Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
To ensure that the concerns arising from the deficiencies noted in the
audit shall be properly addressed, it is suggested that the Department consider
issuing Department Order prescribing the following:
1. The minimum terms and conditions for contracting solid wastes
collection to protect the interest of the government and ensure the
effective performance of contractors. This may include among
others, the following:
a.
b.
c.
2.
Contents
Part I
Page
Executive Summary
Background
2
Audit Objective
3
Audi Scope and Methodology
3
Audit Conclusion
4
Managements Reaction to Audit Observations
Part II
Background
7
National Solid Waste Management Commission 8
Joint Congressional Oversight Committee
8
Metro Manila Development Authority
9
Local Government Units 10
Coordination of Waste Management Activities
11
Involvement of Industry
14
Costs Associated with Waste Management
14
Part III
16
Chapter 1
17
Chapter 2
Appropriate Resources
Introduction
34
Observation
34
Managements Response and
Teams Rejoinder 37
Recommendation
39
33
Chapter 3
40
41
41
56
Introduction 57
Observation
57
Managements Response and
Teams Rejoinder 60
Recommendation
63
Chapter 5
Cost Measures
64
Introduction
65
Observation
67, 73
Managements Response and
Teams Rejoinder 74
Recommendation
80
Part IV
Annexes
83
PART I
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
1.1.1.
1.1.2.
1.1.3.
1.1.4.
The Solid Waste Management (SWM) system has six elements: waste
generation, transfer, recovery/processing, storage, collection and
disposal. The audit did not endeavor to cover all stages but focused on
solid waste collection which is critical among the six mentioned
elements.
1.1.5.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUDIT OBJECTIVE
1.1.7
The audit focused on the evaluation of selected contracts for the year
2001 and 2002 of the following LGUs:
Makati City
Mandaluyong City
Pasig City
Quezon City
Pasay City
Caloocan City
Manila City
Marikina City
Malabon City
Valenzuela City
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The audit was conducted from July 16 to October 31, 2002 pursuant to
COA Assignment Order No. 2002-021 dated July 18, 2002.
AUDIT CONCLUSION
1.1.9
The audit concluded that generally, selected LGUs have not efficiently
and economically carried out their SWM function through the
satisfactory selection of contractors and monitoring their performance
in the collection, cleaning and disposal of solid wastes. This was due
to failure of the LGUs to establish adequate policies and procedures on
selection of contractors to ensure that the most qualified contractors
were selected. Moreover, the performance of selected contractors were
not properly monitored due to absence of established policies and
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PART II
BACKGROUND
2.1
Solid waste, according to internationally accepted definition, is nonliquid waste material arising from domestic trade, commercial,
industrial and mining activities. It also includes wastes arising from the
conduct of public services such as street sweeping, landscape
maintenance, and the clearing of debris brought about by typhoons.
2.2
2.3
frequent use of disposable items such as diapers, razors, pens and lately,
even disposable cameras;
increase in packaging and the use of non-refillable materials;
indifference of some stakeholders to the advantages of recycling;
patronizing products that are made from recyclable, rather than nonrecyclable sources;
presence of household toxic wastes in the garbage stream.
2.4
2.5
the Metropolis in 2000 and 2001, this function was passed by the
MMDA to the LGUs. The MMDA now merely provides financial
assistance to the LGUs to assist them in the disposal function. Under
R.A. 7924 (Law creating MMDA), MMDA shall take the role of a
virtual coordinating body in SWM. Thus, it is considered as a regional
office for the 17 Cities and Municipalities within Metro Manila.
2.6
2.6.1
2.6.2
2.7
2.7.1
The NSWMC shall report to Congress, not later than March 30 of every
year following the approval of R.A. 9003, the detailed account of its
accomplishment and progress on SWM during the year and the
necessary recommendations on the need for legislative action.
2.7.2
Set the guidelines and over-all framework to monitor and ensure the
proper implementation of R.A. 9003;
Submit periodic reports to Congress;
Determine inherent weaknesses in the law and recommend necessary
remedial legislation;
Perform such other duties and functions as may be necessary to attain its
objectives pursuant to the provisions of R.A. 9003.
2.8
2.8.1
2.8.2
2.8.3
Develop a provincial SWM plan from the submitted SWM plans of the
respective city and municipal SWM boards which shall be submitted to
the NSWMC for approval;
Provide the necessary logistical and operational support to its component
cities and municipalities in consonance with subsection (f) of Section 17
of R.A. 7160;
Convene joint meetings of the provincial, city and municipal SWM boards
at least every quarter for purposes of integrating, synchronizing,
monitoring and evaluating the development and implementation of its
provincial SWM plan;
Represent any of its component City or Municipality in coordinating its
resource and operational requirements with agencies of the national
government.
2.9
2.9.1.
Under R.A. 7160, among the basic services and facilities that shall be
provided by the LGUs is solid waste collection.
2.9.2
2.9.3
Develop the City or Municipal SWM Plan that shall ensure the long-term
management of solid waste, as well as integrate the various SWM plans
and strategies of the barangays in its area of jurisdiction. In the
development of the SWM Plan, it shall conduct consultations with various
sectors of the community;
Review every two (2) years or as the need arises, the City or Municipal
SWM Plan for purposes of ensuring its sustainability, viability,
effectiveness and relevance to local and international developments in the
field of SWM.
The City or Municipal SWM Plan shall be composed among others of:
10
2.10
processing
source reduction
recycling
composting
solid waste facility capacity and final disposal
education and public information on source reduction, recycling and
composting programs
special waste
resource requirements and funding
incentive programs
2.10.1 Since various aspects of waste management are spread over a number
of agencies, it is important that the duties and responsibilities of each
agency are clear and that their activities are well-coordinated. This is
necessary to ensure that all agencies involved in SWM are working
toward common goals. Since R.A. 9003 took effect in December 2001,
most of the LGUs have incorporated their SWM plan either in their
Medium-Term Development Plan (MTDP) or Investment Plan for
2002.
11
Gathering data needed for the preparation of the National SWM Status
Report to be used as basis in formulating the National Solid Waste
Framework;
Issued the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of R.A. 9003 with
the assistance of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP);
Drafted 7 guidelines to support the enforcement of the Act;
Issued guidelines to encourage LGUs to establish and operate Materials
Recovery Facilities (MRFs) and composting facilities;
Issued guidelines on the operation of controlled dumps as temporary
disposal sites until 2006;
Finalized guidelines on duty and tax-free importation of Waste Recovery
and Recycling Equipment with the Department of Finance;
On-going formulation and pilot- testing of model SWM Plans in 3
provincial cities;
Implementation of Integrated SWM Programs with donor assistance in the
Visayas (Regions VI, VII and VIII);
Provided assistance to 30 LGUs in the conversion of open dumpsites to
controlled dumpsites, one of which was Lingunan dumpsite in Valenzuela
City;
Assessed potential sites for waste processing and disposal facilities;
Conducted technical review and technology evaluation of 23 proposed
waste management projects and technical advice to proponents;
Showcased MRFs and Ecological SWM projects nationwide;
Conducted information and education campaign:
a.
b.
c.
2.11.2 The following LGUs were able to partially implement R.A. 9003 thru
the following:
12
biodegradable and fielding two trucks at the same time for collection. The
scheme enabled the City to give livelihood to families engaged in
scavenging by commissioning them as sorters of solid waste paid on a
daily basis while at the same time earning an income from sale of
salvaged solid waste for the City.
The City of Valenzuela on the other hand, has established its Ecology
Learning Center (ELC) in April 1999 which was further
strengthened/improved to meet the requirements of RA 9003. Based on
their 10-year ESWM Plan, R.A. 9003 will be implemented as follows:
Period
1999-2001
2002-2004
2005-2008
Implementation/Coverage
Involving 4 barangays
Including additional 15 barangays
Covering the 32 barangays of the City
Storage of waste
Discharge or set out of waste for collection
Waste collection system
Waste collection truck standards
Conduct of public information, education and communication (IEC)
campaigns
Administrative procedures and imposable administrative fines
Collection and disposition of fines
Penal provisions
13
2001
2002
BY CONTRACT:
Quezon
Manila
Makati
Pasay
Caloocan
Pasig
P 681,476,044.45**
473,153,280.00**
534,066,584.22**
224,980,320.00**
286,556,805.00**
177,945,002.00
P 541,170,098.28*
493,468,800.00**
NA
232,320,000.00**
247,380,000.00**
175,708,494.00**
14
CITY
Mandaluyong
EXPENSES
2001
140,603,097.21@
2002
NA
BY ADMINISTRATION:
Marikina
Malabon
Valenzuela
63,834,061.69
43,907,342.96
49,068,836.00
NA
25,046,857.33***
38,700,187.00***
15
PART III
Audit Observations
and
Recommendations
16
CHAPTER 1
17
INTRODUCTION
3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
OBSERVATION
Generally, LGUs do not have adequate policies and procedures in
the selection of contractors for the collection, cleaning and disposal
of solid wastes. While two LGUs were able to define contractors
qualifications, the bidders were not required to submit their current
and present commitments with other LGUs and private entities to
assess the actual resources committed to the services being bidded
out. In other LGUs, basic factors such as financial capability,
adequacy of equipment, experience/track record on solid wastes
hauling, technical proposal and work plan were not even considered
in the evaluation. This resulted in the awarding of contracts to
contractors not qualified to undertake the required services as
18
Of the ten LGUs covered in the audit, 7 were contracting out the
collection, cleaning and disposal of solid wastes to private contractors
either on a clean up or per trip basis. The audit however disclosed that
while contracting out has been practiced for several years, the LGUs
have not established policies and procedures in selecting contractors to
undertake SWM operations. The City Governments of Quezon and
Pasig however managed to define the qualification of contractors
allowed to participate in any bidding undertaken for this purpose.
However, the bidders were not required to submit their current and
present commitment with other LGUs and private entities for the
provision of the same services to assess the actual resources available
for the services being bidded out.
3.1.4
3.1.5
3.1.6
3.1.7
Of all LGUs, the City Government of Quezon was the only City to have
issued Executive Order providing guidelines in the conduct of public
bidding and award of contract for solid waste collection and disposal
services.
3.1.8
Under the Executive Order, the Quezon City Government will issue
Terms of Reference (TOR) where the contractors qualifications are set
as follows:
19
Has at least the minimum number of trucks to service the district/subdistricts bidded for and at least 20% of the minimum as reserve units.
In case the prospective bidder opts to apply in more than one
district/sub-district, the minimum number of units should be
equivalent to the minimum number of trucks required in said
districts/sub-districts plus the 20 % as reserve units;
Owns 50% of fleet;
Has at least 1 service vehicle for every 10 units of truck for
monitoring and information dissemination. Said vehicles should be
equipped with a public address system;
Must provide with the necessary Information and Educational
Campaign (IEC) materials for their information dissemination
activities;
Has a complementing solid waste and/or dispatching area appropriate
to the size of its fleet equipped with maintenance facilities and
manpower;
Eligible contractors may submit bids in one or more than one
district/sub-district open for bidding;
Has the financial capability to sustain operations during the duration
of the contract;
Submission of Work Plan containing the following information:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
The TOR also set penalties in case contractors failed to comply with
the following requirements to be deducted from the contractors billing:
Violation/Requirement
Penalties
P250.00
per
lacking/truck/day
item
20
Violation/Requirement
Penalties
Amount equivalent to one
cell/day
Amount equivalent to one
cell/truck/day
150 % of the amount of one cell
/day
Amount equivalent to one
cell/complaint/day
Amount equivalent to one cell
The failure of the LGUs to establish policies and procedures for SWM
operation resulted in awarding of contracts to contractors who were not
capable of undertaking the tasks as illustrated below:
Caloocan City
a.
21
b.
c.
During the audit, the audit team was consistently reminding the
SWM officials on uncollected solid wastes most particularly in
major thoroughfares in Barangay 177 particularly along Zabarte
road within the jurisdiction of Caloocan City.
d.
Makati City
The contractor in different areas have not been meeting the
required number of trips as illustrated below:
Contractor
E.C. Sarrol
REN Trans.
Corp.
R.T.
Machineries,
Inc.
ACY Trans.
Corp
Req.
Daily
No. of
Trips
No. of
Trips /
Day per
Dispatch
Report
(Range)
Discrep
-ancy
per
Day
No. of
Equip.
Utilized
Contractors
Equipment
per
Inspection
No. of
Equip.
Req.
29
20-26
3-9
12
27
15
67
48-56
11-19
26
350
34
38
29-32
6-9
16
20
19
69
45-55
14-24
26
44
35
203
Quezon City
a.
District
Contractor
Min.
Req.
No. of
Trucks
I
III
IV
Dodge
Omni
IPM
47
50
56
20%
Reserve
Total
No. of
Trucks
Req.
No. of
Trucks
per
Proposal
Difference
Contractors
score per
BACs
evaluation
9
10
11
56
60
67
54
51
56
2
9
11
15 %
15 %
14 %
22
b.
c.
Manila City
While the contract specify the requirements of the City, the
bidders were not required to submit work plan or technical
proposal detailing the strategies to implement the services
required under the contract. As such, the obligations of the
contractors were not clear. In the equipment work plan
furnished to the team, it would even appear that a lesser number
of equipment would be fielded than what has been required
under the contract. Some issues not clear in the contract follow:
a.
b.
c.
Mandaluyong City
The basis of awarding the contract to the lone contractor could
not be determined as there were no bid and other related
documents provided to the team attesting the qualifications of
the contractor. The contract has been consistently awarded to
the same contractor since 1999 with the contract cost for CY
2001 increased by 46.11% without any explanation and
justification.
23
Pasay City
a.
Contractor
a. Greenline
Onyx
Envirotech
Phils. Inc.
(GOEPI)
On-going Contracts
-
b. RM
Maintenance
Services
b.
Quezon City
San Juan
Ayala Center
Association
Ecology
Village
Ecology
Village
Condominium
2001-2002
1992-2002
1995-2001
Caloocan City
2001-2002
1998-2002
1998-2002
Truck/Equipment
per inspection
GOEPI
RM
Maintenance
c.
Period Covered
11 10 wheeler DT
12 6 wheeler DT
13 10 wheeler DT
2 6 wheeler DT
Equipment requirement in
the cities with existing
contracts
Quezon
Caloocan
40
Equipment
required
for Pasay
8
14
This only shows that the bidders do not have enough equipment
to simultaneously enter into contract with different Cities. Their
capability to collect and dispose of solid wastes in their
areas/sectors were therefore questionable. This was manifested
by uncollected solid wastes noted by the team during ocular
inspection at Tolentino Street under Sector 3-E serviced by RM
Maintenance Services. (Annex 1)
24
Pasig City
The bidders were likewise not required to submit their on-going
and current commitment with other LGUs and private
organizations. This led to the contractors failure to efficiently
collect solid wastes in their area of responsibility as in the case
of IPM Construction. The contractor has simultaneous contracts
with Pasig and Quezon City Governments and the Municipality
of Taguig. For the month of November 2002 alone, the
contractor failed to collect 1 to 5 dump trucks and 2.5 to 10 mini
dump trucks of solid wastes daily within 19 days.
Marikina City
25
c.
d.
e.
f.
Malabon City
a.
b.
c.
d.
Valenzuela City
a. Drafting and implementation of the Citys Ecological Solid Waste
Management Plan (ESWMP) which specify the objectives,
implementation strategies and specific activities to be undertaken
under RA 9003;
b. The gradual transfer of responsibility from the City Government to
Barangays of collection, transport and disposal of recyclables and
biodegradables. Collected segregated bio and non-biodegradable
wastes in 6 barangays were brought to the Ecological Learning Center
(ELC) for processing and recovery. Recyclable wastes were also sold
to selected recycling companies and/or used by students on their
projects or brought home for processing. (Annex 2)
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
26
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
27
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
28
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
29
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
30
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
RECOMMENDATION
The LGUs should consider:
1. Formulating adequate policies and procedures in the selection of
contractors for the collection, cleaning and disposal of solid waste.
The procedures should ensure that only qualified contractors are
awarded contracts by including factors such as the required
capitalization, number of equipment, current commitment for the
same services with other LGUs/entities, and years of
experience/track record on hauling of solid wastes. The bidders
should also be required to submit a work plan or technical proposal
containing among others the following:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Collection Schedule;
Equipment mix appropriate for the area to be serviced;
Collection strategies for inaccessible areas;
Provision for motor pool and dispatching area;
Strategies for disseminating information materials:
Collection equipment and paraphernalia;
Available manpower;
Proposed actions on complaints.
31
32
CHAPTER 2
Appropriate Resources
33
APPROPRIATE RESOURCES
INTRODUCTION
3.2
3.2.1
The audit however disclosed that except in the case of Marikina, the
LGUs audited were not preparing a comprehesive plan for SWM
operations. The SWM plan and budget were incorporated in the plan
and budget of the Department where SWM operation was part of. The
total amount budgeted for SWM operation, except for payment to
contractors were not specifically provided.
3.2.2
The team also noted that in some LGUs, total expenditures of the
Department and payments to contractors exceeded the funds
appropriated for the purpose. The failure of the LGUs to determine the
total funds needed for SWM operations affects the efficient
performance of contractors and effective implementation of SWM as
manifested by increased incidence of uncollected solid wastes and
inadequate implementation of information/education campaign on
proper SWM operation.
OBSERVATION
Except in the case of Marikina, the total budget and expenditures for
SWM operations in 2001 and 2002 could not be determined as the
SWM budget and expenditures were included in different
Departments of the LGUs where SWM operations is part of. The
LGUs do not also prepare a comprehensive plan for SWM operation
properly indicating the budget per activity. As a result, the adequacy
of SWM budget could not be determined. The failure of the LGUs to
provide funds needed for SWM operation affects the efficient and
effective implementation of SWM operation as manifested in
unsatisfactory performance of some contractors.
34
APPROPRIATE RESOURCES
3.2.3
LGUs
Department
Marikina CIty
Quezon City
Manila
Pasay
Caloocan
Valenzuela
Malabon
Mandaluyong
Makati
Pasig
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
35
APPROPRIATE RESOURCES
l.
3.2.4
Except in the case of Marikina City, the budgets for these Departments
were not broken down into programs. For this reason, the team could
not determine the total budget and expenditures for SWM operations.
This was aggravated by the absence of comprehensive plan for SWM
operation properly indicating the budget per activity. Only the total
amount budgeted for payment to contractors were specifically
indicated. The absence of a comprehensive plan would deprive LGUs
to determine the adequacy of the budget provided for SWM operation.
For CYs 2001 and 2002, the audited LGUs have appropriated/budgeted
and expended funds for their environmental protection/sanitation
programs as follows:
2001 (in million pesos)
Total
Budget
LGU
Quezon
Manila
Makati
Pasay
Caloocan
Pasig
Marikina
Malabon
Valenzuela
Mandaluyong
NA
617.1
433.6
228.10
378.07
185.30
71.25
16.50
45.30
165.47
Total
Exp.
Payt. to
garbage
contactors
N.A.
574.99
NA
NA
348.51
N.A.
63.83
43.91
49.10
140.60
NA
473.2
534.1
225.0
286.55
177.95
NA
Total
Budget
668.13
489.5
544.4
250.30
343.89
149.90
47.0
16.50
43.70
97.96
Total Exp.
for Jan. June
Payt. to
garbage
contactor
N.A
314.01
NA
N.A
133.54
N.A
N.A
25.05
38.70
NA
NA
246.90
NA
116.20
116.93
87.85
NA
36
APPROPRIATE RESOURCES
3.2.5
The expenses that could not be accounted for were related to salaries
and allowances of SWMO Officials and staff, maintenance of SWMO
and activities related to street sweeping, apprehension of violators of
environmental laws and information dissemination.
3.2.6
The failure of the LGUs to determine the total budget needed for SWM
operations affected the efficient and effective implementation of the
project as manifested in the following:
Trucks for hauling solid wastes which need repairs could not be
repaired due to lack of spare parts, thus affecting the number of trucks
fielded;
Hauling equipment which are beyond repair could not be replaced
due to lack of funds. As a result, daily collection schedules/routes
was not followed leaving uncollected solid wastes in the areas not
covered. This poses health risk to the Citys constituents;
Payments for services of contractors were delayed by 3-27 months
after the billing date;
Information/education campaign on proper SWM through seminars
and distribution of flyers were compromised;
Ecological SWM projects could not be implemented;
Incidence of uncollected solid wastes due to lack of monitors.
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
37
APPROPRIATE RESOURCES
Managements Response
shall be done:
Teams Rejoinder
deficiencies noted.
38
APPROPRIATE RESOURCES
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
the residents.
Considering the
impact of garbage problem on the
economy and health of
its
constituents, and in order to ease the
financial problems the city is facing,
deferred monthly payment plan
agreement were forged by the city
with WMSCs in the spirit of
community service.
This is the
reason why payment for their
services is overdue by 1 to 6 months.
Moreover, this delay has never
affected the efficiency of our service
contractors. They continue to ply
their route and collect garbage.
RECOMMENDATION
The LGUs should consider preparing a comprehensive work plan for
SWM operation indicating all activities needed to efficiently and
effectively discharge the functions with corresponding budget per
activity. This would more or less guide the LGUs in determining the
amount to be budgeted to achieve the objective of a garbage- free
environment.
39
CHAPTER 3
Sound Management
and
Monitoring Mechanisms
40
INTRODUCTION
3.3
3.3.1
OBSERVATION
Generally, LGUs do not have adequate policies and procedures
including performance indicators/standards to assess contractors
performance. While some LGUs have established indicators, these
were not adequate and they have no parameters/standards set to
measure the efficiency of contractors. In view of the absence of
policies/procedures and standards, the monitors were not properly
guided and the performance of the contractors were not effectively
41
3.3.3
3.3.4
3.3.5
The team however noted that while these activities can be used as
indicators by itself, LGUs have not been using such indicators and
42
3.3.6
As the need arises, meet with the contractor and Barangay Chairman
on issues such as systems improvement, suggestions and comments
(Manila);
Evaluation of these activities however showed that the same were not
adequate to properly assess the performance of the contractors. There
are a number of activities contracted which were not monitored. The
team also noted that in some cases, the monitors were submitting
conflicting reports or declared certain area to be clean when
43
3.3.7
3.3.8
As the total area monitored were not disclosed in the report, the team
could not assess the extent of monitoring activities undertaken by the
LGUs except in the case of Quezon City where the number of cells
monitored were indicated in the report. Evaluation of the reports made
available to the team covering the month of July 2002 revealed that for
Districts IIA, III and IV, only about 2 to 38% of the total number of
cells assigned to a particular contractor were actually monitored as
illustrated below:
District
No. of cells
contracted
No. of cells
monitored
Difference
Percentage
IIA
III
IV
1,447
2,289
3,052
549
312
53
898
1,977
2,999
38%
14%
2%
44
3.3.10 In the case of Pasay City, the monitoring activities could not be
documented as there were no monitoring reports submitted to the
team;
3.3.11 In Makati, the contractors performance was monitored by the Garbage
Collection and Disposal Section and the Support Services Office of
SWM Division. The monitors who are called Datu Basureros round
the area/s assigned and prepare the daily Datu Basurero Situational
Report (DBSR). While the Datu Basureros observed and reported that
areas were clean and entire routes were covered by garbage collectors,
reports on uncollected solid wastes were received by the Action Line
Unit from residents. The head of SWMO issued certificate that the
entire area is clean based on the DBSR. This supports the monthly
claims of the contractors;
3.3.12 However, the LGUs claimed that they have been assessing the
performance of the contractors using the following indicators:
45
Manpower checklist:
a.
b.
c.
d.
46
No. of times the contractor failed to collect within the scheduled time
set;
No. of times the contractors failed to field the minimum number of
trucks and collect the minimum volume of solid wastes within a
certain period;
No. of times the mopping operation was not conducted and solid
wastes including wastes due to late throwers were not collected;
No. of trucks/ times not complying with the required masks and
gadgets and number of personnel;
No. of incidence of uncollected solid wastes as monitored by the
LGUs and complaints by the residents;
The quantity and quality of information dissemination conducted.
No. of times the contractor failed to observe the proper collection
method.
3.3.14 The team also noted that LGUs have not established monitoring
strategies to ensure that the contractors were performing as required
such as:
47
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
The
contractors
efficiency
is
questionable considering the results of
survey undertaken by the team and the
absence of documented monitoring
activities that would prove that
contractors performance is actually
being monitored and found at least,
satisfactory.
48
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
would pose health hazards to the
constituents and bad publicity for the
City. SWM contracts should specify
acceptable or tolerable limits for
breach of contracts and specific
sanctions to erring contractors.
49
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
The
DPS
has
performance
measurements as indicated by our
monitoring teams who do ocular
inspections and accomplish daily
monitoring reports. Performance is
measured by the daily monitoring
report of our monitoring team.
Based on this, the Department
Heads of DPS prepares his
certification.
50
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
contracted amount.
51
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
being serviced by Southport Trading
and
Warehouse
Services,
601
complaints of uncollected solid wastes
were recorded from January to August
2002. There were however no
recorded actions on these complaints.
The mounds of solid wastes which
were left uncollected was also noted at
the old Zabarte Road within the
jurisdiction of the City of Caloocan.
52
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
53
Managements Response
trip tickets attesting that garbage
was actually collected may be
possible but not feasible. It may
become the cause of corruption in
that level. Hence, we consider the
recommendation
not
practical.
However, we expect complaints
from residents if garbage were not
collected in their area in just two (2)
or three (3) days.
Teams Rejoinder
complained that this is a source of
corruption. It is therefore suggested
that this aspect of monitoring be
properly considered and studied to
ensure that solid wastes are collected
from the designated sources within the
City's premises.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The LGUs should consider:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Establishing
feedback
mechanism
where
constituents/residents could report their complaints on the
54
7.
55
CHAPTER 4
56
INTRODUCTION
3.4.1 Quality assurance implies a desired quality level in the implementation of
one's operation. To ensure a quality SWM operation, LGUs should
establish and support adequate systems of quality assurance. These
comprise policies and procedures designed to provide LGUs with
adequate assurance that the SWM Plan meet the requirements/standards
set. A quality assurance should provide that:
3.4.2
3.4.3
3.4.4
The audit noted that of the ten LGUs audited, only 2 have so far created
an SWM Board. In view of the absence of an oversight body to develop
mechanics and guidelines, monitor/oversee and review adherence to
existing regulations in the implementation of SWM operations, lapses
in the operations were not given particular attention.
OBSERVATION
Eight of the 10 LGUs audited have yet to create SWM Board
mandated under RA 9003 to develop SWM Plan and oversee the
implementation of SWM operations. The oversight of the quality
assurance process is not also a specific responsibility of any offices
57
within the LGUs. On the other hand, the SWMB of the 2 LGUs
were not yet functioning as intended. As a result, there were
practices required under R.A. 9003 which were not followed and
lapses in the operations were not detected and corrected.
3.4.5
3.4.6
58
3.4.7
The team noted that as of audit date, of the ten LGUs included in the
audit, only Caloocan and Malabon Cities have created SWMB
pursuant to R.A. 9003. Unfortunately, these SWMBs are not yet
functioning in accordance with the provisions of RA 9003.
3.4.8
3.4.9
3.4.10 The absence of the SWMB also contributed to the failure of some
LGUs to strictly implement other activities required under RA 9003
such as:
59
Marikina City
-
Valenzuela City
-
Malabon City
-
Managements Response
Response provided by
Makati City:
Teams Rejoinder
Vice-Mayor,
60
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
Response provided
Administrator, Pasay:
by
City
61
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
62
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
RECOMMENDATION
The LGUs should consider creating and or reactivating the SWM
Board as required under R.A. 9003 to ensure quality implementation of
SWM programs.
63
CHAPTER 5
Cost Measures
64
COST MEASURES
INTRODUCTION
3.5
3.5.1
3.5.2
3.5.3
On the other hand, per trip is a collection system whereby the LGUs
monitor and record the volume of solid wastes collected and number of
trips made by the contractor to ensure that the LGU is paying for the
right volume and number of trips actually undertaken by the
contractor.
3.5.4
The team however, noted that while the contract cost under the package
deal scheme will greatly depend on the estimated solid wastes to be
generated, there was no established methodology in computing the
estimated solid wastes generated from different sources. At present, the
LGUs were using different factors in arriving at estimated solid wastes
generation per person per day which vary widely from LGU to LGU.
The factors used were also found to be higher than the factors
established under the JICA study. Solid wastes from other sources were
generally not included in the estimates as there were no factors
established yet. This raises concerns on the accuracy of the estimated
figures which were used as the basis of contracting cost. The
reasonableness of the contract cost is therefore doubtful.
65
COST MEASURES
3.5.5
3.5.6
The objective of the study was to improve the SWM system in Metro
Manila through formulation of a practical and sustainable Master Plan
for SWM, with emphasis on upgrading the service level and expansion
of service coverage.
3.5.7
3.5.8
The results from the WACS are tabulated below. The study also
showed that the future waste generation rate (WGR) in Metro Manila
showed a 2% annual increase.
Category
Unit
Quezon
Ctiy
Makati
Paraaque
Average
Escalated
Generation
in 2002
High Income
Middle
Income
kg/person/day
.465
.553
.483
.500
.552
kg/person/day
.449
.432
.472
.451
.498
Low Income
kg/person/day
.372
.340
.321
.344
.380
Restaurant
kg/shop/day
15.284
41.732
6.939
21.318
23.537
Other Shops
kg/shop/day
1.688
2.150
1.618
1.818
2.007
Institution
kg/person/day
Market
Street
Sweeping
kg/shop/day
River
.059
.101
.057
.072
.079
4.065
3.945
13.774
7.261
8.017
kg/km/day
10.560
19.010
2.535
10.702
11.816
kg/km/day
41.555
3.595
9.035
18.062
19.942
66
COST MEASURES
3.5.9
OBSERVATIONS
1. The LGUs do not have an established methodology in computing
the estimates of solid wastes generation from all sources. At
present, they only have established factor for solid wastes from
household population. The factors however differ from LGU to
LGU which ranged from .500 to 1.27 kilogram per person daily.
These factors were comparatively higher than the factor
established under the JICA study which is .552 for 2002.
Considering that the estimated solid wastes generation is the
basis of the contract, the reasonableness of the contract cost is
doubtful. The cost derived by the team per cubic meter could not
also be compared across LGUs as different LGUs have
contracted different activities.
3.5.10 As a matter of policy, the 10 LGUs included in the audit prepare
estimates of solid wastes to be generated within a particular period. The
team noted that while solid wastes may come from different sources,
the LGUs estimates normally include only estimates from household
population. Their estimates were
computed using the following
formula:
Estimated daily
wastes generation = Population x
in cubic meter
Ave. wastes
generation/day/ x
person in kg.
conversion factor
from kg. to m3
Where:
Population
Ave. wastes
generation/day/
person
= household population
67
COST MEASURES
The conversion factors and average solid wastes generated per day per
person per LGU are as follows:
LGU
Mandaluyong
Caloocan
Makati
Malabon
Manila
Marikina
Pasig
Pasay
Quezon City
Valenzuela
Conversion
Factor
Average
solid wastes
generation per
person per day
300
300
300
200
200
-
.710
.550
Not indicated
.500
Not indicated
.550
1.27
.914
.585
Not indicated
The team was not provided by the Cities of Manila, Makati and
Valenzuela with the factors used in estimating solid wastes generation
for household population.
3.5.11 It may be noted that the LGUs do not have a standard factor in arriving
at their estimates which ranged from .500 to 1.27 kg per person per day.
They could not also provide the team with the basis for such factors.
The factor would greatly affect the computation of the total estimated
solid wastes generation. Since the estimate should be the basis of the
cost to be contracted, the reasonableness of the contracted cost is
therefore doubtful.
3.5.12 The team also noted that the factors applied by the LGUs vary greatly
with the factor established under the JICA study which was escalated to
be .552 kg. per person per day as of 2002. The resulting quantity
difference ranges from (1,825) to 844,807 cu. m. per LGU which will
greatly affect the total contracted amounts.
68
COST MEASURES
2002 Population
LGU
Caloocan
Makati
Malabon
Manila
Marikina
Pasig
Pasay
Quezon City
Valenzuela
NSO
Agency
Profile
(a)
(b)
1,335,665
515,442
352,407
1,681,040
476,575
637,384
328,159
2,237,580
561,889
1,426,089
435,059
352,407
1,609,097
427,037
528,291
328,159
2,247,720
561,890
Estimated based on
JICA standard
Conv.
Daily
Fac.
b x.552x
(kg to
c=
cu.m./
1,000)
(d)
(c)
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
5
3
2,362
720.46
584
4,441
705
875
906
6,204
930
Difference
Over (Under)
LGU Estimates
Annual
(d) x
365=
(e)
Ave.
daily
wastes
gen.
(f)
862,130
262,968
213,160
1,620,965
257,325
319,375
330,690
2,264,460
339,450
.550
NI
.500
NI
.550
1.27
.914
.585
NI
Daily b x
e x c=
(g)
Annual
G x 365=
(h)
Qty
h-e=
(i)
%
i/e
2,592*
3,035**
622.53
6,200**
700
2,460
1,500
7,889
910**
946,445
1,107,775
227,223
2,263,000
255,500
897,900
547,500
2,879,485
332,150
84,315
844,807
14,063
642,035
( 1,825 )
578,525
216,810
615,025
(7,300 )
10
320
7
40
181
66
27
-
*
Per City profile, however the contracted estimated volume was 1,040,520 cu. m.
**
Per agency records
NI - Not indicated
3.5.13 The big difference in the case of Quezon City was due to a 20%
allowance on the estimated household population of the City based on
agency profile.The City claimed that the daytime population is greater
than the nighttime population due to students and employees working
within the area but were not considered in the population profile as they
were not residents of the city.
3.5.14 The team however did not consider said increase as most City
residents are also working outside the City. Besides, non-resident
population would not generate the same volume of solid wastes as that
of the residents since they do not have household to maintain.
Moreover, solid wastes generated by daytime population are
concentrated on establishments where they are working or in
restaurants or shops, which has a different factor.
3.5.15 In the case of Caloocan City, the team was informed that the Citys
estimates also include wastes generated from commercial
establishments and markets. The density factors used were however not
provided to the team.
3.5.16 In Manila, Makati, Pasay, Valenzuela and Malabon Cities, the team
was not provided with the methodology of calculation hence the
differences could not be assessed.
3.5.17 On the other hand, the difference in Pasig is due to a very high factor
used on average daily wastes generation which is 1.27 kgs per person
69
COST MEASURES
and 26.67 kgs per shop in 2002. Pasig City is using the highest factors
for these items.
3.5.18 The conversion factor used by the LGUs also vary. The conversion of
300 cubic meters per kg. was used by Consoer Townsend and
Associates in their study of SWM in Metro Manila in 1989, while under
the JICA study, the conversion factor used was 200.
3.5.19 The team also noted that except for Pasig City, the LGUs estimates
include only solid wastes generated by household population and do not
include waste generated from markets, business establishments, street
sweeping or institutions.
While in some LGUs,
business
establishments take care of their own wastes by contracting out the
collection and disposal of their wastes to private contractors at their
own costs, the collection of solid wastes in the market places is the
responsibility of the LGUs.
3.5.20 The establishment of a standard factor is important considering that for
CY 2002, of the 10 LGUs included in the audit, 6 were contracting out
the collection, cleaning and disposal of solid wastes on a Package Deal
and Clean-up basis with contract costs based on the estimated solid
wastes generated using different factors.
3.5.21 Using their estimates, the LGUs entered into contracts with different
contractors. Analysis of the contracts revealed that the contracted
activities also differ from one agency to another. Hence, the derived
unit cost per cubic meter could not be compared accross LGUs as each
contract contains salient features not present in other contracts:
Contract
Period
Unit
Cost
Contract
Amount
Quezon
07/01/02
06/30/03
187.94
P 541,170,098.28
Pasig
01/01/02
06/30/02
144.61
to
220.20
175,708,494.00
Manila
01/01/02
12/31/02
218.06
493,468,800.00
City
Contract Feature
SW
collection,
cleaning(streetsweeping),
disposal and information and
education campaign including
provision
of
250
streetsweepers. Quezon City
has a designated dumpsite.
SW
collection,
and
disposal.The City has 10
contractors with different cost
per cubic meter.
SW
collection,
disposal,
information and education
campaign and provision of 250
streetsweepers, special cleanup project at least once a
70
COST MEASURES
Contract
Period
Unit
Cost
Contract
Amount
Pasay
01/01/02
12/31/02
424.33
232,320,000.00
Makati
01/01/02
12/31/02
369.20
408,992,957.64
Caloocan
01/01/02
12/31/02
261.38
247,380,000.00
Mandaluyong
01/01/02
12/31/02
City
340.93
67,607,050.00*
Contract Feature
month, shall be responsible for
cleaning all debris and solid
wastes in case of calamities
and monitoring of services
provided. The City has only
one (1) contractor.
SW collection and disposal
services. The City has 4
contractors.
SW collection and disposal
services. The City has 4
contrators.
SW collection and disposal
services. The City has 10
contractors.
Per Trip collection and
disposal
3.5.22 It can be gleaned from the table above that the contracts with the Cities
of Quezon and Manila involved provision for streetsweepers to
clean/sweep street litters, which is not present in the contracts of other
LGUs. Yet, the unit cost per cubic meter in these Cities were lower than
other LGUs without special features. On the other hand, Pasig City
unit cost per cubic meter is also comparatively lower than other LGUs.
However, the Citys estimate was about 199% over the teams
computation using the JICA standard. Makati City, with relatively high
unit cost compared to Pasig City, was also found to have estimates of
153% over the teams computation using the JICA standands.
3.5.23 Audit also disclosed that the costs per cubic meter in the LGUs
implementing SWM by administration of P 113.13 to P 256.88 were
relatively lower than the derived unit costs under contracts.
LGU
Marikina
Malabon
Valenzuela
Actual Annual
Garbage Collection
(in cu.m).
Jan.-Jun
2001
2002
248,497
190,844
433,749
129,543
122,129
301,143
EXPENSES
2001
Unit
cost
2002
(Jan. to June)
Unit
cost
P63,834,061.69
43,907,342.96
49,068,836.18
256.88
230.07
113.13
Not Available
P25,046,857.33
28,700,187.28
205.08
128.51
71
COST MEASURES
LGU/City
Mode
Population
(a)
Quezon
Pasig
Manila
Pasay
Makati
Caloocan
Mandaluyong
Marikina
Malabon
Valenzuela
By Contract
By Contract
By Contract
By Contract
By Contract
By Contract
By Contract
By Administration
By Administration
By Administration
2,247,720
528,291
1,609,097
328,159
435,039
1,426,089
285,424
427,037
352,407
561,890
vv
NA
*
2002
Expenses
(b)
Cost per
Capita
(b/a)
P541,170,098 .00 vv
175,708,494.00 vv
493,468,800.00 vv
232,320,000.00 vv
408,992,957.00 vv
247,380,000.00 vv
NA
NA
25,046,857.33*
28,700,182.28*
P241
333
307
708
940
173
71
51
3.5.25 It can be noted from the above tabulation that of the seven (7) LGUs
undertaking SWM operation by contract, the cost per capita was highest
in Makati and Pasay. On the other hand, Valenzuela registered the
lowest cost per capita. Valenzuela is undertaking SWM operation by
administration. The expenses considered by the team in Makati and
Pasay Cities consist only of the total contract cost in the collection and
disposal of solid wastes. Other expenses relative to SWM operation
incurred by the said Cities were not included since the data were not
available.The expenses for other activities were lumped in the expenses
incurred by Environmental and Sanitation Department, where SWM
was one of the programs. The cost per capita in said Cities will even be
higher if incidental expenses incurred in SWM operation will be
considered in the computation
.
3.5.26 Due to absence of a standard factor in computing for the estimated
daily solid wastes generation, the LGUs were not able to adequately
manage the risk of ensuring the accuracy of the calculated solid wastes
generated.
72
COST MEASURES
2. The shifting of two (2) LGUs from Per Trip Basis to Package
Clean-up System enabled said LGUs to reduce government cost
by a total of P 271,789,746 in collection and disposal contracts
without sacrificing the quality of the services rendered by the
contractors and maintaining a clean environment.
3.5.27 In 2001, the Cities of Quezon and Makati contracted out the collection
of solid wastes on a per trip basis. In year 2002, these Cities shifted
from per trip basis to Package Clean-Up System where the
contractor was given the full responsibility to manage/administer and
directly carry out actual collection, cleaning and disposal of solid
wastes from various sources.
3.5.28 Comparison of the cost of garbage collection in 2001 incurred by
Quezon and Makati Cities and the cost of contracts entered into in year
2002 showed that the present system (Package Deal) enabled these
Cities to reduce the cost of collection and disposal of waste in the total
amount of P140,305,946.17 and P131,483,800.14 , respectively, or a
total of P 271,789,746.31 as tabulated below:
QUEZON CITY
MAKATI
P 681,476,044.45
P 540,476,757.78
P 1,221,952,802.23
541,170,098.28
408,992,957.64
950,163,055.92
P 140,305,946.17
P 131,483,800.14
P 271,789,746.31
Cost reduction
TOTAL
3.5.29 The present system tends to have favorable effect on the government
not only on account of reduced cost but in ensuring that all solid wastes
within the contracted area are collected by contractors regardless of
volume. This would also make monitoring activities easier as the City
could initially assess the performance of contractors by just going
around the City to see if all solid wastes have been collected.
73
COST MEASURES
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
74
COST MEASURES
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
75
COST MEASURES
Managements Response
We have presented our present
scheme in garbage collection and
disposal. We appreciate the efforts
of the team to evaluate our system
and welcome any suggestion for
further
enhancement
of
the
effectivity of the system for we are
all one in the pursuit of good
governance.
Teams Rejoinder
We appreciate the Citys concern and
desire to enhance their performance.
76
COST MEASURES
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
such factors.
77
COST MEASURES
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
Response
provided
by
the
Secretary to the Mayor, Caloocan
City:
In 1997, instead of per trip at 14
cu.m., the per trip basis was
changed to package deal type
where the cost of services is based
on the volume of garbage estimated
to be collected in addition to other
services to be required from the
contractor.
The estimated daily generation of
2,528 cu.m. and 2,890 cu.m. for
CYs 2001 and 2002 were based on
the actual garbage generated during
the years 1994, 1995 and 1996 as
the basis of payment is based on the
number of trips at 14cu.m.
Thus, in the determination of the
volume of garbage to be collected
for purposes of package deal type
we used in 1994-1996 actual
garbage collected. This estimate is
increased equivalent to the average
increase during the year.
78
COST MEASURES
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
79
COST MEASURES
Managements Response
Teams Rejoinder
RECOMMENDATION
The LGUs should consider establishing standard factors from all
sources in arriving at their estimates of daily solid wastes generation to
provide a clear basis of contracting costs. The estimates should include
80
COST MEASURES
81
JUANITA S. CALIWAG
Team Member
ROSEMARIE R. MAGTAAN
Team Member
GRACE T. DE CASTRO
Team Member
ROMEO B. TANJUTCO
Team Member
TERESA T. SANTIAGO
Team Member
RAQUEL C. GORGONIO
Team Member
EMELIE P. PESTANO
Team Member
GLORIA G. SILVERIO
Co-Team Leader
IDA M. OANES
Team Leader
EVELYN P. REYES
Team Supervisor
Reviewed by:
SUSAN P. GARCIA
OIC-Assistant Director
Approved by:
82
PART IV
Annexes
83
Annex 1
Page 1 of 1
Solid wastes were seen along Tolentino St., Pasay City at 3:00 P.M.on October 2, 2002.
Annex 2
1 of 5 pages
Annex 2
2 of 5 pages
Annex 2
3of 5 pages
Annex 2
4 of 5 pages
Annex 2
5 of 5 pages