishponds that produced milkfish and solar salt, the highestERR (732). (Table 16)

4.12 As mentioned in para. 2.27, adoption of the milkfish-prawn orailkfish-salt combination was a measure to improve viability offishpond operations. These cultural practices had been foundto be more technically feasible and financially viable thanm- mocultore, especially7for newly established sub-projects.

4.13 The Project envisioned to finance purse seiners in line withimprovement in fishing vessel technology. IRRa were appraisedat 281 for purse seiners with gross tonnages (GT) of 30; and242 for 50 CT. ERRs were estimated to decrease conversely withincrease in fishing vessel capacity.

During Project implementation, however, sub-projects financedwere trawlers of 35-GT and 45-GT capacities. At these volumes,7RRa were 331 and 341, respectively; while the respective ERRswere 412 and 392. The shift to sub-loan demand for trawlerswas attributed to lover investment cost as against that ofpurse seiners. (Table 5c and 16h)

4.14 Two units of ice plants were financed under the Project.Indication is that the 45-ton capacity ice plant operated moreviably ti.an the 5-ton. The former had IhR and ERR of 321 asagainst the latter's IRR of 232 and ERR of 282. (Table 16h)

-27-


V. INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE AND DEVELOPMENT

A. DSTITUTIONAL DESIGN AND GROWTH

5.01 Supervision of the implementation of the Credit Component andcoordination with participating agencies for tbe implementationof the Non-Credit Component were assumed by the AgriculturalSupervision Department (ASD). Togetber with the AgriculturalLoans Department (ALD)', ASD was organized in August 1980 fromthe abolisbed Agricultural Projects Department I and II (APO Iand II). The reorganization was necessary to accelerate thepace of DBP assistance to the national food production program.(See PCR for Treefarming II dated February 1986).

B. SUPPORTING SERVICES

5.02 Supporting services for the implementation of the creditprogram continued to be provided by the Bureau of AnimalIndustry (BAI) and the Bureau of Fisheries and AquaticResources (BFAR), which started with LDP II and EC? II. Undermemoranda of agreement formalizing the detail of BAI/BPARextension agents with DBP, terms of reference of the secondedfieldmen were as follows:

a. Conduct regular sub-project visitations;

b. Assist proponents in drawing up simple recordingsystems;

c. Assist in the formulation of balanced feed rations usinglocally available feed ingredients: (BAI)

d. Set up animal and health sr..'Jtation programs: (BAI)

e. Assist in marketing of farm produce and procurement offarm supplies;

f. Coordinate with other offices on related activities forthe promotion of an effective sub-project supervisionprogram; and

t} g. Render periodic reports to DBP on sub-projects beingsupervised.

Collection of loans was additionally assigned to thedetailed BAI/BFAR technicians.

- 28 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PR)

5.03 Since 1981 a total of 45 fisheries specialists has been detailedwith 27 DBP Branches. These BFAR technicians served the Projectin varying lengths of time, ranging from one month to 38 montnsor an equivalent of 537 man-months. Within this period thetotal number of Project beneficiaries assisted was 486.

In the extension of technical-;assistance under the Project, BFARfieldmen observed that adoption of techniques for increasing

.production was slow for first-time operators and that know-howand skills of some sub-borrowers were inadequate. Thesesituations necessitated the concentration of supervision effortsin the following:

a. Fishpond construction;

b. Farm management;

c. Repair and maintenance of dikes, water supply, gates anddrainage;

d. Pond preparation, fertilization, supplementary feeding,disease prevention, harvesting and maintaining fresihne,s offishpond products before and during marketine, and/or p.o-cessing;

e. Polyculture of bangus with other species like prawn, tila-pia, crab and also salt-making; and

f. Preparation of pond engineering designs and water supplyand drainage facilities.

5.04 In addition to dispensing technical assistance, the SFAR spe-cialists also assisted in determining Project implementationproblems. Based on their findings, drawbacks in project opera-tions included the following:

a. Inadequate sub-loans for operating/vorking capital;

b. Lack of funds to rehabilitate projects destroyed bytyphoons and floods (calamities);

-c. Tncreased project costs due to inflation and peso deva-luation; and

d. Deteriorating peace and order conditions.

Cases of speculators/get-rich-quick operators or sub-borrowerswho did not have intentions of actually going into fisnfarminghave also been reported. However, it is believed that thesewere not Project beneficiaries since DBP lending policies andprocedures would eliminate such speculators/operators.

- 29 -


5.05 A total of 22 livestock specialists from the Bureau of AnimalIndustry has assisted 19 Branches.

5.06 Services of most of the extension agents were terminated becauseof reduced Branch operations arising from suspension oflending, cost reduction measures necessitated by DBP's financialdifficulties, and availability of DBP technical men whose ser-vices were harnessed for supervision/collection since workloadfor lending activities had been reduced. As of March 1986 there

ov * --- were oanly 11 detailed technicians left assisting 10 Branches.

5.07 Periodic evaluation conducted by ASD indicates that theSAI/PAR technicians' support services have been satisfactoryto DBP and its clients.

C. STAFF TRAINING

5.08 In preparation for their involvement in the implementationof tDP/FCP III, as well as in prior projects, DBP technical.staff attended trainings which started to intensify inmid-1981. By then the Project-funded training program drawnup by foreign consultants became operational.

D. FARM CREDIT

5.09 Implementation of the Credit Component was covered byseparate special financing programs for livestock andfisheries development. Priority in extending credit was foradditional loans for sub-projects previously financed byDBP. Nevertheless, new sub-loans were also extended providedthat applicants showed proper aptitude and ability to carryout the sub-project to completion.

Credit was provided for any or a combination of thefollowing general purposes:

a. Construction/renovation and development of fixed assets;b. Installation/acquisition of machinery/equipment;c. Procurement of foundation stock;d. Operating capital and miscellaneous expenses;e. Other purposes directly related to the sub-project.

5.10 Loan proceeds were released on a staggered basis followingthe funding requirements at different stages of sub-projectdevelopment, as contained in the farm plan.

5.11 Collaterals included first mortgage on real estate property,assignment of leasehold rights and or chattel on machinery/equipment or durable assets.

- 30 -


5.12 Sub-loans vere payable from 5 years (for fishing projectsother than fishpond and fishing vessel) to 15 years (forcattle projects). Payments were required in semi-annualamortizations, except those for cattle sub-loans which weredue annually.

5.13 Grace period varied from one year (for broiler projects)to five years (for cattle project) during which onlyinterest on sub-loan was required to be paid.

E. ACCOUNTING/REPORTING

5.14 The accounting system adopted for LDPIFCP III was theModified Cash Basis. In this system DBP recognises incomeon loans and advances and all other incomes upon collectionwhile interest expenses and other financial charges onborrowings from the National Government are treated onaccrual basis. All other expenses are recorded on cashbasis. At the end of each quarter or whenever necessary,DBP prepares summaries and/or consolidated financial statements.

F. FINANCIAL PERPORMANCE AND RETURNS

5.15 Bulk of the earnings of the Credit Component was derived fromregular interest/financial charges on sub-loans. Earnings fromthis source averaged 65% of the total for 1960 to 1984.However, in the first year of implementation the main source ofearnings was service and application fees which accounted for78Z of total earnings for 1980. Reflecting the pace of imple-mentation, the share of service and application fees drasticallyfell to 25% in 1981 and to 3% in 1982. (Table 7)

5.16 On the average, salaries and other personnel benefits comprised44X of total earnings for 1980 to 1984. Expenses for this pur-pose exceeded total earnings by 3% in 1980 but eventuallynarrowed down to 14% of total earnings for 1984. Interesc onbills payable shared an average of 36% of total earnings. Thisexpense item had been more or less maintained at same level from1982 to 1984. (Table 7)

5.17 The first sub-projects assisted under the Credit Component were- still within the grace period of sub-loan'repayment in 1980 and

1981, causing low earnings for the period. For the same period,ezpenses were high because of accrued interest/financial chargeson amounts already vithdrawn from the World Bank; consultants'fees charged against operations; and salaries/personnel bene-fits. Net losses were incurred in 1980 and 1981 as a result butthese were overcome in 1982 to 1984. (Table 7)

-31-


5.18 As deferred charges, coamitment iees charged on the unavailedbalance of the loan, when included in total expenses as cost offunds. increased net losses in 1980 and 1981. Moreover, thisinclusion reduced net income from 1982 to 1984. Total ear-nings, however, still outpaced growth rate in total expenseseven with the addition of deferred commitment fees. (Table 8)

5.19 The percentage share of total earnings in average investmentshowed an uptrend from 112 in 1981 to 261 in 1984 attributed toimprovement in income generated from sources other than interescon sub-loans. On the other hand, administrative expensesdeclined as a component of average investment from 12Z in 1981to 62 in 1982 and levelled off at 51 in 1983 and 1984. Cost offunds constituted 141 of average investment in 1981 and settleddown to 1OX from 1982 to 1984. These patterns resulted in a netloss of 151 for average investment in 1981 and increasing netincome towards 1984. (Table 9)

5.20 For 1985 to 2000 it is projected that earnings (interest on sub-loans) and expenses (bills payable) will undergo downtrenddirectly proportionate to yearly reduction of IBRD funds withDBP. Despite the declining trend, however, the Credit Componentwill still te able to generate net income through the 15-yearperiod. Starting with 701 of total earnings in 1905, net incomewill close with 322 in 2000. (Table 10)

G. COST RECOVERY

5.21 As of 30 June 1985 outstanding loan balance amounted to F364,633million, of which 34.81 was fisheries sub-loans and 65.21,livestock sub-loans. (Table 11)

It is anticipated that reduction in total outstanding balancewill tend to increase from the initial 231 posted for 1965, asindicated by the difference from total releases. The trend isreflected in DBP's repayment scheme in which only a fraction ofthe sub-loan principal is paid in the early stages of the term.The larger porFion of the amortization is applied toregular/additional interests on sub-loans and other charges.After full settlement of these 6bligations, liquidation of theoutstanding principal balance is accelerated during theremainder of the term.

5.22 Total arrears amounted to 1150,059 million, of which 371 was forfisheries accounts and 63Z, livestock accounts. Arrears ratioswere about 261 for both fisheries and livestock accounts.(Tables 12 & 13)

Of the total amount of arrears, about 42.61 was over two yearspast due.

- 32 -


5.23 Of the total number of accounts, 2,955 or 75.42 had startedpaying amortization, of which 192 represented fisheries sub-projects; and 812, livestock sub-projects. More than ninety-five per cent (952) of the accounts under amortization or 722 oftotal number of accounts was in arrears, majority or 812 ofwhich was on livestock sub-loans and only 192 on fisheries sub-loans. (Tables 12a 6 13a)

5.24 The highesit incidence of arrearages among DBP Branches withsubstantial exposures in fisheries lending for the Project werePuerto Princesa, Catarman, Mati, and Zamboanga, with arrearsratios ranging from 40.120Z to 43.5782. In livestock lendingthe highest arrears ratio was 33.392Z attributed to theAgricultural Loans Department (ALD) at Pead Office. Rankingnext to ALD was Lucena Branch with 30.9952 both of which hadsubstantial investments under the Project. (Tables 12 & 13)

5.25 For DBP to surmount the arrears problem, efforts have beenconcentrated on loan collection activities, especially in theBranches. For DBP's collection drive the following majorpolicies have been adopted:

a. Implementation of rehabilitation/assistance programs fortyphoon/calamity victims

Area-specific and time-bound rehabilitation/assistanceprograms for typhoon/calamity victims implemented in1983 and 1984 were consolidated into a general program in1985. Principally, these programs were aimed at alle-viating mortgagors' repayment difficulties by extendingloan terms. These programs contributed to cash collectionssince mortgagors were required to pay 5 to 102 of totalarrears for them to qualify for rehabilitation and/orassistance.

b. Provision of incentive for prompt payment

This policy entitles mortgagors who pay their accountspromptly to a rebate equivalent to 12 of the interest due.

c. Provision of incentive for full payment

This policy provides for the condonation of additionalinterest on interest and penalty charges and reversion ofinterest rate to that prevailing before 16 August 1984 forborrowers who would pay in full their obligation with theDBP.

- 33 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1094-PP)

d. Provision of incentive for updating ot accounts

Under this policy, interest rates of past due accountswhich have been subjected to floating interest ratesshall be reduced to 182 (for loans of up to 7170,000) and21X (for loans P120,000) provided all past due amount,including advances shall be fully paid before 31 December1986.

5.26 For its part, ASD fields assistance missions to branches withhigh incidence of arrearages to undertake on-the-spot correctiveactions on problematic accounts. These branch assistancemissions conduct personalized loan collection on seriouslydelinquent big agricultural loans. On a broader framework, thelocal agricultural situation is also assessed to obtaiji basesfor policy recommendations.

R. INSTITtTION BUILDING -

5.27 During Project implementation DBP suffered financial dif-ficulties which were aggravated by poor collection performance.In order to conserve resources, DBP introduced the followingchanges in the lending guidelines:

a. Acceptance of loan applications only for priority projectsthat can be co-financed by other banks in the privatesector, except loans of not more thaa 7170,000 and assetsof P253,000 or less after financing;

b. Acceptance of loan applications only for projects coveredby special financing packages, as an exception to Item a;and

c. Acceptance of loan applications only for projects whichcan be fully funded out of available special sources suchas the World Bank as an exception to the suspension of theacceptance of new loan applications until after all thosein the pipeline have been processed.

Along the same line, DBP made representations with GOP torequest World Bank to increase level of reimbursement forthe loan from 372 to SOZ. Other requests were for theexpansion of the scope of the Project to include otherviable agricultural projects; eztension of the closing dateof the Project from 30 June 1984 to 30 June 1986; andlifting of the suspension of the Project. Approval ofthese requests by World Bank, however, was held in abeyanceuntil DBP presents a rehabilitation program.

- 34 -

Re: Phil. 3rt LDPIFCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

DBP opted for the cancellation of the uncommitted balance ofthe Loan which became effective on 17 October l198. Neverthe-less, a rehabilitation program was proposed and approved by thePresident of the Philippines in December 1985.

5.28 A rehabilitation scheme for DBP supplanting but basicallyU } the same as the one approved by the former President, was sub-

mitted to the new President in April 1986. It calls for, amongother things, a "reorganization of DBP with emphasis in le"dingto agriculture and small and medium industries and thereconstrucL;.on of the DSP Board of Governors, into a Board ofDirectors coaposed of a Chairman/President, Vice-Chairman andseven other members from the government or private sector".

.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~.

- 35 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-P1)

VI. SPECIAL ISSUES

A OPERATIONAL STATU OP SUB-PROJECTS

.O3 1tVield dati va lablefrom branch supervision sission4reports ofthe agricutural Supervision Department would indicate that busi-ness failures in small and medium-sized pig and poultry sub-loans have been proportionally greater than among large-scaleunits, a situation almost similar to what bad been theexperience under the Second Livestock Development Project.Soaring costs of animal feeds and irregular supply of day-old-chicks were cited as the principal causes of such failures.Many raisers had to reduce production capacities because of ina-bility to meet the substantial recurring costs typical of anintensive system of producing pork, eggs and poultry. Not a fewsmall producers returned to the old method of raising pigs andpoultry which relied more on the use of indigenous feedatuffavailable in the village. Oftentimes permanent and costlybuildings and other farm facilities designed for a typical com-mercial operation were either under-utilized or left totallyidle, if not being used for other purposes.

6.02 A general tendency to expand operations and attain some econo-mics of scale has been observed among large-scale producers.Sub-borrowers under this category usually were also engaged inother business ventures and had the advantage of having a widecapital base and adequate cash flows. Much of their farm pro-duce normally goes to the urban markets, particularly MetroManila. The small and medium-sized producers, on the otherhand, catered mainly to the municipal and provincial markets.The disparity in prices of farm produets necessitated large-scale producers, whose costs of production are much higher, tolook for lucrative markets as in Metro Manila and other urbancenters. Om the otber hand, the small raisers, confronted withlimited markets locally and higher cost of inputs, had to adopt

---a conservative approach of production so as to bring down costsand remain competitive with the-numerous subsistence raisers in

" the rural areas whose produce is being sold at a iucl lower*-price.*

; 6.03 A3 he Project' has demonstrated thit small pig"ery and-.poultryproducers did not have the capability to compete with largeproducers under the comercial and intensive production system.Nevertheless, small producers can be given access to creditprovided that they adopt the traditional production system toensure enterprise viability.

- 36 -

Re: Phil. 3rd WP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

6.04 In cattle, feedlot and cow-calf operations in small units andconducted iA the outskirts of towns lhave become a promiaenttrend in beef production. Tais may be attributed todeteriorating peace and order situation which preventedentrepreneurs to raise breeding cattle in traditional grazingareas.

In some instances, sub-borrowers who were given loans eitherfor a small-scale piggery or poultry unit have shifted to orcombined their operation with either goat raising or cattlefattening projects.

6.05 The strategy under the Third Livestock Development Project isthe adoption of a commercial and intensive production systemanchored primarily on non-ruminants to attain growt.} in thelivestock sector. While this situation worked positively forlarge-scale production units, such was not thie case witht respectto the small and medium-sized ones. On the contrary, many ofthe latter group, unable to compete with and match the efli-ciency and organization of the large units, were graduallysqueezed out of business, allowing the other 6roup to Zai,i moreand more control and influence over the livestock business.

6.06 Even long before the Project was conceived, the demand forfeedgrains by the livestock sector, particularly pigery andpoultry, had been outstripping the country's capacity to producesame leading to substantial growth in the impor tation offeedgrains and protein concentrates. This, however, did notseem to influence tne basic direction and general components ofthe Project when it was appraised as the same bias for commer-

cial swine and poultry production was embodied in the program.Consequently, there had been concentration of pig and poultrysub-loans under the Project except in traditional cattle raisingprovinces. Of the total sub-loans granted 77X went to tae non-ruminant sector (pig and poultry) with the balance (232) goingto the ruminant sector, mainly for beef production. Goatfarming received only less than one percent of the total.(Table 6)

6.07 The increasing dominance of the large and integrated pig andpoultry farms had likewise been a fast-emerging trend during the

seventies. Attempts to include in the program the participationof small and medium-sized operators following an intensivefarming system because of some social consideration, appeared tohave been an over-estimation of their real capacity to competewith their large counterparts.

B. SUB-PRWJECT SUPERVISION

6.08 Lack of qualified personnel in many DBP branches to providetechnical assistance and to monitor the performance ofnumerous sub-projects contributed to a certain extent to nignrates of loan default and incidence of business failure. Widelydispersed location of sub-projects financed also adverselyaffected genuine efforts of DBP to effectively supervise them.

- 37 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-P).

Wnile a Memorandum of Agreement betieetn DBP and the Bureau otAnimal Industry (tile latter to provide technical assistance toDBP clients) did exist during the implementation of the Project,the impact of such arrangement leaves much to be desired, notonly because of the limited number of livestock techniciansinvolved in relation to the number of sub-projects to be duper-vised but also for their lack of full commitment to the cause ofDBP. Todate, only 8 out of 38 BAI technicians remain on-detailwith some DBP branches.

* . ..t.

*. .* .

.

- 38 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LWP/FCP (Loan No. 1Q94-PU)

VII. CFANGES IN REPEATER PROJECT

7.01 Gontinued expansion of the livestock sector Is needed inorder to meet the growing demand for food of the burgeoninghuman population. However, because of new constraints thathave evolved vithin which animal production systems mustoperate, a broad livestock development project to be pursuedin the future would have to be premised on the following:

a. amphasis toward animal systems which are primarilygrass-eaters and do not demand so much foreignexchange in their operations;

b. Development of breeds of animals which will havepotential for multiple usage, particularly, for meatand milk;

c. Broad participation of smallhold farmers in order towiden the sector's economic base;

d. Maximized utilization of localy available resources,both conventional and indigenous;

e. Deeper appreciation of the constraints and realitiesexisting in the rural economy.

All these virtually mean that such a livestock developmentproject in the future will have to be based primarily onruminants which include cattle, carabao, goat and sheep.These types of animals, having a compound stomach, arecapable of coverting low-grade roughage, agricultural by-products and crop residues not directly useable by man, intohighly nutritious human food. Such inexpensive inputs areabundant in the countryside. Unlike in the commercial pro-duction of pigs and chicken, expansion of the ruminant sec-tor would not likely result in the growth of the country'simportation of feedgrains and.protein concentrates, and thushelp in conserving the country's scarce foreign exchangeearnings..

7.02 Efforts to increase the country's cattle population mustcontinue but should also address the more fundamental issuessuch as the very low national average on calf-crop (lessthan 50Z), inefficient use and inequitious distribution ofgovernment-owned grazing lands, as well as the problem ofanimal diseases and infestations. The problem of highinvestment cost of the ranch-type operations and thedeteriorating peace and order in many traditional grazing

- 39 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-Pl)

areas, however, would require tne reorientation of the stra-tegy towards emphasis on smalihold cattle farming. Asidefrom its social implications, such approach will make betteruse of the vast but oftentimes wasted resources available innumerous farmlands. Technology on silage making vill naveto be popularized among small farmers to ensure adequate andsteady supply of roughage even during off-seasons.

7.03 The country's extreme dependence on imported milk and milKproducts would likewise necessitate the development of thelocal dairy industry, no matter how long and slow the pro-cess would be. Towards this direction, initial efforts toupgrade the local stock in order to improve their geneticpotential for commercial milk production will have to takeplace at a much faster rate, and at wider scale to includeanimals in backyard farms. In addition, establishment ofnucleus dairy units in strategic places would be veryessential not only for modelling purposes but also in pro-viding related support services to small satellite farms.

But more importantly, there is need for the formulation and,later on, a well coordinated implementation, of a nationalbreeding program which is to be founded on the local >reedswhere environmental adaptation is basic to a succesetul pro-duction, and aimed at producing dual type of animal be itlarge or small ruminants for simultaneous production ofmeat and milk.

7.04 The commercial swine and poultry sectors apparently havealready attained that stage where pouring of developmentfunds may no longer be necessary. Therefore, developmentefforts should be directed mainly for the benefit of thesubsistence raisers in backyard farms. Because almost everyhousehold has a few head of pigs and/or chicken to raise,improvement in taeir production levels and efficiencies willcertainly have a much greater social and economic impactthan when commercial farms are allowed to expand evenfurther. But more than anything, marketing support toassure the backyard raisers reasonable returns for theirproduce would be an important consideration.

7.05 Part-of the overall livestock development project is theneed to institutionalize the delivery of veterinaryservices. Economic losses arising from death of animals,heavy infestation and high morbidity could run into severalmillions of pesos in a tropical country like thePhilippines. Such amount of losses should easily justifythe establishment of provincial veterinary centers withadequately equipped saboratories which will solely beresponsible for the surveillance, control and eradication oflivestock diseases. Eliminating some important diseasescould possib'y open foreign markets for Philippine animalproducts.

- 40 -


7.06 There is likewise a need to continue the thrust towardsfurther development and expansion of the fishery sector withemphasis on th,e aquaculture sub-sector to meet tr,e growingfish requirement of the population in tthe com.ng years.However, for such thrust to have a socio-economic impact inthe light of the launching of the country's econmomic reco-very program, it would have to be anchored on the following:

a. There must be emphasis towards generation of wealth fromthe fisheries resources through projects utilizing tech-nology that does not demand much foreign exchange in itsoperationi but rather contribute to the accumulation offorein exchange.

It has been recognized that the industry is beset with aprogressively declining catch efficiency of commercialdeep- sea fishing vessels, which are import -dependenton engine and equipment spare parts, fuel and nets,because of increase in fishing fleet operation and theprobability of resource depletion in traditionally knownfishing grounds. On the other hand, aquacultureprojects are known to have improved production per unitarea even as the area in operationx is increasing. Taeonly known import component in the extensive productionof bangus, sugpo and tilapia is inorganic fertilizerwhicn usually comprises less than one-third of theoperating cost. Thus, it would be practical to limitthe number of fishing vessels to existing levels atldincrease their efficiency by repowering and improvingfishing technology. qence, the aquaculture sub-sectorwill bear the burden of filling the supply-demand gap.

b. There must be a broad participation of small fishfarmers to upgrade their livelihood and widen theireconomic base. This can be done by allowing experiencedfishpond caretakers to operate individually or collec-tively idle or new fishponds within one fishpond system.This scheme will be beneficial to the government'seffort of improving the lot of the rural populationsince this will lead to the equitable distribution ofwealth, improve production, and allow fish farmers toenjoy the full fruits of their labor.

c. Available government demopstration farms must beharnessed to develop viable technology on aquacultureprojects utilizing organic fertilizers from indigenousmaterials and fish fry which are locally availableand/or can be introduced and reproduced in the area atthe least cost.

d. The number of trained and experienced extension officersmust be increased and their roles strengthened to ensurethe transfer of viable fisheries technology and thesupervision of projects as well as to inculcating in theminds of borrowers-operators credit consciousness.

- 41 -


VIII. CONCLUSION

8.01 The objectives of the Project were attained, particularly inproviding support for institutional development tnrougn thenon-credit component. Inspite of shortfalls in tar6ets, tilecredit component provided DBP with financial assistance inthe amount of US $53 million (including GOP counterpartfunds) to some 3,644 livestock/poultry producers andfishermen.

8.02 For DBP, institutional development was enhanced by the tech-nical assistance sub-component, the objective of which wasto strengthen planning and implementation of the Project.Technical assistance to DBP enabled the formulation andimplementation of an expanded training program in lendin4operations; conduct of studies; and establishment ofmonitoring/evaluation and management information systems.

The training program upgraded staff capability for sub-loanevaluation and economic/financial analysis, to which isattributed the development of new sub-project mixes based ontechnical feasibility and financial viability. The study onviability of fishpond projects in Samar and Leyte Provinceswas the basis for framing a more responsive guideline insub-loan evaluation. Tne pilot monitoring and evaluationsystem has shown potentials for becoming an effectiveplanning instrument; and the management information systemhas started centralizing the widely dispersed Branchreporting network.

8.03 Support services discharged by the Bureau of Animal Industry(SBAI) for the livestock industry which at the same timefacilitated Project implementation were enhanced by the non-credit component. More importantly, out of the Project-funded studies undertaken by SAI, new technological packageson small animal nutrition have been developed.

8.04 On the other other hand, the abolition of Fishery IndustryDevelopment Council (FIDC) and eventual transfer of itsfunctions to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, and therevision of the program delayed the implementation of thestudies for the fishery industry beyond the extended closingdate for the non-credit component of the Project (30 June1986). Indications are that this sub-component will not befurther implemented. Considering that the revised programconcentrated on a review of marine resources and technologyevaluation, its result could have provided the basis ofsetting DBP lending priorities for deepsea fishing.

8.05 Based on actual availments from the US $40 million loan fromIBRD only US $19.559 million or 482 was utilized for thecredit component. In terms of target number of sub-projects, only 70.82 was assisted. The shortfalls in targetinvestments and number of sub-projects were aggravated by

- 42 -


the series of suspensions in 1983 which culminated in thecancellation of the unavailed balance of the credit inOctober 1984. These courses of action arose fromfinancial difficulties undergone by DBP but, moreover,sub-loan comnitment for marine fishing had stopped afterthe initial year of Project implementation.

Target number of sub-projects for marine vessels/traditionalbancas was 2,326 or 451 of aggregate while target invest-ments amounted to S14.3 M or 18.31 of total. Total numberfinanced was only 63 involving $2.143 M or an accomplishmentof 2.n and 15.OZ, respectively.

8.06 In the project design, emphasis on credit was placed onincrease in fish production through expanding fish farmingand offshore commercial fishing. The sub-sector accountedfor 54Z of target number of sub-projects and 532 of creditallocation. The change in thrust to fisheries fromlivestock/poultry production was based on lower cost ofproduction of fish than that of livestock/poultry.

Assistance for. fish production from offshore commercialfishing was geared towards exploitation of new geographicareas and a wide spectrum of vessel sizes, with priority onsmaller fishing boats. The objective to reach sustenanceand municipal fishermen was bolstered by the prohibition ofcommercial fishing within seven kilometers from shore, as anational policy. However, assistance from the project forthis purpose was restrained by the availability of loansfrom the Government-behest program, "Biyayang Dagat" whereas a conduit bank DBP approved 330 sub-loans in the amountof 72.9 million as of 31 July 1982.

Regarding financing of larger size fishing vessels, demandfor loans was subdued because of increased costs ofconstruction materials and fuel and restrictive lendingpolicies resulting from financial difficulties. Adopted in1981 and 1982, the policies were as follows:

a. Increase in the basic interest rates, application fees,.1' ... and other charges;

b. Change in debt-equity ratio and collateral requirements- '. 9 for loans to be secured by government land covered by

,; PLA/FLA;

c. Requirement of co-financing with other banks for appli-cants with loans of more than 7170,000 and whoseassets exceed 7250,000 after financing; and

d. Use of income tax returns as the basis for determiningcapacity to generate the equity requirement/repay theloan.

- 43 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PI)

Implementation of Project design with respect to marinefishing was restricted by increased material and fuel costs;availability of substitute source of funds under thenBiyayang Dagat Program" of government; and stringent DBPfinancing policies.

8.07 Based on the classifirtation of the Bureau of AgriculturalEconomics (BAECON) that backyard or small-scale producers

- of pigs and other small livestock are those with 20 head orless, it may be said that the sub-projects assisted underthe Project were medium- and large-scale. Tne averagecapacity of piggery projects was 18 sov-level or about 180head at any given time which, per BAECON's definition, iscommercial. The Bureau's standard 20-head or two to threesow-level project was not financed despite efforts of DBP tore-direct lending towards this scale of operation.

8.08 Under the commercial and intensive production system adoptedin the credit program, small-scale livestock/poultry sub-projects so defined had very low chances of survival vis-a-vis medium- and large-scale. This approach required use ofcommercial feeds, medicines, vaccines, feed supplements, andinfrastructure, the prices of which rose during Projectimplementation thereby increasing cost of production. Evenamong some medium-scale operators, inputs were not regularlyused, resulting in outbreaks of pests and diseases and poorquality of produce. Further aggravating low quality of out-put was the use of substitute feeds to reduce cost of pro-duction. The overall impact of these constraints was thatfarm gate prices for the produce were low.

The Project concept that commercial producers can use crediteffectively and quickly respond to business opportunitiesprecluded backyard livestock/poultry raisers, given tne pre-vailing financial difficulties.

8.09 The more successful medium- and large-scale commerciallivestock producers had che capability to infuse additionalcapital, when necessary, which gives them the followingbuilt-in advantages.

-} a. Efficient Production. Available capital enabled medium-and large-scale operators to engage in bulk buying of

;- - imported feed ingredients at cheaper prices and assuredcontinuous feed supply.

b. Good Quality Feed Rations. With the services of hirednutritionists high quality and balanced feed rationscould be formulated.

c. Technical Back-Up. Services of consultants in prac-tically every aspect of farm operation could be available.

- 44 -

Re: Pbil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-Pul)

4. High Prices. Because of good quality of produce andaccess to urban markets, medium- and large-scale opera-tions enjoyed higher output prices.

e*. Resiliency. Nedium- and large-scale producers had thecapability to restore their projects back to normaloperations after a setback.

8.10 With the financing of large-scale pi8gery and poultry sub-projects, two issues were anticipated by DBP, namely:

a. Deviation from the objective of the IBRD credit line toassist small- and medium-sized producers; and

b. Distortion of the supply-demand balance already attainedfor pork and poultry (chicken) products if entry of bigproducers in the market forces out the smaller ones.

In response to the clarification requested by DBP on self-sufficiency, the National Economic and Development Authority(NEDA) stated that there was the general indication thatsuch was existing. Nevertheless, continuous provision ofcredit was deemed necessary by NEDA to maintain the selfsufficiency momentum, provided the industry situation isclosely monitored and approval of large loans treated on acase-to-case basis. In addition, NEDA recommended that theshare of credit for cattle production in the total loanablefunds for the livestock sector be increased.

8.11 Considering that assistance to backyard livestock producerswas available from Government livelihood programs, the roleof DBP as a major source of medium- and large-size loans wasfirmed up during Project implementation. The desegregationaccounts for the inability of the Project to reach thetarget clientele. Moreover, shortfalls in target credit forpiggery and poultry may also be attributed to DBP's regu-lated financing because of self-sufficiency in these

* sub-sectors.

8.12 During appraisal, Project justification was pre-conditionedon DBP's capability to provide the followini supportservices: -

a. Upgrading the quality of sub-loan application standard;. and streamline sub-loan processing;

b. Strengthening of staff capability for economic analysis;and

c. Updating leading policies to counter risks.

- 45 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/?CP (Loan No. 1894-PH)

8.13 The DBP, through the Agricultural Supervision Department,consolidated its quality control services into a program tocover not only WP/FCP III but also its various agriculturalcredit lines. ahe program consisted of assessment of Branchagricultural lending activities; extension of technicalassistance to the Branches; and conduct of agricultural sub-sector situation reviews. Specific activities included thefollowing:

a. Sub-project operations analysis aimed at reducingarrearages and incidence of business failures and empha-sizing the need for farm-level monitoring andsupervision;

b. Appraisal of loan proposals;

c. Loan purpose verification for special sub-projects; and

d. Technical and financial analysis of exceptional casesinvolving problem accounts.

Other measures included updating of lending policies (Paras.2.04; 2.23 to 2.26; and 3.13); rationalization of departmen-tal responsibilities (Paras. 3.09 and 5.01); implementationof a comprehensive agriculture staff training program(Paras. 3.12 and 5.05); and expansion/upgrading of computerfacilities for the HIS (Paras. 2.09 and 3.08).

8.14 The efforts of DBP in resolving the foregoing appraisalissues (Para 8.12) was well appreciated by World Bank, asindicated in a communication from Mr. K. G. V.. Krishna toDBP Chairman Cesar Zalamea (8 April 1984), excerpts of wthichifollows:

"Concerning livestock and fisheries operations,I am pleased to tell you that the mission wasimpressed with the caliber of the staff working onthese projects and the character of most of the'investments reviewed. xxx"

'Concerning computerization of DBP managementinformation system, the Mission reported that the

* component was proceeding well: staff at DBP DataCenter have satisfactorily taken into account thefluidity of current DBP organisation in systemdevelopment. xxx"

- 46 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1894-PR)

The same view was reiterated by Mr. Ralph Wadsworth in hisletter to DBP Chairman Jesus P. Estanislao (9 June 1985)saying he was

"zxxx glad to learn (from the Quality Control ServicesReport of ASD) that efforts of ASD in conducting thequality control of the branch's agriculture portfoliohave brought about additional cash collection, par-ticularly from other wise inactive accounts. xxx"

8.15 The obstacles that affected Project implementation werevell-known to World Bank missions that visited the countryfrom 1981 to 1984. For problems that could be controlled bythe implementing agencies, specific alternatives weresuggested by the World Bank. Information from availablerecords show the following actions/suggestions of the WorldBank:

a. On the observed lag in commitments for marine vessels,WS suggested the financing of tuna fishing andinfrastructure investment.

b. On the trend towards financing of large enterprises out-side Metro Manila but which rely on the urban market foroutlet, the Bank asked DBP to assess adequacy oftransportation facilities and costs; and impact on'small- and medium-scale enterprises.

c. On the agriculture staff training program initially con-fined to livestock and fisneries, IBRD recommended theexpansion of scope to include DdP staff's needs in 'allmajor sub-sectors in agriculture.

d. On the trend towards cattle financing, consent was givenfor the opening of new Project areas.

e. On the arrears problem, the World Bank recommended thedissemination to the Branches of the results of thecomprehensive supervision missions on agriculturallending and collection introduced by ASD.

However, for problems which stemmed from the depressed eco-nomy, the Bank was circumspect, advising no more thanflexibility in the implementation of the Project.

8.16 By and large, while the World Bsank did not anticipate thedevelopments that were to affect project implementation, itgained insights into circumstances through feedback fromsupervision missions and open communications with DBP.

- 47 -

Re: Phil. 3rd LDP/FCP (Loan No. 1Z94-P?)

IX. RECO1EYDATIOtZS

9.01 DBP has developed technical and financial capabilities inimplewenting financing programs for livestock and fisherydevelopment, having been involved in this activity since1958. On this basis, it is recommended that the institu-tion's expertise be harnessed for the economic recoveryprogram of the Philippines.

9.02 Considering the financial and economic crisis that thecountry is presently undergoing, DBP's immediate concernshould be the rehabilitation of distressed sub-projects,particularly of smallholders. Towards this end, thethe primary objective of DBP's financing programs snouldbe the improvement of per unit productivity to ootaintarget aggregate production levels.

For the livestock and inland fishery sub-sectors, financingassistance should be confined to the provision of workingcapital for existing sub-projects and should veer away fromestablishment oi new sub-projects.

On the other hand, assistance to the marine fishery sub-sector should include provisions for working capital,modernization of fishing gear and equipment, hull and enginerepairs, and re-powering of (but excluding construction ofnew) fishing vessels.

9.03 In extending revitalization loans, DBP should give priorityto its prime clients.

9.04 Funds for financing programs should be domestically sourcedto minimize demand for foreign exchange and cost ofhar.dling. If funds are provided by foreign sources,assistance should be in the form of grants-in-aid and simi-lar programs.

9.05 Flexibility in financing, which was allowed by the WorldBank and adopted by DBP in this Project, should be pursuedin future projects, but discriminately.

TABLE 1. UDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Quarterly target and actualdisbursement of funds, 1981 to 30 June 1986

Periodic Disbursement Cumulative Disbursement(IBRD -. 37) (TBRD - 37Z)

Period Overage/ Overage RealizationtYear Quarter Target Actual S_ortfall) Target Actual (Shortfall) Rate (Z)

(In million Dollars)

1981 1 - 8 1.419 $ 1.419 $ _ 1.419 S 1.4192 - 3.110 3.110 - 4.529 4.529 -3 1.000 2.506 1.506 1.000 7.035 6.035 703.50 14 3.000 1.819 (1.181) 4.000 8.854 4.854 221.35 >

1982 1 3.000 2.244 ( .756) 7.000 11.098 4.098 158.542 4.000 1.232 (2.768) 11.000 12.330 1.330 112.093 4.000 2.274 (1.726) 15.000 14.604 ( .396) 97.364 .4.000 2.143 (1.857) 19.000 16.747 ( 2.253) 88.14

1983 1 4.000 1.227 '2.773) 23.000 17.974 t 5.026) 78.1k2 4.000 .476 (3.524) 27.000 18.450 ( 8.550) 6i1.333 4.000 .521 (3.479) 31.000 18.971 (12.029) 61.204 ".000 .322 (3.678) 35.000 19.293 (15.707) 55.12

1984 1 4.000 .104 (3.896) 39.000 19.397 (19.603) 49.742 3.000 .851 (2.149) 42.000 20.248 (21.752) 48.213 2.000 .322 (1.678) 44.000 2J.570 (23.430) 46.754 1.000 .041 ( .959) 45.000 20.611 (24.389) 45.80

1985 1 .259 .259 - 20.870 (24.130) -2 - .454 .454 - 21.324 (23.676) -3 - .554 .554 - 21.878 (23.122) -4 - .002 .002 - 21.880 (23.120) -

TABLE I - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH) Quarterly target and actualdisbursement of funds, 1981 30 June 1986

Periodic Disbursement Cumulative Disbursement(IBRD - 37Z) (ILRD - 372)

Overage/ Overage/ RealizationYear Quarter Target Actual (ShortfalL) Target Actual (Sbortage) Rate (2)

( in Million Dollars)

1986 1 $ .310 $ .310 _ 22.190 $ (22.810) -2 - .040 .040 - 22.230 (22.770) -

TOTAL $45.000 S22.230 (S22.770) $45.000 $22.230 $ (22.770) 49.4

NOTE: Availment as of6/30/86 $22.230

Requested tt becancelled $20.441

Unavailed as of6/30/86

TABLE 2 - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PHl): Quarterly avaitment of funds,1B1 Ito 311 June 1986

CUMULATIVED B P I B R D D 8 P I B R D

lear Quarterly (r -) ('P m) (P $$M) (W M) (IF M) (US I H)

1981 1 F 18.546 P 10.892 $ 1.419 7 18.546 F 10.892 S 1.4192 42.072 24.709 3.110 60.618 35.601 4.5293 32.743 19.230 2.423 ^03.361 54.B31 6.9524 24.379 14.318 1.763 117.740 69.149 8.715

1982 1 31.509 18.505 2.240 149.249 87.654 10.9552 17.374 1.204 1.226 166.623 97.858 12.1813 32.947 19.350 2.274 199.570 117.208 14.455 H

4 32.254 13.943 2.142 231.824 136.151 16.597

1983 1 17.311 10.167 1.077 249.135 146.318 17.6742 7.763 4.559 .459 256.898 150.877 18.1333 9.200 5.403 .493 266.098 156.280 18.6264 2.629 1.544 .111 266.727 157.824 18.737

1984 1 .455 .267 .019 269.182 158.091 il.7562 17.286 10.152 .700 286.468 168.243 19.4563 .630 .370 .021 287.098 168.613 19.4774 .249 .146 .007 287.347 168.759 19.484

1985 1 .444 .261 .014 287.791 169.020 19.4982 2.099 1.233 .067 28d.890 170.253 19.56534 _ _

TOTAL F 289.890 717U.253 719.565 7 289.890 7170.253 7 19.565

NOTE: Financ ing rate:IBURD 37XDBP - 632

TABLU 3 - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Quarterly availment of fundsNon-Credit Component, 1981 to 30 June 1986

Equipment EquipvesaVehicles & Breeding Cattle for Consultant's Vebicle4 & Breeding Cattle for Constant 's

Year Quarter Materials Stock Dispersal Services Total Materials Stock Disersal Services Total

MILLION PESOS MILLION US DOLLARS

1981 1 7- F - P - P - P - $ - $ - 8 - $ - $ -

2 - - _ . _ --

3 - - - .667 .667 - - - .0)4 .08'.4 - - - .451 .451 - - - .055 .055

1982 1 - - - .031 .031 - - - .004 .0V4 >

2 - - - .048 .u48 - - - . .006 'U

3 -- . - - - _ _ _ _ -

4 -- - - - - _ - _ _

1983 1 - - - 1.304 1.3U4 - - - .150 .1St)2 - . - - - - .- _ _ - _

3 .2S2 ' - - .184 .436 .029 - - .017 .0464 1.780 - -. 100 1.880 .205 - - .007 .212

1984 1 - - - 1.195 1.195 - - - .085 .OdS2 .043 1.237 - .044 1.324 .005 .142 - .00o3 .15u3 .690 - - 4.005 4.695 .079 - - .222 .31)14 .291 - - - .291 .0h34 - - - .tl34

1985 1 1.601 - -. S22 2.123 .184 - - .tJ61 .2442 .p14 - 1.473 1.8.:je 3.367 .0U2 - .169 .216 373 .078 - - 4.743 4.321 .009 - - .545 .54 - - - .015 .")1S - - - .oVZ .0u2

1986 1 - - - 2.706 2.706 .547 - - .311 .3112 - _ - _ _- .34w .348 .tV.u_ .04')

TOTAL ' P 4.749 p 1.237 P 1.473 P 13.2h3 P 25.70s2 $ .5'X7 $ .14k S .169 $ 1.8u1 $.A.605

NOTE: Finauncing rate: I1R) - IW Z

TABLE 4 -.LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Appraisal and actual

project cost, by source of funds, 1980 to 30 June 1986

Appraisal Actual

Amount Distribution Amount Distribution Realization Rate

Sources of Funds V US $M S __ M

I B R D 9 45.000 32 $ 22.230 32 49.4

D B P 80.531 57 33.312 a/ 48 55.0

8ub-Borrowers 15.125 11 13.710 bl 20 90.6

T 0 T A L *140.656 100 $ 69.252 100 49/2

a/ Converted peso amount of 7289.890 million usting average rate of 78.70223 - US $1.00.

b/ Per Cir. 2, s. 1981, the rate of beneficiarie's contribution to total cost of investment projects

ranges from 52 to 35Z, or an average of 202.

POTS: The amount of US $20.441 Million was requested by the GOP to be cancelled; approved by IBRD.

TABLE 5 - IP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Target Number of Sub-Projects Financedand amount of Sub-Loans to 1981/82

Type of NUMBER NMOUNT OF SUB-LOANSub-Projecti (Shortfall)/ (Shortlall)/Financed Actual Target Overage Actual 1/ Target 1/ OveraAe

(US$ )LIVESTOCK

Piggery 906 1,850 (944) 22.006 30.100 8.094Egg Production 209 300 ( 91) 10.972 bt 2.700 b/ 8.272 b/Other Small Livestock 436 100 a/ 336 .715 1.200V!/ (0.485)

Broiler 326 - - (c) c) (c ) Duck 23 - -Quail 3 - -Goat 84 - -

Cattle 1,325 110 1,215 9.231 2.300 6.93JHill 181 65 116 2.961 1.900 1.031Village 1',002 45 957 4.941 0.400 4.541Coco-Beef 142 - 142 1.339 - 1.339

Slaughter Douse I - 1 0.039 - 0.039

Sub-Total 2.877 2.360 517 42.963 36.300 6.663

FISHERIE8

Inland 698 450 248 16.661 27.400 (10.719)Saltbed 3 - 3 0.074 - 0.074Lambaklad I - 1 0.061 - U.061Ice Plant 2 - 2 0.160 - 0.160Marine Vessels 63 a/ 2,326 (2,263) 2.143 a/ 14.300 a/ (12.157)

Traditional Bangus - 2,25012 GT - 3030U T - 30 - -5U CT - 875 GT - S

150 GT - 3 _

TABLE 5 - LDP|PCP IIT (Loan No. 1894-pH): Target Number of Sub-Projects Financedand amount of Sub-Loans to 1981/82

Type of NUMBER AMOIUT OF SUB-WAN

Sub-Projects (Shortfal l)/ (ShortfalI)i

Financed Actual -Taret Overage Actual 1/ Target I/ Overage

( US $1)Family Fish Traps - 8 (8) - -

Fishing (gear & equipment) - - (d) (d) (d)

Slipway - 0.108 - 0.108

Sub-Total 767 2,784 (2,017) 19.227 42.700 (22.473)

GRAND TOTAL 3,644 5,144 (1,500) 62.190 78.000 (15.810)

REALIZATION RATES (X) NUMBER AMOUNT

Livestock Credit 121.907 118.36Fisheries Credit 27.55 46.11Overall 70.83 79.73

_______________

1/ Foreign Exchange Rate 77.40 - US $1.00al Breakdown not reported1 Includes broiler financingcl Included in egg proO"tctiond/ included in Marine vessel

TABIS Sa. - lDP|PCP III (Loan No. 1894-PR): Target and actual Number ofsub-projects, by year, 1980/81 to 1981/82

Average/Year Actual Target (Shortfall) Realization Rate (X)

1980-81 2,980 1,702 1,278 175.08

1981/82 658 1,712 (1,054) 38.43 ,

1982/83 6 1,730 (1,724) 0.34

Total Number 3,644 5,144 (1,500) 70.83

Table 5b - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Target and Actual Number

of Sub-Projects, by sub-sector and year, 1980/81 to 1982183

1980/81 1981182 1982/83

Number Overage/ Number Overage/ Number Overage/ Total Number Overage/

Sub-Project Type Actual Target (Shortfall) Actual Target (Shortfall) Actual Target (Shortfall) Actual Target (Shortfall)

LIVESTOCKPiggery 1/ 709 616 93 196 616 (420) 1 618 (617) 906 1,850 (944)

PoultryLayer 2/ 132 100 32 77 100 ( 23) - 100 (100) 209 300 ( 91)

Other 31 242 33 209 109 33 76 1 34 ( 33) 352 100 252

CattleHill-Beef 4/ 133 15 lid 46 20 26 2 30 ( 28) 181 65 116

Backyard/Village 5/ 807 10 797 195 15 180 - 20 20) 1,002 45 95

Coco-Beef 6/ 105 - 115 35 - 35 2. - 2 142 - 141

Goat Raising 84 - 84 - - 8 - 84 84

Slaughter House I I - - - - - - I I 1

Sub-Total 2.213 774 1,439 65X 784 126 6 802 796 2,877 2j 60 517

1/ Deducted 45 projects which are either cancelled or no records of release

T/ Deducted 7 projects which are either cancelled or no records of release



5/ Deducted 16 projects vhich are either cancelled or no records of release

6/ Deducted 4 projects which are either cancelled or tlo records of release

Table 5b - LDP/FC., tIl (Loan No. 1894-PH): Target and Actual Numberof Sub-Projects, by sub-sector and year 19N0/81 to 1982/83

1980/81 1981/82 1982/83Number Overage/ Number Overak,i./ Number Overage/ Total Number Overage/

Sub-Project Type Actual Target (Shorttall) Actual Target (Shortiail) Actual Tarxet (Shortfalt) Actual Target (Shortfall)

FISHERIESFishpond 698 150 548 - 150 (150) 150 (150) 698 450 248Saltbed 3 - 3 - - - - - 3 - 3"Lambaklad" I - I - - - - 1 - IDeepsea/Marine 63 778 (715) _ 778 (778) - 778 (778) 63 2,334 2,271Ice Plant 2 - 2 - - - - - - 2 - 2Slipway Included in Marine

Sub-Total 767 928 (161) - 928 (928) - 920 928 767 2,784 2,017 g

Total Number 2,980 1,702 1,278 658 1,712 (1,054) 6 1,722 1,730 3,644 5,144 1,500

REALIZATICA RATES (2)Livestock Credit 121.907Fisheries 27.55Overall 70.83

Table Sc - LDPIFCP III (Loan No. 1894-PR): Target and Actual Sub-Loan

Releases, By Sub-Sector and By Year, 1980/31 to 1985/86

1980/81 1981182 1982/83 1983/84

Number Overage/ Number Overagel Number Overage/ To-ta Number OvertagelSub-Project Type Actual Target (Shorttall) Actual Target (Shortfall) Actual,Target (Shortfall) Actual Target (Shorttall)

Million US Dollars

LIVESTOCK

Piggery 0.720 11.500 (10.780) 11.088 11.500 ( 0.412) 7.951 11.500 ( 3.549) 1.992 None ( 1.992)PoultryLayer a/ 0.404 1.000 0.596 4.665 1.000 3.665 4.904 1.100 3.804 0.628 - 0.628

Others - 0.430 ( 0.430) 0.150 0.430 ( 0.280) 0.179 0.440 ( 0.261) 0.007 - 0.007

CattleHillbeef 0.088 0.500 0.412 1,188 0.680 0.508 1.354 1.020 0.334 0.254 - 0.254

Backyard/Village 0.519 0.090 0.429 1.927 0.130 1.797 1.735 0.180 1.555 0.104 - 0.1u4

Dairy 0.088 - 0.088 0.336 - 0.336 0.198 - 0.198 - - 0.14t4

Cocobeef 0.028 - 0.028 0.584 - 0.584 0.568 - 0.568 0.104 - 0.104

Goat Raising 0.001 - 0.01 0.111 - 0.111 0.244 - 0.244 0.011 - 0.011

Slaughterhouses 0.020 - 0.020 0.019 - 0.019 - - - -

Sub-Total 1.86d 13.520 11.652 20.068 13.740 6.328 17.133 14.240 2.893 3.100 - 3.100

FISHERIES

Fishpond 0.531 10.200 ( 9.669) 7.184 10.200 ( 3.016) 6.932 10.400 ( 3.468) 1.418 - 1.418

Saltbed - - - 0.035 - 0.035 0.020 - 0.02(0 0.019 - 0.019

"Lambaklad" - - - - - - 0.049 - 0.049 0.012 - 0.012

Deepsea/lMarine 0.006 5.560 5.554 1.090 5.56J 4.470 0.749 5.580 4.871 0.202 - 0.202

Ice Plant - - - - - - 0.119 - 0.119 0.041 - 0.041

Slipway 0.071 - 0.071 0.015 -0.15 0.O11 - 0.011 0.011 - 0.011

Sub-Total 0.608 15.760 (15.152) 8.324 15.760 ( 7.436) 7.840 15.980 ( 8.140) 1.703 - 1.703

Total Credit 2.476 29.280 (26.81)4) 28.392 29.50J ( 1.106) 24.973 30.220 ( 5.247) 4.803 - 4.803.. ~~ /aA u==_ = 4 ==S5 ata WI =S: ma=u .uUu 5==. na

able 5c - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Target and Actual Sub-LoanReleases, By Sub-Sector and By Year, 19U0/81 to 19d5/1.6 (as continued

1984/85 1985/86 T O T A LOverage/ Overage/ Overage Realization

ub-Project Type Actual 1/ Target 2/ (Shortfall) Actual li Target / (Shortfall) Actual 1/ Target V (Shortfall) Rate (2)

Million US Dollars.VESTOCK

iggery 0.221 - 0.221 0.034 - 0.034 22.006 34.500 (12.49'.) 63.78oultryLayer a/ 0.271 - 0.271 0.100 - 0.100 10.972 3.100 7.872 353.94Others 0.005 - 0.005 0.004 - 0.004 0.345 1.300 ( 0.955) 26.54attleHillbeef 0.042 - 0.042 0.025 - 0.025 2.951 2.200 0.751 134.14Backyard/VillaUe 0.019 - 0.019 0.014 - 0.014 4.318 0.400 3.918 1,079.50Dairy - - - - - - 0.623 - 0.623 -Cocobeef 0.054 - 0.054 0.001 - 0.001 1.339 - 1.339 -oat 0.002 - 0.002 0.002 - 0.002 0.370 - 0.370 -.laughterlhouses - - - - - 0.039 - 0.039 _

Sub-Total 0.614 _ 0.614 0.180 0.180 42.963 41.500 1.463 103.52

ISHERIES

'ishpond 0.342 - 0.342 0.274 - 0.275 16.681 30.800 (14.119) 54.16.altbed - - - - - - 0.074 - 0.074 -'Lambaklad" - - - - - - 0.061 - 0.061 -ieepsea/Marine 0.081 - 0.081 0.055 - 0.055 2.143 16.700 (14.557) 12.83ce Plant -O - - 0.160 - 0.16D -;lipway 0.108 0.1J_;ub-Total 0.423 - 0.423 U.3329 0.329 19.227 47.500 (28.273) 2.60_

'otal Credit 1.031 - 1.037 0.509 - 0.509 62.190 89.000 26.810 69.86

| Excludes subborrowers' equity/ Includes subborrowers' equity

'I Includes broiler sub-projects

TABLE 5d. - LOP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Target and Actual Sub-loan Releases,By Year, 1980/81 to 1985/86

Annual Average/ Cumulative Overage/ Realization

Year Actual 1/ Target 2/ (Shortfall) Actual 1/ Target 2/ (ShortEall) Rate (2)

1980/81 2.476 29.280 (26.804) 2.476 29.280 (26.804) 8.46

1981/82 28.392 29.500 ( 1.108) 30.868 58.7a30 (27.912) 52.51

1982/83 24.973 30.220 ( 5.247) 55.841 89.000 (33.159) 62.74

1983/84 4.803 - 4.803 6).644 89.000 (28.356) 68.141

1984/85 1.037 - 1.U37 61.631 39.00V (27.319) 69.30

1985/86 0.509 - 0.509 62.190 89.000 (26.810) 69.88

Total Credit 62.190 89.000 (26.810) 62.190 89.000 (26.810) 69.88

'-A

1/ Excludes sub-borrowers' equity3/ Includes sub-borrouers' equitya/ Includes broiler sub-projects

-62-

Table Se - WP/FCP III (Loan tio. 1894-PH): Stock and FishpondArea in Financed

Livestock and Poultry (No. of ELead)

Piggery 25,059Boiler 1,629,617Layer 375,814Coco/Hill-Beef 3,545Fattening 12,248Dairy 461Goat 1,575Duck 75,759

Fishpond Area (ha.) 5,000

Table 6 - LDPIFCP III (Loan No. 1894-P"): Actual Amount ofSub-Loan Releases, By Sub-Sector, 1980 to 1985

DistributionAmount Sub-Sector Total

Livestock and Poultry

Piggery P 198.620 54.2 37.4

Broiler 59.831 16.3 11.2

Layer 26.110 7.1 4.9

Quail 0.227 0.1 a/Duck 2.896 0.8 0.5

Cocobeef 12.453 3.4 2.3

Backyard.Cattle 32.736 9.0 6.2

Hillbeef 24.982 6.8 4.7

Goat 2.910 0.8 0.5

Slaughterhouse 0.330 0.1 0.1

Sub-Total P 366.106 100.0 68.88*arnumum x,.m . .an

Fisheries

Fishpond 1 147.120 89.0 28.0

Deepsea 15.062 9.1 2.8

Saltbed 1.220 0.7 0.2

Ice Plant 1.529 1.0 0.2

Lambaklad 0.455 0.2 0.1

Sub-Total P 165.386 100.0 31.12

TOTAL P 531.492 100.0

a/ less than 0.101

- 64 -

Table 6a - LDP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Number of accountsand amount of ilvestock sub-loans approved byBranch and sub-project type

LIVESTOCK & POULTRY

LUZON No. of AmountAccounts Approved

Head Office

Piggery 132 94,933.068.00Broiler 53 24,803,451.05Layer 23 7,357.3(0.00Hill-Beef 3 608,600.00Dairy Cattle 1 4,581,000.00Coco-Bee f 5 854,659.00Duck Raising 8 1,816,800.00Slaughterhouse 1 329,70u.00Goat Raising 1 493,600.00Quail 1 132,200.03

Sub-Total 228 135,910,373.05

APARRI

Layer 4 41,000.00

BAGUIO

Piggery 9 7J1,7Uv.00Broiler 1 16,00%.O0Backyard Cattle 1 35,6uJ.GJHill-Beef 2 32,000.00

Sub-Total 13 754,700.03

BALANGA

Piggery 75 5,470,300.00Broiler 32 2,135,925.00Layer 9 1,097,100.00Cattle Fattening 12 484,200.00Hill-Beef 4 1,015,0uO.00Goat Raising _-2 71,000.00Duck Raising 1 88,000.00

Sub-Total 135 10,361,525.00

BALER

Cattle Fattening 29 441,200.00Coco-Beef 1 7,000.00

Sub-Total 30 448,200.00

- 65 -

Table 6a - LDP III (Loan N4o. 1984-PH): Number ofAccounts and amount of livesLock sub-loana approved,by Branch and sub-project type

No. of AmountAccouwits Approved

BAYOIBONG

Piggery 17 1,087,100.0JBroiler 10 306,fEd6.00Layer 1 22,300.00Cattle Fattening 160 1,115,500.00Hill-Beef 16 2,647,400.00Goat 2 26,000.00

Sub-Total 206 5,204,986.00

CABANATUAN

Piggery 82 6,027,200.00Broiler 64 6,688,100.00Layer 40 4,794,503.03Coco-Beef 8 305,200.00Hill-Beef 8 1,142,100.00Cattle Fattening 65 1,308,050.00Goat 3 _111,80U.Ou

Sub-Total 270 2;1,377,400.00

CALAPAN

Piggery 13 2,141,158.0t)Broiler 1 153,900.O3Coco-Beef 16 638,558.00Hill-Beef 2 102,t0ij.00

Sub-Total 32 3,039,13o.00

DAET

Piggery 1 500,030.*0Coco-Beef 5 337,200.00Hill-Beef D2 255,000.00Goat 3 146,930.00

Sub-Total 11 . 1,239,130.00

DAGUPAN

Piggery 102 8,470,964.00Broiler 7- 197,700.00Layer 4 416,700.00Goat 24 324,850.00Cattle Fattening 447 17,727,450.00Hill-Beef 1 490,000.00

Sub-Total 585 27,410,720.00

- 66 -

Table 6a - LDP I[I (Losn No. I694-PP): Number ofAccount and amount of livesto;k sub-loans approved,by Branch and sub-project type

No. of AmountAccounts Approved

ILAGAN

Piggery 9 1,399,185.00Broiler 13 687,200.00Layer 4 1,080,000.00Cattle Fattening 31 154,500.00Hill-Beef 12 2,187,900.00Duck 1 18.000.00Su*-Total lo 5,526,7T5.00

LAOAG

Piggery 52 2,155,100.OuBroiler 4 121,530.00Layer 1 72,0OJ.00Cattle Fattening 8 86,3d0..00Hill-Beef 1 30,W0.0iGoat 2 37,000.00Sub-Total 68 2,771,900.00

MZGASPI

Piggery 45 1,463,618.0uJBroiler 8 1,150,840.00Cattle Fattening 1 19,800.00Coco-Beef 3 617,800.00Hill-Beef 3 521,500.0USub-Total 60 3,773,518.00

LUCENA

Piggery 81 20,479,400.00Broiler 45 13,874,353.00Layer 15 1,728,150.00Cattle Fattening 18. 2,558,300.00Coco-Beef 8 1,640,050.00Hill-Beef 4 716,000.00Goat 8 670,500.00Duck 5 764,900.00Quail 1 69,200.00

Sub-Total 185 42,500,853.00

- 67 -

Tabl 6a - DP III (Loan No. 1894-P!): Number otAccounts and amount of livestock aub-loans approved,by Branch bid sub-project type


MASBATE.

Cattle Fattening 185 5,122,290.00Coco-Beef 4 66,000.00Hill-Beef 31 7,254,50J.OUGoat 12 258,440.00

Sub-Total 232 12,703,230.00

NAGA

Piggery 2 852,533.00Broiler 1 71,900.00Layer 1 86,803.0V(Coco-Beef 5 541,6,ju.00Hill-Beef 1 500 300.00Sub-Total 10 2,052 Sio. 0;,

PUERTO PRINCESA

Piggery 8a 361,2W0.00Broiler 4 21O,303.00Laysr 1 10,930.00Coco-Bef 3 124,030.00Hill-Beef 3 857,430.03Coat 11 203,884.00Sub-Total 30 1,777,684.00

SAN JOSE

Piggery 8 461,900.00Broiler 1 13,600.00Cattle Fattening 1 30,000.00Coco-Beef 12 1,390,500.00Bill-Beef 7 1L042,000.00Sub-Total 29 2,983,000.00

SOUSOGONt

Piggery 5 111,100.00Broiler 1 115,400.00Coco-Beef 4 138,200.00

Sub-Total 10 364,700.00

- 68 -

Table 6a - DP III (Lean No. 1694-PH): Number ofAccounts and acount of livestock sub-loans approvea,by Branch and sub-project type

No. of AmouncAccounts Approved

TABUK

Layer 1 209,400.00

TARLAC

Piggery 20 2,744,700.00Broiler 8 507,500.00Layer 11 1,367,900.00Hill-Peef 46 933,400.00Goat 1 l5J,_J0.JG

Sub-Total 86 5,703,800.0o

TUGUEGARAO

Broiler 2 86,000.00Hill-Beef 1 183,000.00

Sub-Total 3 266,OUJ.0U

TOTAL, Rlead Office andLuzon Branches 2,300 285,405,373.05

VISAYAS

ANTIQLUE

Piggery 3 223,500.00Broiler 1 22,800.00Layer 2 100,198.00Hill-Beef 3 ld9,00(.00Coco-Beef 2 44,200.00

Sub-Total 11 579,698.00

BACOLOD

Piggery 16 2,955,600.00Broiler 21 833,000.00Layer 5 255,122.00Goat 2 53,900.00Duck 2 44,600.00Quail 1 25,8U0.00

Sub-Total 47 4,168j022.00

- 69 -

Table 6a - IDP III (Loan No. 1894-Pig): Number ofAccounts and amount of livestock sub-loans approved,by Branch and sub-prcject type

No of AmountAccounts Approved

BOGO

Piggery 6 574,500.00Broiler 2 55,000.00Layer 5 210,000.00Sub-Total 13 839,500.00

BORONGA2

Piggery 46 1,094,765.00Broiler 1 34,0;ja.0ULayer 1 16,000.0CCoco-Beef 1 35,003.00Sub-Total 49 1,179,765.Gu

CATBALWGAd

Piggery S 206,400.00Coco-Beef 3 396,603.00Sub-Total 8 6U5,OOJ.00

CEBU

Piggery 27 1,959,760.0uBroiler 17 2,726,5i0.0vLayer 13 1,317,20.00UCattle Fattening 6 425,60Us0oGoat 3 90,000.00Duck 1 291001i.OUSub-Total 67 6,548.0&k.0u

DUMAGUETE

Piggery 10 1,260,800.00Layer 3 176,500.00Goat 2 42,000.00Sub-Total 15 1,479,300.00

ILOILO

Piggery 13 2,375,000.00Broiler 1 115,300.00Sub-Total 14 2,493,300.00

-70-

Table 6a - IDP III (Loan N!o. 1894-PH.): Number ofAccounts and amount of livestock sub-loans approved,by Branch and suo-project type


KABANKALAN

Piggery 1 l50,0OU.00

KALIBO

Piggery 6 200,303.00Layer 3 53,303.00Coco-Beef 2 286,900.0uHill-Beef I 163,900.00Goat 1 15,000.00

Sub-Total 13 721,l00.Oi

MAAS'N

Piggery 6 156,OOu.00Coco-Beef 1 72,60j.00

Sub-Total 7 22d,6UO.00

ROXAS

Piggery 3 196,500.0uLayer 2 981,400.00Coco-Beef 1 56,000.00Hill-Beef 1 92,70u.00

Sub-Total 7 1,326,60J.00

TACLWBAN

Piggery 13 463,300.00Broiler 6 580,200.00Layer 2 142,200.00Coco-Beef 2 108,300.00Pill-Beef 2 270,000.00Duck 1 38,000.00Sp bT G o talt- .. 2 _ 73.500.00Sub-Total 28 1,675,500.00

- 71 -

Table 6a - LDP IXI (Loan No. 1394-PH): Number ofAccounts and amount of livestock sub-loans approved,by Branch and sub-project type


TAGBILIARAN

Piggery 15 1,457,300.00Broiler 1 8,000.00Layer 4 81,000.00Cattle Fattening 9 150,950.00Coco-Beef 6 132,600.00

Hill-Beef 1 390,00v.00

Sub-Total 36 2,206,850.00

TOTAL VISAYAS BRANCHES 316 24,198,315.00

I4IND*4A0

BASILAN

Broiler 2 19,000.00

Cattle Fattening 1 5,000.00

Sub-Total 3 24 ,000.00

BUTUAN

Piggery I 19,000.00

Goat 2 77,700.00

Sub-Total 3 96,700.00

CAGAYAN1 DE ORO

Piggery 4 1,390,800.00Broiler 8 749,400.00

Layer 6 551,600.00

Coco-Beef 1 8,600.00

Hill-Beef 4 648,100.00Dairy Cattle 1 430,000.00

Sub-Total 24 3,847,500.00

- 72 -

Table 6a - IDP II (Loan No. 1694-PP.): Number o01Accounts and amount of livestock sub-loans approved,by Branch and sub-projbct type


COTABATO

Piggery 6 226,800.00Layer 1 32,000.00Coco-Beef 4 200,000.00Hill-Beef 11 534,300.00Goat 1 10,000.00

Sub-Total TS 1,003,100.00

DAVAO

Piggery 13 11,519,340.30Broiler 13 2,527,375.00Layer 3 549,734.0uCoco-Beef 9 950,05J.00

Suo-Total 38 15,546,499.0i

DIGOS

Piggery 8 1,648,900.00Layer 2 133,300.00Cattle Fattening 1 100,000.00Coco-Beef 3 613,20u.U0

Sub-Total 14 2,495,40u.Ou

DIPOLOG

Piggery 5 347,600.00Layer 2 80,600.00

Sub-Total 7 428,200.00

GENERAL SANTOS

Piggery 12 8,243,900.00Layer 9 545,069.00Cattle Fatening 18 2,568,200.00Coco-Beef 11 1,452,400.00Hill-Beef 4 1,471,000.00

Sub-Total 54 14,280,569.00

*7

Table 6a - LDP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Number ofAccounts and amount of livestock sub-loans approved,by Branch and sub-project type


ILIGAN

Piggery 16 6,419,903.00Broiler 7 665,100.00Layer 6 1,409,520.0UCoco-Beef 1 170_ 003JO.00

Sub-Total 30 8,664,520.00

IPIL

Piggery 1 26,$4a.0JLayer 2 185,20u.0uGoat 1 11,340.00. Sub-Total 4 222,94J.00

KIDAPAWAN

Piggery 3 349,003.00Cattle Fattening 6 83,300.00Coco-Beef 10 146,865.00Hill-Beef 3 141,100.0 0Duck 6 96,340.00Suo-Total 25 816,605,00

MALAYBALAY

Piggery 15 4,187,50J.OuLayer 8 264,900.00Cattle Fattening 2 203,000.00Coco-Beef 2 306,900.00Hill-Beef. 2 215,600.00Sub-Total 29 5,177,900.00

MARBEL

Piggery 7 720,000.00Hill-Beef 1 81,000.00Sub-Total 8 801,000.00

4~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~7- 74 -

Table 6a - LDP III (Loan Wo. Ib94-PY): Numuer ofAccounts and amaunc of livestock sub-loans approved,by Branch and sub-project type

no. of AmountAccounts Approved

KATI

Layer 1 80,000.00Coco-Beef 2 200,000.00Sub-Total 3 280,000.00

QZAMIS

Piggery 1 ll0,000.00Broiler 1 10,000.00Layer 3 100,000.0uSub-Total 5 22u,UO.00

PAGAOIAN

Piggery 9 534,460.00Layer 3 l06,43J.0UGoat 3 26,6vU .00Coco-Beef 1 79,6u3.00Sub-Total 16 719,06J.0O

SAN FRANCISCO

Piggery 6 112,200.OuBroiler 2 9O,400.00Layer 2 94,000.00Coco-Beef 9 399,700.0UGoat 1 6,500.00

Sub-Total 20 710,800.00

SURIGAO

Piggery 4 109,300.00Coco-Beef 1 * _50,000.00

Sub-Total 5 159,300.00

- 75 -

Table 6a - LDP III (Loan No. 1694-PHi): Number ofAccounts and amount of livestocK sub-loans approved,by Branch and sub-project type

No. of .4moUntAccounts Approved

TACURONG.

Layer 1 3,500.00Cattle Tattening 12 67,500.00

Sub-Total 13 71,00o.OQ

ZAMBOANGA

Piggery 2 48,000.00Broiler 5 247,200.OuLayer 11 355,20u.00Cattlc Fattening 2 5V,200.0Sub-Total 20 3-0,603.35

TOTAL, NINDANAO BRANCHES 348 56,255,693.0u

GRMAD TOTAL 2,963 365,859,360.05__m aaaaaaaa

Table 6b - FCP III (Loan No. 1894-Pul): Number ofAccounts 'and Amount of Fisheries Sub-LoansApproved, by Branch and Sub-Project Type

FISHPOND DEEP SEA OTHERS TOTALNo. of Amount No. of Amount No. of Amt. No. of Amt.Accts. Approved Accts. Approved Accounts Approved Accounts Approved

LUZON

Head Office 10 2,554,141.66 3 3,558,453.00 2 1,079,446.05 15 7,190,540.11 s1. Aparri 11 445,140.00 4 266,200.00 - - IS 711,340. )2. Baguio 2 69,800.0) - - - - 2 69,800.003. Balanga 8 2,402,525.00 - - - - 8 2,402,525.004. Cabanatuan 2 158,000.00 - - - - 2 158,000.005. Calapan 24 4,637,910.00 - - - - 24 4,637,910.006. Daet 22 2,753,607.00 5 587,200.00 - - 27 3,340,807.007. Dagupan 53 3,959,132.00 1 196,000.00 3 692,100.00 57 4,847,232.008. Laoag 1 154,800.00 - - - - 1 154,800.009. Lagaspi 8 1,544,043.00 2 150M.O0.00 - - 10 1,694,043.0010. Lucena 25 3,522,314.00 4 1,654,959.00 - - 29 5,171,273.0U11. Nasbate 31 7,082,494.00 - - - - 31 7,082,494.0U12. Naga 11 1,146,622.00 2 538,800.00 - - 13 1,685,422.0013. Puerto Princesa 7 1,53f ,432.00 6 244,098.00 - - 13 1,780.530.0014. San Jose 32 9,064,692.00 - - - - 32 9,064,692.0u15. Sorsogon 16 1,929,740.00. _ - - - 16 1,929,740.00

SUB-TOTAL 263 42,961,392.66 27 7,195,710.00 5 1,770,046.05 295 51,927,148.71

TABLE 6b - FCP III (Loan No. t894-PH): Number of* Accounts and Amount of Fisberies Sub-loans

Approved, by Branch and Sub-Project Type

FISHPOND DEEP SEA OTUEPS TOTAL

No. of Aimiount No. of Amounlit No. of Amt. No. of Amt.

Acets. Approved Accts. Approved Accounts Approved Accounts Approved

VISAYAS

1. Antique 5 729,700.00 - - 5 729,700.01)

2. Bacolod , 36 4,840,531.00 16 4,737,824.00 - - 52 9,578,355.00

3. 8ogo 1 117,8o0.00 - - - - 1 117,800.00

4. Catarman 8 1,669,795.00 - 8 1,669,795.00

5. Catbalogan 3 1,OS1,872.0U - - - 3 t,051,812.0)

6. Cebu 10 2,731,839.35 2 1,087,660.00 - 12 3,819,499.35

7. Dumaguete e. 4 35U,934.00 3 411,346.00 - - .7 762,280.00

8. Iloilo 36 6,275,090.00 - - 2 647,000.00 38 6,922.090.00

9. Kabankalan 14 SS,05O.00 1 172,600.00 - - 15 730,650.00

10. Kalibo 42 6,523,190.00 - - 42 6,523,190.00

11. Iaasin 1 387,711.00 - I- 3dl,711.00

12. Roxas 86 19,543,244.98 - - - 86 19,543,2.$.98

13. Tacloban 12 2,069,195.00 4 520,400.00 1 lO7;800.0U 17 2,697,3'5.00

14. Tagbilaran 10 t.687,061.00 1 291,200.05 - - 11 t.971826l.00

SUB-TOTAL 268 48,536,013.33 27 7,221,030.0U 3 298 56.5US 73.33

TABuI 6b - FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Number ofAccounts and Amount ot Fisheries Sub-LoansApproved, by Branch and Sub-Project Type

.. 4

FISHPOND DEEP SEA OTHERS TOTALNo. of Amo..nt No. of Amount No. of Amount No. of AmountAccounts Approved Accounts Approved Accounts Approves Accounts Approved

MINDANAO

1. Basilan 1 240,248.10 - - - 1 240,248.102. Butuan 37 10,830,659.74 - - - - 37 10,830,659.743. Cagayan de pro 1 3,600.00 - - - - I 3,60U.004. Cotabato 11 1,407,345.00 2 74,000.00 - - 13 1,481,345.005. Davao 19 3,364,456.00 - - - - 19 3,364,456.006. Digos 6 1,415,400.0U - - - - 6 1,415,400.007. Dipolog 11 1,198,549.00 - 250,OOU.00 - - 12 1,449,2b9.008. Iligan -;4 1,534,480.00 - - - - 4 1,534,48U.009. Ipil l2 2,374,758.00 - - - - 12 2,374,756.t0010. Hati 11 2,105,359.00 - - - 11 2,105,359.0011. Ozamis 1 150,800.00 1 12,108.92 - - 2 162,903.9212. Pagadian 18 3,072,892.00 - - 1 460,800.00 19 3,533,692.0013. San Francisco 9 3,473,318.00 1 209,6UU.00 - - 10 3,6b2,916.0014. Surigao 2 318,152.00 - - - - 2 31a,152.0015. Zamboanga 11 1 , 0 3530 0 0 7 559,300.00 7 - 18 t,594,670.00

154 32,525,386.84 12 1,105,708.92 1 460,800.00 167 34L092_75.76

TOTAL 685 124,022,792.83 66 15,522,448.92 9 1,770,046.05 760 142,525,007.80mmm U=XaUU"nmX2C u2 muv=z=mS =33B m=w=uman3Z nu X3=w

T-ble 7 - IP/FCP Itt (Loan No. 1894-PH): Results of Operations Pet AuditedStatements of camings and Expenses for the Years 1980-1984

1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 a/ Average

Amount 2 Amount 2 Amount 2 Amount I Amount 1 2 of Share

EARNINGS: (7ooo)Interest on Loans 59 13 1,741 46 18,220 86 29,181 92 37,086 86 65

Misc. Bank Fees:Service & Application Fees 363 78 970 25 581 3 13 - 22 - 21

Comitment Fees - 38 8 934 25 1,674 8 352 1 19 - 8

Other Income:Add'l Income &

Penalty Charges 4 1 59 2 615 3 2,057 6 5,554 13 5

Miscellaneous Incame 3 - 89 2 127 - 275 1 463 1 1

Total Earnings 467 T100 3,793 IToo 21,217 100 31.878 1W0 4 T IUU

EXPENSES: (0ooo)Interest on Bills Payable - - 2,630 69 8,347 39 12,476 39 13,954 32 36

Consultantts Expenses - - 1,117 30 81 - 1,476 5 1,290 3 8.

Loan Processing ftpenses 57 12 301 8 359 2 113 1 89 - 5

Travelling Expenses , 21 4 203 5 3U0 2 305 1 359 1 3

Salaries & Other PersonalBenefits 481 103 2,381 63 5,035 24 5,140 16 5,941 4 46

Stationeries & Supplies 7 2 55 1 77 - 68 - 125 1 1

Postage, Telephone &Telegrams - - 5 - 14 - 20 - 27 - -

Electricity & Water - - - 8 - 11 - 13 -

Expenses In Litigation - - 4 - 34 - 96 -

Expenses & Losses inAcquired Assets - - - - 1 - 19 - 115 -

Miscellaneous Expenses 24 5 187 5 393 2 304 1 378 1

Total Expense. 590 126 6,879 181 14,619 69 19 966 63 22, 3 8 7 52 9d

NET tNCOME/ (NET WSS) (7000) (123) (26) (3,0116) (81) 6,598 31 11,912 37 20,757 48 2=~ _~ __ = __ _= = .== W_

ajl Unaudited

Table 8 - DP/PCi III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Results of Operations AfterCost of Funds with Percentage of Growtb Rate fot thte year 1980-1984

4, g1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 at'2 of 2 of 2 of 2 of

Increase/ Increase/ Increase/ Increase/. Amount Amount Decrease Amount Decrease Amount Decrease * Amount Decrease *

EARNINGS: (7000)-.,

Interest on Loans 59 1,741 28.51 18,220 9.46 29,181 0.60 37,086 0.27Miscellaneous Dank

Fees 401 1,904 3.75 2,255 0.18 365 0.84 * 41 0.89 * 0

Other Income . 7 148 20.14 742 4.01 2 332 .2.14 6017 1.58

Total Earning-: i7i 3,793 7.12 21,217 4.59 31 8 0.50 43,144 0.35

EXPENSES: (P000)

AdministrativeExpenses (net ofInterest on BDllsl.Payable) 590 4,249 6.20 6,272 0.48 7,490 0.19 8,433 0.12

Cost of Funds 575 4,887 7.50 10,232 1.09 14,495 0.42 16,812 0.16Total Expenses 1.165 9 6.84 16,504 0.81 21,985 0.33 25,245 0.15

NET INCOME (NET IDSS).(7000) - 698 5,343 - 4,713 - 9,893 1.10 17,899 0.81

a/ Unaudited

Table 9 -WLOP/iCP'III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Results of Operations AfterCost of Funds with Percentague of Average Investment for theYears 1980-1984

. ,

1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 a/

IN MOUNT .(000) .

Averagq Investment - 35,133 103,807 148,377 164,760Total 8araings 467 3,793 21,217 31,878 43,144Admintatrative Expenses 591) 4,240 5,272 7,490 8,433Cost of Funds 575 4,887 10,232 14,495 16,812

Net ntoume (Net Loss) (698) (5,343) 4,713 9,893 17,899 co

IN S OF AVER#E INVISTMENT

Average Investment 1OOS 1001 100l 1001Total Income - 11 20( 211 26Z

Adminiqtrative Expenses 12X 61 51 51Cost of Funds 141 10 101 101

Net InVome (Net Loss) (151) 41 7 11

a/ UnaudLted

4.,

Table 10- LOP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Projected Statements of Earningand Expenses for the Years 1985-2000

I.i 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992

EAR1NI=S:I (T000)Interest on Loans 83,874 74,648 66,436 59,128 52,624 46,835 41,683 37,098Miscellaneous Bank Fees:Service 6 Appl. Fees 21 19 17 15 13 12 11 9Commitment Fees 46 - - - - - - -

Other Iicome:Additional Interest 6Penalty Charges 760 676 602 536 477 424 378 336

Total larnings 84,701 7 67.055 59,679 53,114 47,71 42,072 37,443

EIPENSB8g: (7000) , Interest on Bills

Payable 16,339 17,008 16,263 15,564 14,805 13,982 13,091 12,124Consultant'$ Fees 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191Electricity & Water 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14Travelling Expenses 359 359 359 359 359 359 359 359Salaried & Other Personal

Benefits 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535Stationeries & Supplies 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138Postfge, Telephone and

Telegrams _ 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30Total Expenses 2S,606 26,275 25,530 24,831 24.072 23,249 22.358 21,391

NET INCOME/(NET tSS)S PO000) 59,095 49,068 41,525 34,848 29,042 24,022 19,714 16052

2 of Net Income to TotalEarnings 701 652 62X 5.3% 55X 51X 472 43X

INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN (IRR) 11.212

Table 1* WP/MP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Projected Statement of Earningand Expenses for the Years 1985-2000 (as continued)

1993 19'14 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000EARNINGSta (FOOO)

Interest on Loans 33,017 29,385 26,153 23,276 20,715 18,437 16,409 14,604Misce elateous Bank Fees:Service & Appl. Fees 8 7 7 6 5 5 4 4Commitent Fees - - - - - - -Other Income:Additional Interest APeaelty Charges 299 266 237 211 188 167 148 132Total atrnings 33,324 29,658 26,397 23,493 20,9() Tii09 T636 9 40

EXPENSES: ('PO00)Interest on Bills

Payable 11,075 9,939 8,707 7,372 5,923 4,353 2,651 805Consultant's Fees 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191 2,191Electricity & Water 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14Travelling Expenses 359 359 359 359 359 359 359 359Salaries & Other PersonalBenefits . 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535 6,535Stationeries & Supplies 138 138 133 138 138 138 138 133Postage, Telephone andTelegrams 30 30 30 30 30 30 39Total Expenses 20.342 19,206 17,974 ,639 15,190 13,620 11.918 10.02

YET INCOS/(NET tOSS) (P000) 12.982 10,452 8,423 .854 5,718 4 989 4,643 4.668

X of Net 'lcome to TotalEarnings 39% 35X 322 292 272 272 28% 322

- 84 -

ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS

A. Collections:

1. Interest on loans - 24.5Z of the regular and restructuredaccounts for the period (See Schedule of Accounts).

2. Service & Application Fees - 0.1S of accounts to be restruc-tured for the period (See Schedule of Accounts).

3. Commitment Fees - 14 of 1S of undisbursed portion of the sub-loans committed to sub-loan borrowers.

4. Other Income: Additional interest and penalty charges - 24.5Zadditional interest and 82 penalty charges of the restructuredaccounts.

B. Payments:

1. Interest on Bills Payable - based on Schedule 3 of SLA datedOctober 10, 1980 but with subsidiary loan amounting to only7209.271 million (See Schedule of Amortization).

2. Consultant's Fees - the unpaid amount equally distributed tothe remaining terms of tile subsidiary loan.

3. Other Expenses: Electric & water at 70.14 million/year;Travelling expenses at 70.359 million/year; Salaries & otherpersonnel benefits at P6,535 million/year; Stationeries andsupplies at 70.138 million/year; and postage, telephone andtelegram at 70.030 million/year.

- 85 -

Table 10a - DP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Projected Statusof Accounts For the Years I985-2000

Regular Restructure Under Acquired

Accounts Accounts Litigatiou Assets 4 CMRYear (802) (52) (12) (32) TcTfAL

(7000)

1984 (Actual) 381,717 22,825 5,538 14,928 425,005

1985 340,004 21,250 4,250 12,750 374,254

1986 302,603 18,913 3,782 11,348 336,646

1987 269,317 16,832 3,366 10,099 299,614

1988 239,691 14,981 2,996 8,988 266,656

1989 213,325 13,333 2,666 8,000 237,324

1990 189,859 11,866 2,373 7,120 211,218

1991 168,974 10,561 2,112 6,336 1o7,97 3

1992 150,386 9,399 1,880 5,639 167,3U4

1993 133,843 8,365 1,673 5,019 14o,9U0

1994 119,120 7,445 1,489 4,467 132,521

1995 106,017 6,626 1,325 3,976 117,944

1996 94,355 5,897 1,179 3,538 104,969

1997 83,975 5,248 1,050 3,149 93,422

1998 74,738 4,671 934 2,803 83,146

1999 66,517 4,157 831 2,494 73,999

2000 59,199 3,700 740 2,220 65,859

-86-

Table lOb - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1694-PH):Schedule of Amortization 1/

DUE DATE 2/ INTEREST PRINCIPAL BALANCE

(P000)

June 15, 1986 14,387 3,655 205,616August 15, 1986 2,827 3,809 201,807February 15, 1987 8,324 3,963 197,844August 15, 1987 8,161 4,126 193,718February 15, 1988 7,011 4,299 189,419August 15, 1988 7,814 4,472 184,947February 15, 1989 7,629 4,655 180,292August 15, 1989 7,437 4,848 175,444February 15, 1990 7,237 5,050 170,394August 15, 1990 7,029 5,261 164,133February 15, 1991 6,812 5,473 159,660August 15, 1991 6,586 5,704 153,956February 15, 1992 6,351 5,934 148,022August 15, 1992 6,106 6,175 141,847February 15, 1993 5,851 6,435 135,412August 15, 1993 5,5o6 6,704 128,708February 15, 1994 5,309 6,983 121,725August 15, 1994 5,021 7,262 114,463February 15, 1995 4,722 7,563 1.6,903August 15, 1995 4,410 7,877 99,026February 15, 1996 4,085 8,195 90,831August 15, 1996 3,747 8,541 82,290February 15, 1997 3,394 8,88S 73,402August 15, 1997 3,028 9,253 64,149February 15, 1998 2,646 9,638 54,511August 15, 199d 2,248 10,032 44,479Februar 15, 1999 1,835 10,455 34,024AUgust 15, 1999 1,403 10,888 23,136February 15, 2000 954 11,330 11,806August 15, 2000 487 11,806

1J Loan of 7209,271,000 with a repsyment term of 15 yearsand interest rate of 8.25Z per annum

2/ Reayment schedule basd on Schedule 3 of SLA dated10 October 1980

Table 11 - LDP/FCP III (Loan go. 1894-PHI): Total Releases and Outstanding

Principal-as of 30 June 1985

LiP III FCP IItOutstanding Outstanding Outstanding

Total Principal Total Principal Total Principal

Releases Balances Releases Balances Releases 8lancefs

Regular Accounts 282,223,363 263,151,754 113,009,949 108,581,179 394,233.312 371,732,933

Restructured Accounts 29,259,482 28,734,731 16,438,157 15,928,828 45,697,639 44,6$3,559

Accounts in Litigation 6,162,223 5,993,643 2,147,504 2,146,969 8,329,727 8,140,611L

Acquired AssetsIQtR 16,094.579 16,040.432 8,261,440 8,260,858 24,356,019 24,301J,2 X

TOTAL 333,759,647 313,920,560 139,857,050 134,917,834 473,616,697 448,838,394

TABLE 12. LDP III (DAN NO. 1894-PH)SUMMARY OF AGEs OF ARRRARS BY BRANCHESFOR THE QUARTER ENDED JLINE 30, 1985

P A S T n U ENo. OP OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATIO OF

B R A N C H S S ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARREAKS

1. A.L.D. - H.O. 125 66,030,446.75 7,435,657.01 22,658,928.21 8,523,583.92 38,618,169.14 33.9322. APARRI 2 14,784.10 1,600.05 1,013.20 38.55 2,651.80 16.5423. BAGUIO 16 704,078.80 5,639.27 169,921.87 27,123.09 191,405.69 18.7964. LAOAG 70 1,944,241.66 103,396.74 424,874.34 37,292.28 565,563.36 22.2985. TABUK 1 204,222.26 6,177.31 21,443.34 2,049.86 29,670.5) 12.2396. BAYOMBONG 187 4,176,510.80 305,846.73 1,153,112.55 337,301.82 1,796.261.10 27.3747. ILAGAN 90 4,979,656.07 76,475.7U 1,066,843.23 442,630.61 1,432,998.14 16.3798. TUGUEGARAO 3 234,000.00 36,822.94 78,994.74 35,308.27 151,125.95 37.0039. BALANGA 152 7,801,610.32 250,067.09 1,462,024.60 286,744.51 1,998,836.20 18,48110. BALER 32 400,860.08 119,261.46 69,496.87 47,423.88 236,182.21 40.13011. CABANATUAN 270 15,634,516.69 1,243,925.72 2,120,012.44 582,811.88 3,946,750.04 18.94612. DAGUPAN 601 22,466,115.52 568,033.61 5,292,545.51 1,503,719.53 7,364,298.65 21.11213. TARLAC 90 4,551,1d3.50 73,607.98 809,032.66 160,115.96 1,042,756.60 16.46614. CALAPAM 50 2,650,999.37 330,412.47 735,363.89 237,497.20 1,303,273.56 31.47215. LUCENA 217 23,164,042.28 2,845,956.11 6,280,563.73 1,747,041.04 10,873,560.8d 30.99516. PUERTO PRINCESA 28 1,099,112.20 56,511.19 176,451.66 27,769.51 260,732.36 t8.26317. SAN JOSE 30 2,130,471.00 123,189.29 442,308.27 104,235.47 669,733.03 21.98018. DAeT 11 992,727.26 107,572.401 322,u65.01 81,657.35 511,294.76 32.67119. LFGAZPI 69 3,013,694.40 174,399.03 6B5,l62.72 188,393.58 1,047,955.33 23.23820. MASBATE 227 10,259,726.71 559,608.26 1,884,408.36 341,289.88 2,745,306.50 19.86121. NAGA 11 1,35U,94d.31 25,007.34 183,622.52 18,338.71 226,968.57 13.59522. SORSOGCR 11 230,393.57 9,947.53 31,132.15 2,697.17 43,776.85 15.70723. ANTIQUE 13 540,069.24 30,350.58 93,455.72 35,137.72 158,94$.02 19.54224. BACOLOD 67 3,771,404.72 298,254.26 1,012,153.74 411,309.66 1,721,717.66 27.39325. ILOILO 23 2,171,811.22 243,162.86 517,767.45 47,777.11 8u7,707.42 28.29126. MAASIN 10 211,787.69 14,191.22 26,854.56 6,470.44 47,516.22 17.19927. KALIBO 18 621,077.47 11,858.24 61,775.23 16,811.63 90,445.1J 10.7832d. ROXAS 11 1,199,538.14 79,263.98 183,46d.64 32,285.95 295,018.57 18.99729. BORONGAN 59 1,040,217.18 78,993.41 359,983.57 67,800.67 506,777.65 31.35130. CATBALOGAN 11 165,282.70 6,109.97 35,113.06 35,897.31) 77,120.33 20.5t0

P A S T D U EN0. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATIO OF

8 R A N C H E S ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARREARS

31. CEBU 77 4,946,059.52 534,535.29 991,007.29 326,686.52 1,852,229.10 25.695

32. BOGO 12 738,759.24 44,929.00 271,296.64 49,266.46 365,492.10 31.307

33. DUHAGUETE 26 1,143,766.47 83,166.33 132,983.87 18,577.84 234,728.04 16.929

34. TACLOBAN 29 982,421.98 32,781.23 143,413.08 38,480.43 214,674.74 15.650

35. TAGBILARAN 41 1,007,267.77 18,947.77 205,024.05 26,608.02 250,579.84 18.475

36. BASILAN 1 8,117.31 708.04 0.00 0.00 708.04 8.722

37. BUTUAN 8 327,279.42 78,500.01 80,943.40 41,015.21 200,458.62 39.057

38. SAN FRANCISCO 18 432,946.73 72,121.97 67,851.04 45,876.32 185,849.33 27.950

39. CAGAYAN DE Oe^ 32 2,969,7,0.70 68,318.61 575,750.35 112,453.29 756,522.25 18.165

40. ILlGAN 35 5,169,191.62 247,607.04 1,035,856.44 332,502.00 1,615,965.48 20.684

41. IALAYBALAY 32 3,774,921.05 134,817.90 535,676.52 105,688.22 776,182.64 15.554

42. OZAMIS 5 185,291.05 11,308.89 20,88L.90 5,216.43 37,406.22 15.613

43, SURIGAO 5 86,025.65 3,462.96 10,428.91 469.05- 14,360.92 14.402

44. COTABATO 30 843,279.40 76,515.16 178,541.7? 47,480.48 302,537.41 24.961

45. DAVAO 45 13,895,653.40 1,052,642.82 2,234,631.26 429,897.26 3,717,171.34 20.379

46. DIGOS 20. 2,332,154.00 99,613.22 431,476.39 71,768.98 602,858.5Q 19.217

47.. DIPOLOG 7 300,070.07 32,312.13 162,8t4.78 34,866.93 229,993. 42.154

48. GENERAL SANTOS 55 12,273,345.59 420,045.34 2,194,827.21 636,503.60 3,251,3?6.t.) 18.073

49. IPIL 4 205,244.75 21,833.50 38,970.91 590.66 61,195.07 24.697

50. KIDAPAWAN 28 751,262.12 135,097.83 297 733.43 102,325.50 535,1:6.76 41.261

51. HARBEL 9 426,371.53 41,875.79 61,322.27 11,322.95 30,769.43 3.987

52. MATI 4 262 655.34 2,947.71 60,335.37 6,220.10 69,5U3.18 19.592

53. PAGADIAN 23 584,414.67 527.26 144,767.55 17,236.31 162,531.18 19.925

54. TACURONG 10 34,858.16 28,113.08 9,380.04 15,85U.06 53,343.18 84.752

55. ZAMBOANGA 20 551,297.90 122,569.56 113,963.94 17,751.00 254,284.50 35.554

BANKWIDE 3,081 237,987,975.45 ld,338,616.67 58,319,771.25 17,882,208.23 94,540,596.15 25.871

TABLE 12a. WP III (WMA N0. 1894-PH):STATUS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1985

P A S T 0 0 1NO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY 6 OTHER TOTAL RATIO OF

8RANCH: BANKWID ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARG8S ARRRARS ARREARS

SUBSECTOR: PIGGERY

Loans In releasing stage 5 2,224,421.66 0.00 106,337.85 166,982.70 273,320.55 4.5622Loans under grace period 61 6,888,080.98 6,834.69 1.415,589.12 183,984.42 1,592,738.85 17.1302Loans repaying regularly 48 8,711,477.79 47,107.44 4,830.20 12,819.44 39,11d.20 0.4852Loans in arrears for0-3 months 45 1,324,626.57 163,286.07 103,366.99 17,045.23 42,873.85 18.6732 O4-6 months 355 27,728,101.34 974,089.68 2,509,499.09 349,262.85 3,032,851.62 11.52027-12 months 181 11,235,294.49 523,950.39 1,960,141.84 537,918.74 3,022,010.97 1d.825S13-24 months 156 51,898,254.12 4,938,436.85 16,035,408.58 4,369,620.99 25,343,466.42 30.8742Over two years 183 16,306,201.85 2,866,262.72 10,128,740.84 2,768,957.95 15,763,961.51 '9.158XInsufficient data 3 159,072.46 1,743.23- 729.57- 0.00 2,4 2.80 0.6401

S U B - T 0 T A L 1,037 126,475,531.26 9,083,768.21 32.253,524.54 8.406,592.32 49,743,885.07 26.0422

SUBSECTOR: BROILER

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans under grace period 2 200,000.00 21,417.93 61,576.09 17,952.20 100,946.22 31.7281Loans repaying regutarly 8 174,593.96 38,416.98 2,436.48 35.09 40,81d.37 20.899%Loans in arrears for0-3 months 21 2,119,481.87 69,371.29 112,554.66 27,786.36 70,969.73 8.15024-6 months 114 9,781,218.65 652,261.75 b42,214.90 122,769.95 1,617,246.60 s4.067%7-12 montlhs 45 2,962,355.65 330,964.28 456,620.98 86,582.53 874,167.79 23.035Z13-24 months 55 3,881,933.83 979,613.76 882,517.23 365,879.21 2,228,01U.20 39.083%

Over two years 10V 8,810,475.93 2,902,567.97 4,449,651.98 1,721,931.30 9,074,151.25 55.4462Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.O0 0.0J 0.00 0.0J O.00oo2

S U B - T O T A L 353 27,930,059.89 4,779.L0 3 7 .4 2 6,802,699.36 2.342,936.64 !3,92',.673.42 33.345%

TABLE 12a. LOP III (WAN NO. 1894-PH):STATUS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDRDO JUNE 30, 1985

P A S T D U E

NO. OF OUTSTANOING PENALTY a OTHER RATIO OF

BRANCH: BANKWIDE ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARREARS

SUBSECTOR: LAYER

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

Loans under grace period 5 436,159.98 2,498.35- 48,275.76 14,461.10 60,236.51 10.4UIZ

Loans repaying regularly 6 1,460,815.47 138.49- 0.00 834.56 973.05 0.0092

Loans in arrears for 0-3 months 9 542,419.27 28,901.80- 38,227.73 10,724.15 20,050.08 11.5612

4-6 months 94 7,818,586.55 376,429.46 718,849.94 116,195.09 1,211,474.49 12.829S

7-12 months 42 2,425,094.64 134,098.78 437,446.05 126,239.56 697,784.39 19.966Z

13-24 months 39 2,766,411.87 258,105.67 824,774.92 257,124.01 1,340,004.60 3l).1532

Over tvo years 38 3,166,013.20 820,734.64 1,592,259.86 629,064.56 3,042,059.06 50.711Z

Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

S U B - T 0 T A L 233 18,615,500.98 1,557,829.91 3,659,834.26 1.152,973.91 6,370,638.08 23.4232

SUBSECTOR: BACKYARD CATTLE

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 u.0002

Loans under grace period 24 509,787.03 21,252.10- 104,408.52 36,064.88 119,221.30 20.4592

Loans repaying regularly 1 2,424.36 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.0202

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 3 108,180.47 180.47 7,735.16 3,239.01 11,154.64 6.8281

4-6 montihs 6 86,353.17 11,215.24 9,605.47 4,00;.61 24,828.32 2t.6974

7-12 montbs 44 228,148.02 47,956.69 34,622.39 16,348.37 98,927.45 31.4262

13-24 months 39 142.237.14 70,912.52 31,743.09 13,149.08 115,15U4.69 59.0042

Over two years 88 506,304.82 333,839.37 175,718.09 125,298.06 634,d55.52 74.7122

Insufficient data 0 M.0U 0.0) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.003)1

S U B - T 0 T A L 215 .L5 83.435.01 442.51.69 363.832.72 198,l17.01 1, 0 0 4 .7 9t. 4 2 41.4262

TABLE 12a. WDP III (LDAN NO. 1894-PH):STATUS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1985

P A S T DU ISNO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATIO OF

BRANCH: BANKW IDE ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGSS TOTAL ARREARS ARREARS

SUBSECTOR: DAIRY VARN DEV.

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans under grace period 2 385,000.00 0.00 268,011.65 45,827.06 313,838.71 41.0422Loans repaying regularly 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.00iW Loans in arrears for

0-3 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00024-6 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00027-12 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

13-24 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Over two years 3 4,224,334.93 913,509.69 3,058,548.80 2,286,924.48 6,258,982.97 54.5392Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000S

S U B - T 0 T A L S 4,609,334.93 913,509.69 3,326,560.45 2,332,751.54 6,572,821.68 53.429X

SUBSECTOR: COCO-BEEP BREEDING

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans under grace period 62 4,937,534.54 1l7,421.40- 634,182.07 116,086.84 632,847.51 13.489XLoans repaying regularly 1 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.0U0OLoans in arrears for0-3 monttis 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000X4-6 months 5 165,903.23 4,300.59 15,589.74 640.20 20,530.53 10.95iX7-12 months 5 146,171.51 16,265.41 18,593.52 1,390.71 36,249.6g4 21.156Z13-24 months 4 363,650.09 39,561.34 141,192.40 36,395.07 217,148.81 35.8t3ZOver two years 10 2'.2,876.10 162,689.59 103,586.89 61,852.45 328,123.93 67.1632Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.31) 0.00 0.00 0.01) 0.9)02O

S U B - T O T A L 87 6,056.135.47 105,395.53 913,1 4.62 216,365.27 1,234,905.42 14.614X

TABLE 12a. UDP III (WAN NO. 1894-PH):STATUS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1985

P A S T D U ENO. OP OUTSTANDING PENALTY 1 OTHER RATIO OF

BRANCH: 8ANKW IDE ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARREARS

SUBSECTOR: HILL-BEEF

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.0V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

Loans under grace period 184 17,943,188.57 505,845.53- 3,766,182.63 718,669.11 3,979.006.81 19.6782

Loans repaying regularly 8 346,744.25 12,385.00- 3,288.05- 0.00 15,673.05 2.6482

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 1 149,138.00 0.00 5,219.83 18,309.90 23,529.73 3.3812 %

4-6 months 2 76,521.75 2.621.62 6,430.49 1,281.84 10,333.95 10.912Z

7-12 months 6 146,209.83 20,716.01 20,803.86 13,491.49 55,071.36 24.8962

13-24 months 7 447,144.12 58,418.86 123,017.97 33,989.73 215,426.56 31.8212

Over two years 3 50,500.00 26,907.67 23,814.44 1550.09 52,272.20 68.2532

Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.00 O.OU 0.00 0.00 U.0002

S U B - T 0 T A L 211 19,159,446-52 409,506.37- 3,942,181.17 787,292.76 4,319,967.56 15.291t

SUBSECTOR: GOAT-FIN4NCING


Loans under grace period 4 581,513.45 3,317.99 407,924.75 294,704.39 705,947.13 41.5632

Loans repaying regularly 2 7,792.60 9,677.68- 175.68- 101.74 9,751.62- 124.7462

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 3 58,195.05 75.20 5,060.95 1,642.27 6,628.02 8.1192

4-6 months 30 652,525.95 30,746.14 60,654.39 12,396.65 103,797.18 12.8152

7-12 months 16 258,988.29 35,491.20 42,500.67 10,205.75 88,197.62 25.86.12

13-24 months 11 184,962.58 37,789.75 46,055.15 10,780.25 94,625.15 36.293%

Over two ytears 12 191,774.00 63,747.2a 71,275.21 20,359.20 155,381.69 51,3291

Insufficient deta I l5 Ll0.0 0.00 MU 0 0.00 0.00 0.0wU0

S U B - TO0 T A L 79 1_951,111.92 2 1hd339.Ep 631 295.44 350,190.25 1 14 4L8 2 5 . 1 7 .30.747%

TABLE 12a. LDP III (LOAN NO. 1894-PH):STATUS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1985

P A S T D U ENO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATTO OF


SUBSECTOR: RABBIT

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans under grace period 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000XLoans repaying regularly 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans in arrears for0-3 months 1 20,849.68 20,648.99- 3,566.05 419.33 16,663.61- 99.17824-6 months 0 0.00 0.0U 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00027-12 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01o o.OUuZ13-24 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0VUZ

Over two years 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.00U2Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0W02

S U B - T 0 T A L 1 20,849.68 20,648.99- 3,566.05 419.33 16,663.61- 69.9662

SU3SECTOR: DUCK

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00U2Loans under grace period 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0U 0.000%Loans repaying regularly 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0u 0.0002Loans in arrears for0-3 months 2 449,000.00 0.00 10,1d8.19 10,381.38 20,569.57 2.21824-6 months 8 214,490.77 11,225.29 21,920.81 7,998.81 41,144.91 14.02027-12 mnmths 8 559,086.16 43,109.40 98,526.58 29,756.78 171,392.76 21.537213-24 monthts 5 85,687.23 13,579.09 19,838.74 5,288.38 38,756.21 31.7U0%

Over two years 17 960,409.32 358,906.06 479,778.25 251,314.39 1,089,998.70 58.2342Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.0U 0.00 0.00 _ 0.0U 01.000

S U 8 - T O T A L 411 2,268,673.48 426,319.84 63U,302.57 3U4,739.74 1,361,862.15 36..652

TABLE 12a. LDP III (WAN NO. 1894-PH):STATUS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1935

P A S T D U L

NO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHRR RATIO OF


SUBSECTOR: QUAIL


Loans under grace period 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

Loans repaying regularly 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000% >

4-6 months 2 56,390.23 6,827.95 3,674.23 900.64 11,402.82 17.4842

7-12 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0V O.OUii

13-24 months 1 115,000.00 115,000.00 24,736.52 46,218.10 185,954.62 100.0002

Over two years 1 65,000.00 10,960.98 26,101.35 2,161.60 39,223.93 40.682Z

Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00. 0.00 0.0002

S U 8 - T 0 T A $ 4 236,390.23 132,788.93 54,512.10 49,280.34 236,581.37 64.3862

SUBSECTOR: CATTLE-FATTENING

Loans in releasing stage 2 61,436.93 6,281.45 13,010.41 6,267.19 25,559.05 25.9132

Loans under grace period 334 15,115,701.28 339,022.33- 2,974,668.39 849,717.50 3.4B5,363.56 18.3172

Loans repaying regularly 31 1,333,819.73 7,668.81- 1,045.80- 2,562.87 6,151.74- 0.4962

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 11 419,156.54 6,033.88- 20,870.86 14,761.11 29,598.09 6.1142

4-6 montihs 68 924,386.78 335,680.48- 162,571.17 83,957.23 89,152.08- 45.8392

7-12 montihs 201 5,983,403.76 778,550.24 946,869.98 281,411.43 2.006,837.65 24.8962

13-24 montihs 88 2,937,347.77 510,271.06 853,592.32 238,172.37 1,602,035.75 35.9762

Over two years 47 948,978.35 3lt),630.85 481,197.58 130,075.70 921,954.13 55.369%

Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.0__ 0.00 .00 0__ O.Ol) 0.00

SOB 8 - TO0 T A L 782 27,724231.14 917 378.1tJ 5,451j74.91 1 06 931.40 7,9764.41 19.1972

TABLE 12a. LDP III (WAN NO. 1894-PH):STATUS 0F ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1985

P A ST D U 2

,NO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATIO OF


SU8SECTOR: COCO-BEEF FATTENING


Loans under grace period 9 361,525.00 0.00 43,364.39 8,006.03 51,370.42 10.7102

Loans repaying regularly 2 158,561.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.OO00

*4-6 months 1 9,000.00 592.38 810.00 642.70 2,045.08 14.2952

7-12 months .7 161,531.35 29,036.34 20,388.21 6,266.07 55,690.62 27.1682

13-24 months 9 300,603.17 65,845.93 106,662.71 41,108.70 213,617.34 42.3572

Over two years 13 266,350.11 116,374.91 107,807.72 58,404.30 282,586.93 59.916Z


S U B - T 0 T A L ' 41 1,257,571.27 211,849.56 279,033.03 114,427.80 605,310.39 31.945S

SUBSECTOR: OTHER LIVESTOCK


Loans under grace period 1 41,300.00 0.00 222.03 84.22 306.25 0.534Z


Loans in arrears for0-3 months 1 36,203.67 36,203.67 0.00 16,676.50 -52,880.17 100.0002

4-6 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

7-12 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00W2

13-24 months 1 22,200.00 0.00 5,328.00 2,439.20 7,767.20 19.354%

Over two years 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o0.000

S U B - T 0 T A L 3 99,703.67 36,203.6 7 5,550.03 19,199.92 60,953.62 39.6699

TABLE 12a. WP III (LOAN NO. 1894-PH):STATUS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1985

P A S T D U eNO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATIO OF


SUISECTOR: OVERALL TOTALS

Loans in releasing stage 7 2,285,858.59 6,281.45 119,348.26 173,249.89 298,879.60 5.2232

Loans under grace period 688 47,399,790.83 968,138.48- 9,724,405.40 2,285,558.35 11,041,825.27 18.718S

Loans repaying regularly 107 12,346,229.80 115,394.90- 11,776.21- 14,684.58 112,486.53- 0.8402 a

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 97 5,227,251.12 251,933.09- 306,790.42 120,985.24 175,842.57 10.0962 %

4-6 months 685 47,513,478.42 1,734,629.62 4,351,820.23 700,0S,.57 6,786,503.42 11.7352

7-12 months 555 24,106,283.70 1,960,198.74 4,036,514.08 1,109,617.43 7,106,330.25 21.3082

13-24 months 415 63,145,431.92 7,087,534.83 19,094,917.63 5,420,165.09 31,602,617.55 31.8362

Over two years 523 35,789,218.61 8,887,181.73 20,698,481.01 8,057,894.08 37,643,556.82 52.3752

Insufficient data 4 174,432.46 1,743.23- 729.57- 0.00 2,472.80- U.5832

S U B - T 0 T A L 3,081 237,987,975.45 18,338,616.67 58,319,771.25 17,882,208.23 94.540,596.15 25.8712

No. of Accounts fully paid: 0

TABLE 13. FCP III (WAN NO. 1894-PH):SUMMARY OF AGES OF ARREARS BY BRANCHESFOR THE QUARTER ENDeD JUNE 30, 1985

P A S T D U ENO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY 6 OTHER RATtO OF

I R A N C H E S ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARREARS

1. A.L.D.- 1.O. 23 8,919,277.57 1,196,034.84 3,701,092.97 2,251,562.81 7,148,690.62 38.8032. APARRI 14 661,340.00 202,316.56 230,548.14 136,557.92 569,422.62 48.5333. BAGUIO 2 58,183.22 9,118.79 9,015.36 2,110.68 2,007.25 0.1534. IAOAG 3 135,827.99 39,540.72 17,777.67 9,306.04 66,624.43 37.315S. IAIANGA 10 2,319,786.25 71,050.58 773,457.20 198,318.23 1,042,826.01 27.3016. CABANATUAN 2 154,270.11 3,217.98 12,183.87 2,395.50 17,797.35 9.2527. DAGUPAN 46 3,167,593.15 55,819.34 443,240.66 67,344.02 566,404.02 13.821 c8. CALAPAN 33 4,516,966.78 176,257.12 1,678,377.43 623,248.69 2,477,883.24 29.9359. UCENA 34 .4,601,431.26 306,978.89 901,315.74 485,209.43 1,693,504.06 21.95810. PUERTO PRINCESA 18 1,726,249.02 217,530.81 793,324.04 282,818.16 1,293,673.01 40.12t11. SAN JOSE 27 5,156,415.08 190,775.50 1,048,834.57 174,577.94 1,414,188.01 19.97612. DART 34 2,351,838.12 55,751.54 746,722.79 134,326.00 936,800.33 25.89813. LEGAZPI 18 1,490,046.13 38,532.89 449,170.05 133,259.47 620,96l.41 25.14914. MASBATE 19 4,594,028.00 43,697.08 1,470,316.06 274,991.32 1,789,004.46 24.96515. NAGA 15 1,432,737.86 103,769.40 213,836.86 131,321.89 448,928.15 19.28816. SORSOGON 14 1,426,305.70 57,776.37 292,113.09 67,105.56 416,995.02 20.36117. ANTIQUE 5 573,889.60 18,227.82 35,392.21 20,517.77 74,137.80 8.80018. BACOLOD 79 8,788,914.02 1,256,065.15 2,259,759.90 1,495,825.40 5,011,650.45 31.82119. KABANKALAN 14 540,503.50 91,871.76 204,599.12 91,389.65 387,86).53 39.78920. ILOILO 45 7,214,249.41 489,276.63 1,287,854.66 -%98,667.00 1,975,808.29 2U.90221. MAASIN 1 381,711.00 0.00 217,457.46 48,280.36 265,737.82 36.29322. KALIBO 62 5,410,254.40. 758,928.93 2,144,726.14 669,808.35 3,573,463.42 3d.43323. ROXAS 83 18,503,291.60 '',994.21 5,654,598.12 1,429,909.73 7,148,502.06 23.67124. CATARMAN 7 1,48U,714.64 203,318.66 783,316.46 339,913.43 1,326,548.55 43.57825. CATBALfGAN 3 949,762.06 5u,476.03 115,800.57 133,546.78 299,823.38 15.60426. CEBU 18 3,821,444.58 144,256.$1 768,743.26 362,324.39 1,275,324.46 19.89027. DUNAGUETE 8 658,253.19 71,962.16 87,746.24 17,848.08 177,556.48 21.40828. TACLOBAN 19 2,334,163.05 142,311.03 431,5U9.40 219,462.71 793,283.1) 20.74729. TAGBILARAN 11 1,78d,189.38 88,610.34 d67,349.18 171,257.11 1,127,216.63 35.99o30. BASILAN 1 240,248.10 0.00 0.UO 0.00 0.00 0.000

P A S T D U E

NO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHiER RATIO OF

B R A N C H E S ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARREARS

31. BITUAN 39 11,045,466.81 293,634.19 2,425,833.53 698,410.50 3,417,878.22 20.187

32. SAN FRANCISCO 13 3,740,718.00 6,933.74 870,370.24 510,774.08 1,388,078.06 19.025

33. ILIGAN 3 597,054.58 2,328.12 98,815.91 35,722.31 136,866.34 14.534

34. OZANIS 4 486,447.18 26,331.22 97,098.04 14,500.42 137,929.68 21.151

35. COTABATO 13 1,442,752.57 32,943.72 243,410.45 %80,408.06 356,762.23 16.389

36. DAVAO 20 3,094,475.91 116,781.92 546,299.95 "135,830.16 798,912.03 18.212

37. DIGOS 6 1,415,400.00 20,854.72 270,063.77 63,427.20 354,345.69 17.260

38. DItPOLOG 13 1,461,865.98 204,730.97 534,385.08 119,007.58 858,123.63 37.025

39. IPIL 11 2,091,465.01 93,137.05 740,378.47 150,637.48 984,153.00 29.433

40. MATI 14 1,813,529.00 214,055.01 924,604.70 225,749.65 1,364,409.36 41.585

41. PAGADIAN 18 2,804,550.14 100,163.72 735,580.75 105,915.15 941,659.62 23.607

42. ZANBOANGA 16 1.453,158.95 393,792.39 319,890.6U 122,369.88 836,052.95 40.251

BANIVIDS 838 126,844,768.90 7,634,917.18 35,446,910.79 12,435,966.89 55,517,794.86 26.545_ m . ,,_,.

TABLE 13a. FCP III (WAN NO. 1694-PH):STATUS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1985

P A 8 T D U ENO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATIO OF

.BRANCH: BANKIWIDE ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARREARS

SUBSECTOR: DEEP SEA FISHING

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0° 0.0002Loans under grace period 1 275,568.86 0.00 20,059.48 12,767.72 32,827.20 6.7451Loans repaying regularly 4 182,028.66 2,105.24- 0.00 0.00 2,105.24- 1.1562Loans in arrears for

0-3 months 16 1,642,085.14 25,374.68 142,331.50 157,719.74 325,425.92 9.3982 °4-6 months 4 188,367.57 18,914.30 18,119.68 4,673.16 41,707.14 17.93527-12 months 5 1,425,696.86 45,931.47 288,651.11 153,713.84 488,296.42 19.516213-24 months 8 1,574.236.81 165,206.60 432,352.69 235,525.29 833,084.58 29.7792Over two years 48 8,479,469.40 2,420,192.38 3,654,296.59 3,059.019.40 9,133,508.37 50.0622Insufficient data 1 6,522.70 0.04- 0.00 0.00 0.04- 0.0102

S U B - T 0 T A L 87 13,773,976.00 2,673.514.15 4,555S811.05 3.623,419.15 10.852,744.35 39.440t

SUBSECTOR: SLIPWAY

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans under grace period 1 107,800.00 0.00 9,712.19 1,585.08 [1,297.27 8.2642Loans repaying regularly 0 0.00 0.00 0.0U 0.00 0.00 U.0tJULoans in arrears for

0-3 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00024-6 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0007-12 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000%13-24 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0U 0.W0OXOver two years 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01) 0.0 0WInsufficient data U O.0u 0.00 0.00 O.O 0.0U 0.000%

S U 8 - T 0 T A L 1 _107,800.00 0.00 9,712.19 [.585.08 1_t291.27 8.2642

P A ST D uE

NO. Or OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATIO OF

BRANCH: BANKWIDE ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARRFARS

SUBSECTOR: ICE PLANT


Loans under grace period 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000O


Loans in arrears for0-3 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

4-6 months 2 393,647.52 17,673.30 30,410.84 684.76 48,76d.90 11.3392

7-12 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

13-24 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00)2

Over two days 2 724,720.05 143,646.74 378,116.08 202,137.55 723.900.37 47.311-


S U B - T 0 T A L 4 1,118,367.57 161,320.04 408,526.92 202,822.31 772&669.27 37.3202

SOBSECTOR: FISHPONDS

Loans in releasing etage * I 44,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002

Loans under grace period 265 45,291,597.35 294,497.90-11,437,293.59 3,157,470.26 14,300,265.95 20.6802

Loans repaying regularly 25 3,421,705.73 35.76- 0.00 0.00 35.76- 0.0012

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 29 2,072,157.83 96,364.08- 158,018.19 67,871.22 129,525.33 11.406%

4-6.months 121 17,410,794.59 456,185.36 1,578,821.42 373,745.19 2,408,751.97 10.7162

7-12 months 109 13,293,868.40 768,412.08 2,926,153.12 751,330.54 4,445,895.74 22.7?7f

13-24 months 78 12,298,996.31 S51,713.45 3,895,002.91 1,362,311.86 6,109,028.22 29.3112

Over two days 113 17,033,275.12 2,760,267.50 10,062,729.78 2,852,954.52 15,675,951.80 47.324S

Insufficient data 2 331,230.00 15,866.63 156,964.99 40,938.31 213,769.93 35.402%

S U B - T 0 T A L 743 111,197,625.33 4,461,547.28 30,214,984.00 8,606,621.90 43,283,153.18 24.521%

P A S T D U eNO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY & OTHER RATIO OF

BRANCH: BANKVIDE ACCOUNTS BALANCE PRINCIPAL INTEREST CHARGES TOTAL ARREARS ARREARS

SUBSeCTOR: SALT BED

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans tader grace period 1 192,000.00 0.00 576.00- 0.00 576.00- 0.3002Loans repaying regularly 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00u2Loans in arrears for0-3 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0U024-6 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00027-12 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00)02

13-24 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002 Over two years 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.V W2oInsufficient data 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0001

S U B - T 0 T A L 1 192,000.00 0.00 576.00- 0.00 576.00- 0.3002

SUBSECTOR: LAMBAKLAD .,

Loans in releasing stage 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans under grace period 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Loans repaying regularly 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0. 0.0002Loans in arrears for

0-3 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00024-6 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00027-12 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0U 0.0002

13-24 months 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0002Over two years 2 455,000.00) 338,535.71 258,452.63 1,518.45 598,506.79 83.6752Insufficient data 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000%

S V 8 - T 0 T A L 2 455,0o0.00 33k,535.71 25,6452.63 1,518.45 598 L1U6. 83.6752

P A S T D U ENO. OF OUTSTANDING PENALTY I OTBER RATIO OF


SUBSECTOR: OVERALL TOTALS

Loans in releasing stage 1 44,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000t

Loans under grace period 268 45,866,966.21 294,497.90-11,466,489.26 3,171,823.06 14,343,814.42 20.513Z

Loans repaying regularly 29 3,603.734.39 2,141.00 0.00 0.00 2,141.00- 0.059I

Loans in arrears for0-3 months 45 3,714,242.97 70,989.40- 300,349.69 225,590.96 454,951.25 9.249X

4-6 months 127 17,992,809.68 492,772.96 1,627,351.94 379,103.11 2,499,228.01 10.6052

7-12 months 114 14,719,565.26 814,343.55 3,214,804.23 905,044.38 4.934,192.16 22.4662

13-24 months 86 13,873,233.12 1,016,920.05 4,327,355.60 1,597,837.15 6,942,112.80 29.363I

Over two years 165 26,692,464.57 5,662,642.33 14,353,595.08 6,115,629.92 26,131,867.33 48.7652

Insufficient data 3 337,752.70 15,866.59 156,964.99 40,938.31 213,769.89 34.9352

T 0 T A L 838 126,844,768.90 7,634,917.18 35,446,910.79 12,435,966.89 55,517,794.86 26.545Z

No. of accounts fully paid: 0

- 104 -

Table 14 - IDP/PCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH) ProjectedVs. Actual Volume of Livestock and FisheriesProduction

ESTIMATED REALIZATIONVOLUME AT ACTUAL OVERAGE/ RATE

PARTICULAR APPRAISAL VOLUME (SHORTFALL) 2

X E T R I C T O N S

A. Livestock/Poultry

Pork 25,000 18,051 (6,919) 27.7Eggs 1/ 2,250 2,985 735 32.7Broiler 2/ 1,900 5,834 3,934 207.1Beef 1,865 4,430 2,565 137.5Milk 3/ - 296 296 -Chevon (Goat) - 18 18Duck - 22 22 -

B. Fisheries

Milkfish 14,200 6,000 (8,200) 57.75Marine Fish 98,200 34,600 63,600 64.76Prawn - 120 120 -Tilapia - 11 11 -Siganids - 13 10 -Solar Salt - 3,630 3,630 -Ice - 12,740 12,740 -

1/ 24 assorted chicken eggs or 18 assorted duck eggs 1 kg.2/ Includes culled layers produced31 0.001 ton a 1.0 liter

-105-

'able 15 - LP/FCP ItI (Loan No. 1994-PH);rEaployment Generated

APPRAISAL ACTUALgo. of Unit E'ploy- No. of Unit Eaploy-Financed ment (N.Y.) Financed ment (M.Y.)

I'. Piggery or Poultry

4 Piggery 1,850 1,480 1,275 1,2751 Jroiler - - 1.630 325

layer 300 90 3,758 94Duck - - 758 18Other small livestock 100 50 - -

2. Cattle

* nill/Coco-Beef 65 130 3,545 236Cattle Fattening - 1,225 316

* Coat - 79 79Dairy/Village Cattle 45 225 461 92

3. Inland Fisheries 450 450 687 500

4. Marine Vessels 2,334 5,302 69 1,104

. Others:

Slaughterhouse - - ISolar Salt - - 2 16Slipway ^ - 4 20Ice Plant - - 2 20Lambaklad 1 5

TOTAL 5,144 7,727 13,497 4,100

1e Assumption on estimates of animal units and labor requirements.

Per Unit Labor Requirement (Actual)

1. Piggery 20 1:202. Broiler 1,000 1:50003. Layer . 100 1:40004. Duck 100 1:40005. Nill/coco-teef 1 1:156. Dairy 1 1:57. Cattle Fattening -10 1:508. Goat 20 1:20

NOTE: One caretaker was employed for the whole year operation andconsidered man year.

- 106 -

Table 16 - lDP/VCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH):Rates of Returns of Sub-Loans, byType of Sub-Project

ActualAppraisal Estimates (Based on 19ts4/85 Castings)

Type of Sub-Project IRR__ ERR IRR ERR

t. Livestock and Poultry

1. Piggery 1/ 21.0 17.0 22.7 19.4Z. till-Bee

(Breeding) 2/ 20.9 26.8 20.0 18.03. Village Cattle 3/ 42.0 100.0 32.6 14.34. layer 4/ 28.0 19.6 24.0 20.05. Aroiler 5/ None None 59.0 61.9

II. Inland Fisheries

A. New Models

1. Construction of NewFishpond Sub-Projects

a. Monoculture None None 28.0 38.0Milkfish 6/

b. Polyculture,Nilkfish/Prawn 6/ None None 37.0 49.0

c. Milkfish-SaltCombination 7/ None None 36.0 60.0

2. Expansion of ExistingFishpond Sub-trojects

a. Monoculture,MilRfisbh6/ None None 36.0 38.0

b. Polyculture,Milkfish-Prawn 61 None None 44.0 64.0

c. Nilkfisb-SaltCombination 7/ gone lone 40.0 73.0

I/ Increasing sow-level from 5 to 201/ 40-ba hill-beef sub-project, increasing breeder level from 25 to 503/ 50-cattle breeder sub-project, under the village "paiwi" scheme4/ Poultry layer sub-project, increasing capacity from 540 to 1,620 birds.5/ 5,000-broiler contract growing6/ 25-ha fishpond sub-project7/ 10-ha fishpond sub-project

- 107 -

Table 16 - IDP/FC? III (Loan No. 1894-PH):Rates of Returns of Sub-Loand, byType of Sub-Project

ActualAppraisal Estimates (Based on 1964/65 Castings)

Type of Sub-Project IRR ERR IRR ERR

S. Traditional Models 8/

a. New Constrtuction 27.0 43.0 27.1 39.7

b. Major Reconstruction 23.0 33.0 27.6 38.3

c. Partial Recons-truction 17.14 26.0 28.6 39.5

d. Minor Rehabili-tation 41.0 53.0 54.7 54.3

III. Marine Fisheries

A. Fishing Vessel

1. 35 GT Trawler None None 33.0 41.02. 45 GT Trawler None None 34.0 39.0

IV. Ice Plants

1. 5-Ton Capacity None None 23.0 27.92. 45-Ton Capacity None None 32.0 32.1

8 15-ha fishpond suproject

- 108 -

Table 16a - DP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Piggery modelincreasing sow level from 5 to 20, Based on1984-'85 Monitoring and Evaluation System Data

Appraisal M E SBasic Assumption Area/Unit Unit Cost Area Cost Unit Cost

I. Investment Cost

A. Fixed Investment

1. Shed-type Hoghouse 125 sqm 200/sqm 115.4 sqm 400/sqm2. Water System 1 5,000 1 15,0003. Bodega 7 260 - -4. Equipment - 700 - _

B. Working Capital

1. StockGilts 15 1,100 15 3,413Boars 1 3,000 1 5,000

2. Feeds 11,710 1.46 20,856 7 3.563. MSV 2,600 17 4,45d4. Utilities 600 600 10 7 6/sow/mo.5. Labor 3,500 1 730/sow/mo.

C. Pre-Operating Expenses 1,000 1,500

.Per Sub-Project

XI. Total Investment Cost 106,000 220,527

III. Total Economic Investment 88,605 170,022

IV. Yearly Incremental Financial Operatinc Cost

Year Amount Year Amount

1 39,900 1 84,0632 71,700 2 194,7443 156,700 3-10 199,744

4-10 159,700

V. Breakdown of Sales Per Unit Cost

* .'Cull Sow 800 2,800Cull Boar 1,600 2,700Weaners 238 400Finisher 917 1,610

- 109 -

TABLE 16a. - LDPFCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): Piggerymodel increasing sow level from 5 to20, Based on 1984 - '85 Monitoring andEvaluation System Data

VI. Yearly Incremental Financial Revenue.

Per sub-project

Year MAount Year Amount

1 2,9Q0 1 6,0002 115,800 2 245,440' *3 147,700 3 - 10 248,140

VIII.Yearly Increme Economic Revenue

1 2,380 1 4,8002 94,960 2 196,352

3 - 10 121,110 3 - 10 198,512

IX. Repayment Terms 10 yrs with 2 10 yrs. with 2years grace years grace

X. Internal Rate of Return 211 22.71X

XI. Economic Rate of Return 172 19.38X

- 110 -

Table 16b - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): 400-Ha. E.illoeefModel Increasing Breeding Level from 25 to 50 ReadBased oan 1984-85 Monitoring and Evaluation SystemData

Agpraisal N E.SBasic Assuiption Area/Unit Unit Cost Area Unit Unit Cost

(Pesos) . (Pesos)

I. Item in Total Investment Cost

1. Perimeter Repair 9.6 km P 2,000 9.4 km 2,0002. Major Fencing 2.0 kam 7,000 2.0 km 16,3333. Internal Fencing 2.75km 6,509 2.75km 16,3334. Pasture Improvement

Category 3 100 ha. 100 100 ha. *360)Category 4 30 ha. 670 30 ha. 520Category 5 10 ha. 740 10 ha. 1,810)

5. Farm Structures

Cowboy's Quarter 1 5,000 1 9,80jFarm Shed 1 5,000 1 13,OJUCorral 1 15,003 1 1a,00;)Water System 2 9,600 2 10,000

6. Heifers 25 hd. 2,600 25 17,63-)7. Bulls 2 hd. 12,000 2 3u,UOO

1I. Total Financial Investment Cost

Per Sub-Project


1 58,060 1 611,5492 24,620 2 45,8833 71,540 3 76,183Total 154,220 Total 733,615

III. Total Economic Investment Cost

NOT INDICATED 1 508,8092 38,1753 63,384

Total 610,368

- 111 -

Table 16b - WP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH):400-Ha. Nillbeef Model Increasing Level from 25 to

* 50 Read, Based on 1984-85 Monitoring and EvaluationSystem Data

nV. Total Financial Operating Cost

SYear Amount Year Amount

1 15,740 1 43,1962 15,780 2 48,0633 15,910 3 56,3714 15,980 4 63,1265 16,040 5 68,3246 17,230 6 76,1077 17,400 7 86,311a 17,490 8 89,5469 21,040 9-25 91,873

10 21,20011 21,27012 21,40013 21,95014 22,05015 22,25016 22,63017 22,83318 22,96019 23,16020 23,36021 23,59022 23,62023 23,72024 23,85025 23,980

V. Total Economic Operating Cost

1 18,940 1 27,0532 21,490 2 30,0253 27,450 3 35,2464 27,710 4 38,3465 28,620 5 41,8136 31,230 6 45,6327 31,440 7 51,527

-. 8. ,: 35,320 8 53,0729 *36050* 9-25 54,677

11 39,82012 40,36013 40,590

14-25 40,680

- 112 -

Table 16b. - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. ld94-PH):430-Ra. Hillbeef Model Increasing level from25 to 50 Head Based on 1984-85 Monitoring andEvaluation System Data

VI. Composition of Sales

Amount Amount

Culled Bulls 3,000 7,506Culled Cows 1,700 . 4,778Weanrs 1,800 -

lefers 2,100 3,197steers - 3,390

VI. Total Financial Revenues


1 39,500 1 73,8312 39,800 2 100,1363 45,000 3 108,2444 64,600 4 126,5225 75,000 5 144,8016 93,200 6 159,6897 105,200 7 182,6868 121,200 8 249,2379 173,450 9 328,650

10 180,350 10-25 354,99911 241,55012 278,30013 310,90014 323,950

15-25 323,950

VIII. Total Economic Revenue


1 33,970 1 61,4272 34,228 2 83,3133 38,700 3 90,0594 55,556 4 105,2665 64,500 . 5 120,474.6 80,152 6 132,8617 990,472. 7 152,145

;.8- 2;i8 . '' 0736S9 149,167 9 273,437

10 .155,IC1 10-25 295,35911 207,73312 239,33813 267,374

- 14 278,59715-25 278,597

u - ~~~~~~~~113-

Table 16b - DP/FCP III (Loan llo. 1894-PUl):400-fa. Hillbeef Model Itcteasing Levelfrom 25 to 50 Read

IX. Repayment Terms fifteen Year with Fifteen years with5 years, grace period 5 yrs. grace period

X. Internal Rate of Return 20.91 201

XI. Economic Rate of Return 26.82 18.3S

- 114 -

Table 16c - MDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): 50-Cattle BreederModel Under the Village "Paivi" Scheme Based on1984-85 Monitoring and Evaluation System Data

ppraisal n K SBasic Asumption Uiit Cnit cost Unit Unit Cost

(1984-85)

I. Major Items in Total Investment Cost

A. Fixed

ShedlBarn 1,503Crates 150Total 1,650

Stock 50 2,700 S0 8,000

B. Working.Capital

Feeds

Heifer Ration - ldO kg 3.90Lactating Mash - - 1,228.8 3.6oBreeder Mash - - 583.2 3.9utsv - - 82 133Dull Service - - 50 hd 100Supervision Fee - - 50 9)Repair & Maintenance - - - U

:I. Total Financial Investment Per Sub-ProjectCost 164,670 (derived) 7429,40J.00

1II. Total Economic InvestmentCost Not Indicated 7363.643.00

IV. Yearly Financial Operating Cost


1 19,670 1 31,5492 11,050 2 76,5743 1,560 3-14 78,4284 12,680 *

22,140 ..- *

7 12,0708 11,9609 1,790

10 11,66011 11,49012 21,30013 11,08014 11,000

* - 115-

Table 16c - WP/!CP III (Loan No. 1894-PH):5ii-Cattle Breeder Model Under the Village "Paiwi"Scaeme Based on 1984-85 Monitoring and EvaluationSystem Data

V. Early Economic Operatiug Cost


1 4,040 1 26,2572 4,070 2 63,9403 4,460 3-14 65,4964 4,8505 5,1806 5,3807 5,4508 5,4309 5,40010 5,43011 5,35012 5,26013 5,13014 5,090

VI. Composition of Sales Per Unit Cost

Culled Cow 3,180/hd 9,0J0Culled Bull 3,000/hd -Yearling Heifer 2,000/nd 8,000Steers (42 mos.) 5,036/hd 3,227*Milk 250/hd 7.50/li

VII. Total Financial Revenues Per Sub-Project


1 1 15,1202 31,025 2 130,0743 63,320 3-14 228,4324 73,7405 121,6006 138,2257 138,2258 136,4759 126,100

-. - --~ . 10 ",.-. 1151400-. ; ;t 2.- + -1t '^ b 102,100 *

12 99,32513 78,40014 69,300

116 -

Table 16c - DP/FCP III (Loan Now 1894-PH):50-Cattle Breeder Model Under the Village "Paiwi"Scheme Based on 1984-85 Monitoring and EvaluationSystem Data

VIIl. Total econamic Revenue


1 7,740 1 12,7012 41,730 2 109,2613 75,940 3-14 191,2614 72,8105 117,3706 135,8707 138,1008 133,9409 127,07010 114,68011 104,29012 99,28013 82,080.14 71,970

IX. Repayment Terms 15 yrs w/ 5 yrs grace 15 yrs w/ 5 grace

X. Internal Rate of Return 422 32.56X

XI. Economic Rate of Return 1002 33.1%

- 117 -

Table 16d - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH):Poultry Layer Model Increasing Layer Capacityfrom 540 to 1,620 Birds Based on 1984-85 Monitoringand Evaluation System Data

Appraisal I E SBasic Assumption Area/Unit Unit Cost Area Unit Unit Cost

(Peso) (Peso)

I. Invesoment Cost

A. Fixed Investment

1. Brooder House 44 sqm 7 230 44 sqm P 3002. Layer House 80.6 sqm 350 80.6 sqi 35u3. Equipment 1 3,500 1 6,0jv4. Water System 1 2,500 1 4,700

S. Working Capital

1. Day-Old-Chicks 1,200 4.20 1,200 9.oU2. Feeds:

Starter 2,440 2.0 2,484 5.23Grower 7,860 1.75 9,816 4.62Layer 3,596 1.94 3,683 4.93

3. MSV 21 TFC 500* - 2,600*4. Utilities 1Z TFC 300* - 1,023*5. Labor 90/1,000 - - 16,580*

II. Total Investment Cost Per Sub-ProjectYear Amount Year Amount

1 766,200 1 1143,5702 10,700 2 36,1503 - 3Total 776.900 Total 7179,720

III. Total Economic Investmuent

1 754,218 1 1117,5852 8,763 2 29,5663 - 3Total Y62,981 7147,150

IV. Yearly Incremental Operating Cost

1 I 9,700 7 28,8252 74,200 197,4183 101,400 241,481

- 118 -

Table 164 - WP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH):Poultry Layer Model Increasing LayerCapacity from 540 to 1,620 birdsBased on 1984-85 Monitoring and EvaluationSystem Data

V. Yearly Incremental Economic Operating Cost

Year Amount Year Amount1 IF 7,944 ' 23,6062 60,770 *2 161,6853 83,047 3 197,773

VI. Breakdown of Sales Per Unit Cost

1. Eggs 103,368 0.54 358,275 1.152. Culls 270 12.0 79d 28.03. Droppings 5,150 0.15 17.35a 0.104. Feed bags 370 2.0 1,250 3.30

VII. Yearly Incremental Financial RevenuePer Sub-Project

Year Amount Year Amount1 14,900 1 (11,497)2 93,200 2 232,2243 121,830 3 293,741

VIII. Yearly Incremental Economic Revenue

Year Amount Year Amount1 12,203 1 (9,416)2 76,331 2 190,191

3-10 99,754 3-10 240,574

IX. Ratio on Incremental Total Operating Costto Incremental Total Revenue

Year Amount Year Amount1 65.1X-- 1 (2.52)

2 79.62 2 8523 83.32 3 822

X. Repayment Terms Ten years with 2 Ten years with 2years grace period years grace period

XI. Treatment of Pre-Op Equity of borr,ower Equity of borrowere.g. comitsent and included in and included inFee and Accrued investment cost the investment costInterest

XII. Interval Rate of Returns 28S 23.62

XIII. Economic Rate of Returns 19.62 20

** Total Cost

_ 119 -

TABLE 16e. - LDP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PP): 5,000 -broiler contract growing uaoel, 1984-85 a/

Basic Assumption

I. Major Items inTotal Investment Cost (pesos)

Per sub-project

A; P;

1. Brooder/Grower House 120,0002. Bodega 5,0003. Water System 25,000

Total 150,000

B. Working Capital

1. Day old chicks* -2. Feels* -3. Laber 3,7504. Add'l Feeds 6,2005. Utilities 3,5006. Med. Supp., Vaccines 3,9007. Miscellaneous expe.lses 500

Total 17,850

C. Pre-Operating Expenses 2,347

II. Total Financial Investment (pesos) P170,197

1IU. Total Economic Investment (pesos) 139,144

IV. Yearly Financial Operating Cost (pesos)

Year 1 68,1002 -8 90,800

V. Yearly Economic Operating Coat. (pesos)

Year 1 47,121,2- 61,893

VI. Composition of sales unit Cost(pesos)

Broiler (Liquidation) 1st 1.3 kilos at 71.50/hd+ excess weight at 719.20/kg.

Feed Bags 73.00/pcManure 70.10/kg

- 120 -

Table 16e. - DP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PP.): 5000 - BroilerContract Growing Model, 1984-85 a/

VII. Total Financial Revenues (pesos)

Year 1 107,5002-8 143,310

VIII. Total.8conomic Revenue (pesos)

Year 1 86,7442 - 8 115,608

IX. Repayment Terms 8 years vith 2 years grace

X. Internal Rate of Return 59.02

XI. Economic Rate of Return 61.92

a/ Appraisal model not provided; actual model based on dataprovided by ASD Monitoring and Evaluation System (HES)

x Supplied Integrators

Table 16f - 1DP/FCP III (Loan No. 1894-PH): New FishpondModels by Type of Culture, Based on 1984-85Monitoring and Evaluation System Data

MONO CULTURE POLYCULTURE SiLTED-FISHPOND

25-Na. 25- Va. 10-Ha.

NEW EXISTING NEW EXISTING NEW EXISTING

1. Investment Cost (7000) 915.52 568.81 1,013.03 670.32 1,171.44 979.72

2. Production (UT)Nilkfish 30.38 30.38 9.00 9.00 9.45 9.45

Prawn _ - 4.00 4.00

Salt - - 947.70 947.70

3. Ave. Price/Nt (F )Milkfish 20.00 20.00 20 20 20 20

Prawn - - 1.50 1.50 - -

Salt -_ _ 7.33 7.33

4. Revenue (1000) 607.50 607.50 780.00 780.00 883.98 883.98

5. Operating Cost (7000) 255.88 225.88 329.91 329.91 416.57 416.57

6. Net Operating Cost 381.62 381.62 450.00 450.09 467.41 467.41

7. IRR (S) 28 36 37 44 36 40

8. IRR (X) 38 38 49 64 60 73

Table 16g - LDP/ICP III (Loan No. 1894-PR): Traditional 15-Ha.Milkfish Fishpond Nodels by Loan Purpose, Based on1986-1985 Monitoring and Evaluation System/Data

NEW CONSTRUCTION MAJOR RECONSTRUCTION PARTtAL RRCOUSTRUCTION MINOR REHABILITATIONAPPRAI8AL MES APPRAISAL MES APPRAISAL MES APPRAISAL MES

1. Investment Cost(Pt00) 268.00 576.66 214.00 464.16 168.00 346.66 48.00 199.36

2. Production (MT) 25.00 18.23 25.00 18.23 19.00 14.34 25.00 18.23

3. Ave. Price/MT (7) 6.00 20.00 6.00 20.00 6.00 20.00 6.00 20.00 9

4. Revenue (7000) 150.00 364.60 150.00 364.60 114.00 286.68 150.00 364.60

5. Operating Cost (P000) 63.00 132.64 63.00 132.64 50.00 120.60 63.00 132.64

6. Net Operating Income(7OOO) 87.00 231.96 87.00 231.96 64.00 166.28 67.00 231.96

7. IRR (Z) 27 27 23 28 17 28 41 54

8. ERR (z) .43 40 33 38 26 40 53 54

Table 16h - LP/PCP Itt (Loan No. 1894-PR):Marine Vessels and Iceplants Models, by Cspacity,Based on Results of 1984-85 Monitoring andEvaluation system Data

TRAVLZR DKUP-SSA Ica PLAIT35 GT 45 GT S Tom 45 TO

1. Investment Cost (1oO0) 951.47 1,262.80 1,120.38 4,811.53

2. Production (MT) 271.04 338.80 1,350.00 12,803.00

3. Ave. Price/MT (1) 7,313.00 7,313.00 500.00 367.00

4. Revenue (1000) 1,982.46 2,478.08 675.00 4,700.00

5. Operating Cost (1000) 1,631.88 1,995.17 348.00 3,069.00

6. Net operating Income (000) 350.58 482.91 207.00 1,631.00

7. IRI 332 342 232 322

8. ERR 412 p92 282 321

- 125 - M IE.OSL I

OUV4LOPMENT BANK OC TH: P4IUPPIN

A40 C4* YIA I a,4A

r . G;r ahAn V)ona i dson*i vi onr li etXq,t iculture., lnfraswirtLr-ture & Humitv Ressoturcr%

OJperat 1 ot3 EvOtatdtij on D)ep3t tfentThe World 14ank18sl H. Street Wi.W.Washinricto, t 24003lU.J. S. A.

Dear 11r- . Vne 1 d!ion:

ihantk yot for turnisiring us i dra*:t corp of v'ntr reportconcerning the Project Completion Fepcrt. (PCUe oui the 'tl-tirtoLivestock attd Fisheries Ct-edit Prt-olect *tlon 1i84-+1Hlpr-epared by the Development bank of the Philippine-s.

We concur wi th YouAr overview on okr -PC excret for somuefigitresi pre?sented in Table $ Ipage 6) as followss

1. lshe :cttual nutmber of Iivestock: sub-proiects financed byOBP was 218f7 and not 2,879. Hence total sub-projec-tsf i nanc.ed (livestock #- fisheries) sthould be ad justedfrom 3,64b to 35,644.

2. li terms of &mounI. of investment. in IIve stCksutb-sector, the actual lending of $4-3M ato s4b-bor-r-wers is 1 a% end tnot 1Of. of the Jargetted amutusltof $36. 4MM.

We hope the ebov'e figures cart be rectified in your fin.slreport to the WIB Executive Dirpctors.

We also appreciate your comment thet inspile of thlefinancial constraints encountered by P)fP, the eanaremorntterformince of DPP was highiy vprcfessional and should be,

commended.

BANOKO SA PAGPAPAUNLA 14G NO UPSI S TELEX: RCA 2s97 Of.-

HEAD OFFICE I4AKATI, METRG MANILA. PHILIPPINES GLOSE-MACKA^ 45,r OR-.P. 0 F1OY AOCI. MAKAII CENTPAL POST OFFICF 1200 EASTERN 637' 'R

CABLE: PHILOEBANK VtANILATELFPNONE 81.ID.9-561 TO 9S2t

Sin slPfII TO) 94i2'

Documents

World Bank Documentdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/... · document of the world bank for official use only report no. 7871 project completion report philippines third livestock