Bryan Paul B. Gatmaitan

 Date: Time Started: Time Adjourned: Venue 01 to 02 September 2020 9:00 a.m. 5:00 p.m. Meeting Room No. 1, 2nd Floor, TAM Building, PSA Complex, East Avenue, Quezon City Meeting Presider: Assistant National Statistician Meeting Attended by: (See attached Attendance Sheet) Absent from meeting: N/A AGENDA TOPICS/DISCUSSION/ACTION Agenda Item No. 1 Unresolved issues of PPGM with ISMD One of the concerns raised by PGMP group to ISMD is the monitoring of lost and damaged IDs whether it will be done manually or electronically. According to Mr. Polo, it will be done electronically, and his group is already preparing the design of the system. They also asked about biometric exception particularly on registrants who do not meet the minimum threshold. Mr. Fajutagana responded that after 3 failed attempts, the supervisor will override the system for exception and the best two biometrics will be the one to be indicated in the ID. But it was clarified by Mr. Coronado that for biometric exception, the system will be the one to prompt or indicate whether an applicant has biometric exception. For registrant with biometric issues or physical impairment e.g. artificial iris, incomplete fingers, etc. the encoder will need to capture the part where there is a biometric exception for evidence. Mr. Fajutagana also said that in the next years, it was proposed that instead of photo, video will be used to capture registrants with biometric exceptions. With regard to the certifications on the procurement of equipment, it is indicated in the IRR that the “state” will be responsible for its delivery. With this, DBM will be the one to provide 1500 kits from the 2020 budget. Agenda Item No. 2 Unresolved Issues of FOM with ISMD One of the concerns of the FOM group is on password for user as EN and supervisor. With this concern, Mr. Polo’s group will forward two manuals to FOM group specifically: Configuration of FO and how to use the App for EN on Monday, 07 September. FOM also raised their concern on the scheduler application whether they will do it manually or electronically. As per Mr. Polo and QAT, the scheduling should be manual and pre-assigned schedule because of the unavailability of internet connection. On the issue with regard to the unavailability of registrant during his scheduled date, the suggestion is to ask the registrant’s availability based on EN’s calendar. In connection, ANS Orcilla recommended to the FOM group the need to write the actual process on scheduling which is to be included in the operations manual. As suggested by Dir. Abuan, the printing of appointment slip will have a pre-assigned ARN, printed on A5 paper. But the printing agent of ARN is still yet to be identified or assigned, and for the Algorithm on the generation of ARN will be handled by EY India. Further, Mr. Coronado also suggested, if possible, the ARN will be in a form of a small sticker which contains QR or bar code. This small sticker will be attached to the appointment slip so that during the actual registration, the encoder will just need to scan it to see the pre-registration data. On October 12, EN must bring the following, as recommended by QAT: Tablet Appointment slip Appointment Calendar Messenger bag Powerbank The concern on the demographic data was also raised. According to Mr. Polo, “N/A” will be inputted in the demographic data if the information is not available, and this will be the design of the pre-registration APP. FOM group also raised their concern on demographic data specifically on the application design as follows: Full name – first name is required, middle name and last name will be indicated as optional Sex – required and male or female are the only option for sex Date of Birth – required Place of Birth –municipality/city and province are required (if born outside the country, only the country is required) Blood type – (unknown) Marital Status – Optional and it can be skipped Permanent Address – province and municipality are required, but the barangay, house number, and room number are optional. Present Address - province and municipality are required, but the barangay, house number, and room number are also optional Mobile number – Optional Email Address – Optional Moreover, in the discussion, it is agreed that there will be no scanning of supporting documents, but only identification during pre-registration. Further, only picture of the registrant is needed for validation. Thus, a suggestion was made to remove it to the application design, subject to approval. Monitoring system and dashboard by EN was also raised by FOM group. According to Mr. Polo, the accomplishment of the EN will be reflected in the tablet. But with regard to the accomplishment of supervisor, there are no clear directives on how to identify his accomplishments. According to Mr. Coronado, the schedule master list proposed by the FOM is not recommendable because of the information it contains. So, the proposal is not to continue the master list because of privacy issues that may arise. For registrants who left their appointment slip, it is made clear by Mr. Robert that SMS or e-mail sent by PhilSys can be a substitute if the appointment slip was lost/left. Agenda Item No. 3 Comments on the Policies and Guidelines Manual for PhilSys Identification System (PGMP) by QAT For the PGMP, following comments were made : Preliminaries and Definition of Terms For the title of the policy manual, it is agreed that it will be changed to Policies and Guidelines Manual for the Philippine Identification System (PGMP) based on the branding of KMCD rather than PPGM. So, the directive is to change PPGM to PGMP in the manual. Mr. Nogales suggested that PGMP to have a separate guiding principle, in addition to the PhilSys’ guiding principle. This will be indicated in the manual after PhilSys’ guiding principle. ANS Orcilla also suggested to include penal provisions in the next version of PGMP if it cannot be done in the first version. As per Mr. Laurente, this concern will be raised to IAC on legal if it is feasible. On the definition of terms, fixed registration center and mobile registration center, the word “12 months” must be removed. ANS Orcilla recommended to check the official name of the portal or address. Further, she suggested to include the terms, relying parties and Use cases in the definition of terms. Chapter 1 Mr. Nogales and ANS Orcilla recommended to omit the core functions under the interim work structure of PRO, then indicate in the background that “the structure is to be worked out, and to be approved by DBM”. So, in this section, only the structure needs to be presented and the background. On section 4, it is also suggested to enumerate the following requirements needed by NICA. Chapter 2 On section 1, there is a suggestion to include inputs in the end-to-end business process for it be called a framework, and with this matter, ANS Orcilla recommended to PMGP group to call for the assistance of the Technopoly. In the table of section 1, the word “distribution of social welfare benefits” must be changed to “eligibility and access to social welfare and benefits”. Chapter 5 ANS Orcilla recommended to omit all the references made in chapter 5 and transfer it to another file for consistency purposes. For section 2, a suggestion was made to change the title of forms from “Registration form 1A, 1B and 1C” to “PhilSys Registration Form 1A, 1B, and 1C” to conform on what is indicated in the IRR. For section 3.2., there is a need to specify the particular discrepancies. Moreover, if there are discrepancies in the PhilSys forms and the supporting documents, the general rule is to follow what is indicated in the supporting documents. For section 4, regarding primary and secondary documents, the two terms must be included in the definition of terms to see the difference between the two documents. For section 4.1 (PhilSys Registration Form 1A), PSA-issued report of live birth and LCRO-issued of live birth must be included as secondary documents. Moreover, ANS Orcilla suggested to set a meeting with WorldBank to discuss about the suggested supporting documents. For section 4.2.2., it should be reworded as "This forms is to be filled out by the accompanying parent or guardian of the applicant." For section 4.2.5. (PhilSys Form 1B), PSA-issued report of live birth and LCRO-issued of live birth must be included as primary documents. Moreover, a suggestion was made to add an introduction statement in the secondary documents as follows, "The following identification documents shall be accepted as secondary supporting documents provided that they have a front-facing photograph, signature/Thumbmark, Full Name, Permanent Address, Date of Birth”. For section 4.4.2., “the renewal is mandatory upon reaching ages five (5) and 15 after initial registration”, this section must be transferred to the registration process. For the Updating of Filipino Citizenship or Resident Alien Status, this section must be clarified with DFA and to be raised during the meeting with them. Chapter 6 On section 2.4., ANS Orcilla asked about the basis on the maximum number of registrants to be endorsed by introducers, as per PGMP group, the basis is the number of population per barangay with no supporting documents (assuming that almost all of them have supporting documents). And for IPs, Muslim Tribes, and Institutional Population, the basis is their area (supposing that they are living in a far-flung locations, and cannot provide any supporting documents for themselves). On section 2.8., the suggestion is to reword the sentence in a way that the introducer must first have a PSN before he can be a qualified introducer. Chapter 7 On section 2 (background), omit the word “applicant” Section 2.2., omit the word “online” ANS Orcilla asked whether a photo of the registrant is included in the web portal, according to PGMP group, it is the proposed design of the web portal. Moreover, ANS Orcilla suggested to allow an introducer-based on the portal during the online roll out as long as the introducer satisfies all the requirements and he is enlisted introducer in the system. On section 3.8., when an applicant lost his appointment slip or ARN, the applicant must provide the SMS through phone or e-mail, instead of name and birthdate. So, the directive is to omit the “the applicant must provide the birthdate and his name for validation” in the said section. On section 3.17., a recommendation was made to change the content of the section in a way that the system will imply a biometric exception, and not after “3 failed attempts”. On section 5. 7.1, adopting parents must be included in the section as the accompanying individual of the foundlings, aside from the legal guardian. SUMMARY OF ACTION MATTERS Issue/s Action Matters/Updates Responsibility Center 1. Suggestion to include penal provisions in the next version of PPGM To raise the concern to IAC on Legal Affairs PPCD 2. PhilSys end-to-end business process To ask for the assistance of Technopoly regarding the business process PPCD 3. Supporting documents To set a meeting with WorldBank with regard to the identified supporting documents PPCD 4. Updating of Filipino Citizenship or Resident Alien Status To discuss this matter during the meeting with the DFA PPCD Prepared by: Bryan Paul B. Gatmaitan Secretariat Planning Officer I Signature over printed name Approved by: Presiding Officer Assistant National Statistician Signature over printed name