What price are you willing to pay to survive another day?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For some, paying for convenience is the obvious answer. Others forfeit a whole day\u2019s wage waiting in line for ayuda<\/em>. Yet for far too many Filipinos, a chance at financial assistance may even cost them their life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April of this year, a motorcycle driver passed<\/a> away while in queue for a Php5,000 cash relief assistance from the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). That same day, over 2,500<\/a> transport worker beneficiaries lined up at the Quezon Memorial Circle payout site, enduring hours of unbearable heat in hopes of receiving a measly amount of ayuda.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Assistance programs, also called ayuda(Spanish for assistance), have become the government\u2019s primary response to indigents\u2019 calls for dignified, livable economic conditions. From pandemics and climate-related disasters to oil price shocks, the culture of ayuda exposes a system where welfare is dispensed through political patronage, while neoliberal policies go largely unchallenged and continue to deepen the very hardships that make such assistance necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Too little, too few, too late<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n There are several types of ayuda. Executive departments handle ayuda related to their mandates, such as the Department of Labor and Employment\u2019s (DOLE) Tulong Pang-hanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged\/Displaced Workers (TUPAD<\/a>) and the Department of Health\u2019s (DOH) Medical Assistance for Indigents and Financially Incapacitated Patients (MAIFIP<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The DSWD, as the country\u2019s dedicated center for welfare and development, spearheads over 19<\/a> programs for immediate crisis relief or social protection for poverty alleviation, ranging from cash transfers, in-kind relief, targeted programs, and conditional aid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201c[Sa DSWD], may crisis intervention unit ka, \u2018yan ang laging pinipilahan; ito ang Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (AICS<\/a>). May social protection programs [din], so may 4Ps<\/a> [Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program] ka, tapos may Sustainable Livelihood Program (SLP<\/a>), tsaka may KALAHI-CIDSS<\/a>,\u201d said social activist, retired University of the Philippines (UP) professor, and former DSWD Secretary Judy Taguiwalo in an interview with IBON Foundation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [At DSWD, you have a crisis intervention unit that people always line up for; that\u2019s the AICS. There are also social protection programs, such as 4PS, SLP, and KALAHI-CIDSS.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n These existing programs follow a lengthy process before they become useful to a beneficiary. According to Taguiwalo, the process starts with a law outlining guidelines, inclusions, and qualified beneficiaries. Beneficiaries would then be identified, where politicians would commonly endorse beneficiaries through a \u201clistahan.\u201d <\/em>After the procurement of relief (rice, canned goods, etc. for family food packs), only then does distribution to communities commence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cSa UP [University of the Philippines], sanay naman kami mag-relief [operations]. It takes us 2-3 weeks to produce 500 family food packs. Pero sa DSWD, because it has the budget, personnel, transportation, and relief hubs donated by Australia, in one day, kaya niyang mag-produce ng 50,000 family food packs; at kaya mong ma-distribute [agad] \u2018yan,\u201d said Taguiwalo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [At UP, we are used to conducting relief operations. It takes us 2-3 weeks to produce 500 family food packs. But at DSWD, because it has the budget, transportation, and relief hubs donated by Australia, in one day, it can produce 500,000 family food packs and immediately distribute them.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n But despite DSWD\u2019s nationwide capacity to efficiently distribute ayuda, many Filipinos continue to battle a wide array of challenges to financial assistance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bureaucratic red tape traps many Filipinos in long wait times, stringent requirements, and, in some cases, the added burden of needing access to online financial services just to receive ayuda. For some, this means giving up a day\u2019s wage (or the mere chance to earn it), which is stuck at the average minimum of Php512\u2014Php790 short of IBON\u2019s estimated average family living wage (FLW) of Php1,302<\/a> per day for a family of five. For most, it means giving up their dignity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cSinubukan naming kumustahain yung mga 4Ps beneficiaries, so pumunta talaga ako sa Mindanao [at Bicol], nakipag-interview ako. Essentially, happy sila kasi may dagdag pera sila, na otherwise, hindi nila makikita,\u201d Taguiwalo said, recalling her most impactful interaction with a beneficiary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAlthough, ang sinasabi nila, nahihiya sila sa mga kapitbahay nila na hindi nakaka-receive ng ayuda. May ibang nagsasabi, \u2018Ang gusto namin, actually, trabaho kesa makatanggap ng ayuda\u2019,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [We tried checking in on 4Ps beneficiaries, so we went to Mindanao and Bicol to interview them. Essentially, they\u2019re happy because they have extra money that they wouldn’t have otherwise earned. Although they also said that they feel ashamed for receiving it compared to their neighbors who didn\u2019t. They\u2019d say, \u2018What we want is a job instead of just receiving ayuda\u2019.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n As a program created and financed by the World Bank in 2008, 4Ps frames \u201cdevelopment\u201d through the neoliberal lens of human capital for global competitiveness. This framing makes the Philippines further reliant on overseas and business process outsourcing (BPOs) jobs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even other livelihood assistance programs, such as the SLP and TUPAD, are short-sighted measures that provide no permanent job security for the increasing number of unemployed persons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n DOLE\u2019s TUPAD, for example, only provides emergency employment for 10-30 days for its currently identified 13,000<\/a> beneficiaries, roughly 0.5% of 2.59 million<\/a> unemployed persons this June 2026. Clearly, social protection assistance programs are and continue to be myopic as poverty alleviation programs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As for crisis response, beneficiaries continue to face a grim reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cNoong [naging secretary ako noong] 2016, ang papel ko ay ma-ensure yung mga Ondoy at Yolanda backlogs sa calamities. Halimbawa, sa Yolanda, marami pang emergency shelter na hindi inayos. And supposedly, kahit nasira [nang] buo ang bahay mo, you only receive Php15,000-Php30,000. Emergency shelter assistance \u2018yan ha, but it takes years!\u201d Taguiwalo said, exasperated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [When I became the secretary in 2016, my job was to ensure the Ondoy and Yolanda backlogs in calamities. For example, for Yolanda, there were still many emergency shelters that were not properly implemented. And supposedly, even if your house gets completely damaged, you will only receive Php15,000-Php30,000. It\u2019s called emergency shelter assistance, but it takes years!<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Typhoon Ondoy displaced 450,000<\/a> individuals, while Super Typhoon Yolanda displaced 4 million individuals and destroyed 1.1 million<\/a> houses. Ondoy struck the Philippines in 2009, while Yolanda in 2013; seven and three years before Taguiwalo served as DSWD secretary, respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Marcos. Jr administration sought to expedite and unify government assistance programs through the Unified Package for Livelihoods, Industry, Food, and Transport<\/em> (UPLIFT) program in light of the global oil crisis. But the UPLIFT program reports only 2.7 million<\/a> assisted beneficiaries since March<\/a>, or 13% of IBON\u2019s estimated 21 million vulnerable households amid the current cost-of-living crisis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even in times of grief and thunderous calamities, the government\u2019s slow crisis response provides no true immediate relief for those displaced and devastated, leaving millions of Filipinos drifting for years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Administrative limitations and exclusion<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n On the frontlines of crisis response and social welfare programs are humble social workers who keep the cogs running in institutions like the DSWD. Yet despite their crucial role in social welfare and development, social workers remain unsupported and underfunded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cMay personnel problem \u2018din [ang DSWD]. Halimbawa, sa 4Ps, we\u2019re talking of 4 million beneficiaries noong panahon ko. Ang isang municipal link<\/em> [social worker], ang caseload niya would be 200 families. Hindi na siya makakagawa ng casework, so i-ikot na lang siya to follow up [on beneficiaries of 4Ps],\u201d Taguiwalo said, highlighting the overloaded nature of social workers in the Philippines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [DSWD also has a personnel problem. For example, in 4Ps, there were roughly 4 million beneficiaries during my service. One municipal link [social worker] would have a caseload of 200 families. They\u2019re unable to do casework; instead, they\u2019d roam around communities and go house-to-house to check in on 4Ps beneficiaries<\/em>.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Taguiwalo, there were roughly 30,000 DSWD personnel nationwide in 2016. Most of them were contractual, with only 10% or about 3,000 workers regularized. Ten years later, 4Ps municipal links\u2019 caseloads doubled with up to 400<\/a> beneficiaries each, all while continuing to struggle for plantilla positions despite years of frontline service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cHindi mo mamaliitin yung dedication [ng DSWD staff] sa trabaho. Maraming social workers doon sa Region X o XII, fasting sila, pero tuloy ang trabaho. Ganoon \u2018din sa Kalinga at Tuguegarao. May iba sa kanila, binagyo \u2018din ang pamilya; pero nandoon sila sa field \u2013 tuloy pa \u2018rin ang trabaho,\u201d Taguiwalo remarked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [You really can\u2019t belittle the DSWD staff\u2019s dedication to their work. A lot of social workers in Region X or XII are fasting but continue to work. It\u2019s the same in Kalinga at Tugeugarao. Some of them continue to show up and work in the field even if their families are affected by the flood, too.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Whether in the office or in the field, social workers also bear the brunt of frustrations over beneficiary targeting and identification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAng isa pang problem would be inclusion\/exclusion. Dahil hindi siya [targeting system] universal, may mga na-e-exclude na qualified naman; tapos may mga in-i-include na hindi qualified, pero malapit sa kusina,\u201d Taguiwalo explained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cDahil targeted, selective ang mga ginagawang listahan. Kaya, hinahabol [ng mga tao] yung mga social workers [at tinatanong], \u2018Bakit kami wala, bakit sila meron?\u2019 <\/em>Ganiyan kapag targeted \u2013 may exclusion na nakaka-divide ng communities.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n [Another problem would be inclusion\/exclusion. Because the targeting system is not universal, there are people who are qualified but are excluded, and people who are not qualified who are included because they have political favor. It\u2019s a selective list. That\u2019s why people chase social workers and ask, \u2018How come we don\u2019t have ayuda, how come others do?\u2019 That\u2019s what happens when it\u2019s targeted \u2013 exclusion divides communities.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Both DSWD beneficiaries and workers experience institutionalized injustices that directly affect their economic power. Despite countless guidelines, safeguards, and laws, Taguiwalo reveals that the root cause of common struggles with assistance programs stems from a deeply ingrained political patronage system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Political patronage and corruption<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In Taguiwalo\u2019s firsthand experience observing ayuda, corruption and patronage are deeply entrenched in the identification, procurement, and distribution systems across varying government levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In her recollection, the former DSWD secretary reveals that a governor in Northern Luzon refused to distribute family food packs to a municipality for the simple reason that the mayor of the municipality was against the governor\u2019s political faction. This delay occurred while thousands of families battled an ongoing disaster.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cMay isa namang mayor, nireport sa amin na hindi niya dinidistribute yung family food packs; this was in October. Plano niyang i-distribute ang family food packs sa December, pang-Christmas gift,\u201d said the former secretary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cSa Bicol naman, barangay level. Kinukuwento naman doon na pinapalinis niya yung bahay niya, pero ang pambayad niya doon ay family food packs. [Inuwi niya] doon sa bahay niya; inari niya na.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n [There is one mayor who was not distributing the family food packs; this was in October. The mayor planned to distribute in December as Christmas gifts. In Bicol, at the barangay level, we were told that family food packs were used as payment for cleaning the barangay official\u2019s house, who brought home the food packs and treated them as his\/her property.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Each rung on the ladder of decentralized politics ultimately leads up to broader patterns of corruption at the national level. In the 2027 National Expenditure Program (NEP), Social Protection and Welfare Employment accounts for 4.5% of the proposed budget\u20140.7 percentage point lower than in 2025, and is at its lowest since 2010.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Marcos Jr administration also allocated Php241.6 billion to DSWD, nearly Php30 billion short of the department\u2019s initially proposed Php270 billion<\/a> budget. Meanwhile, there remains Php112 billion in unprogrammed funds prone to patronage and corruption for the following year in preparation for the upcoming 2028 national elections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n More interestingly, the department continues to propose a Php100 billion budget for 4Ps despite a downward trend in active household beneficiaries. In 2023, there were 4.4 million active households, which declined by 400,000 to 4 million in 2024, and down to roughly 3 million in 2025-2026, as announced<\/a> by current DSWD Secretary Rex Gatchalian.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAng explanation [ng gobyerno], nag-increase [daw] ang amount ng assistance. But definitely, sa karanasan namin, at kung bakit ako naligwak, nalaman natin na may cuts sila [Congress] diyan eh,\u201d Taguiwalo said, further explaining the mismatch between active beneficiaries and budget allocation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [The government says that the budget increase is due to higher amounts of assistance. But definitely, through our experience, and the reason why my confirmation was rejected, we found out that Congress has shares in that budget.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n While political dynasties in Congress continue to pocket billions in financial aid budgets for their own election funds, millions of families remain waitlisted due to the lack of timely and reliable data on official poverty and food thresholds that reflect their true situations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Just this month, the Department of Economy, Planning, and Development (DEPDev) and the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) touted a poverty incidence among families of 6.4%<\/a> or 1.9 million families in 2025, lower than 10.9% in 2023 and 13.2% in 2021. However, a 2026 Social Weather Station (SWS) survey showed that there was a 52%<\/a> annual average of self-rated poverty in the same period in 2025 and was more or less sustained at 49% in June 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n