REFLECTION

TO GIVE OR NOT TO GIVE 4PS

The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Programs poses many appealing objectives, goals and
benefits for the poor families that comprises most of the Philippines population. The 4Ps
is a good example of strengthening the governments capability of distributing the
countrys resources to those who are extremely in need. It is undeniable that there are
many poor households that will benefit from the said program, and that the program
covers the basic needs that otherwise would go unmet. Likewise, the governments effort
in making the countrys educational and health services system inclusive is a huge step
towards social mobility and equality. I feel strongly about the 4Ps principle that well-fed
and educated citizens are imperative for a productive country and society and I believe
that 4Ps program must be given and sure that it continues to be a good investment for
the people.

The first reason is the 4Ps is NOT the only program in the anti-poverty strategy of the
government, yet its quite possibly the most important component. The reason is that this
program attacks one of the root causes of povertyweak education, health and other
human development characteristics that disadvantage a poor person. No amount of job
creation will employ and lift out of poverty millions of under-skilled and unhealthy citizens.
No business would get into such an enterprise, and no government can sustain economic
growth and job creation on such a weak foundation. Therefore, human capital build-up is,
first and foremost, the key ingredient in the strategy.
Next, 4Ps can help ensure that the majority of our young people do not fall through the
cracks. Because of 4Ps, children will grow up to be educated, healthy, and productive
members of Philippine society, contributing to the countrys economic competitiveness in
the longer term. Therefore, the 4Ps is not merely a matter of charity for poor children as
far as the country is concernedour long run economic growth depends in large part on
how successfully we equip our future citizens and workers to compete.

On top of all this, the 4Ps is among only a small number of government programs that are
actually evaluated for their impact. In fact, the impact evaluation evidence suggests that
the design of the 4Ps seems to successfully mitigate any possible dependency effects
poor families actually further increase child investments, over and above the cash
transfer itself.

These are all good reasons to continue to expand and improve the program. Killing this
program will bring us back to the previous status quo: no evaluation; poorly targeted;
riddled with leakages so that non poor people also benefit, and far less reaches the poor
and likely to be dominated by patronage politics.