COA Project Subsidy FGD

CTC 202|5-6pm| July 13, 2016

Name
Diana Romero
Dave Araquel
Azra Deloso
Reginald Ong
Carmen Ang
Selina Chiew
Micah Sy Lato
Anne Berango
Gian Corpuz
Rafaella Javier
Bianca Tarun
Lui Mawis
Josh Perez
Wesley Dela Cruz
Trisha Mae Sumampong
Jayvy Gamboa

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)

ATTENDANCE
Organization Position
AECES
Acting Finance Officer
ASSEMBLY
AVP for Finance
CompSAt
AVP for Finance
AJMA
Finance Officer
PMSA
Finance Officer
YFC-A
AVP for Finance
MISA
Finance Officer
MISA
Sec Gen
Blue Symph
Finance Officer
Blue Symph
Finance Officer
ACIL
Executive Secretary-Treasurer
ACIL
Ite et Docete Head
Ateneo
PEERS
VP for Finance and Marketing
MEA
Chief Adminstrative Officer
Finance and Operations
ACLC
Coordinator
Baybayin
VP for Finance and Marketing

AGENDA
System to better cater to the needs of the organization
Feedback from last year
Criteria for this year
Distribution of Funds
Expectations Setting
MEETING PROPER
I.

Feedback from last year/ present knowledge

a. PMSA - N/A
b. YFC-A okay naman yung reqs, mas okay yung system last year
compared to last last year. Last year mas maraming orgs yung napili
but a smaller amount was given
c. Baybayin- Maayos in a way na nabigyan yung org, di ko alam kung fair
kung nabigyan dapat lahat.
d. AEA? Got subsidy but not a lot. Helped in organizing the YES. Only
revenue was from registration fee, subsidy helped in covering
expenses.
1

e. MISA Most of it went to those who are really in need of it based on

the criteria. Part of it went to COA awards daw. You have to show that
you need it.
f. AJMA Last year we got some amount but not the whole amount. It
was really easy to apply for as compared to Sanggu. Sanggu had more
requirements. Subsidy helped cover costs and break even.
g. ABS - We were able to get a subsidy for our workshops. Out of the
many projects presented, only one was taken. Costs were reduced and
helped equip members with skills.
h. PEERS Process was fair, presentation was scary. 2 projects got
subsidies but not the whole amount. The one that needed it more got a
higher amount. Unforeseen expenses werent a big problem because
of the subsidy.
i. MEA Got a subsidy for MEA Fiesta, not sure if LTS got a subsidy.
j. CompSAt not familiar with the COA subsidy system.
k. Assembly Not sure about specifics, since only this year in finance.
Problem with flagship project, 20k wasnt granted because of some
criteria. The project had to be downscaled because of a lack of funds.
l. ACIL- Not familiar/ Got a subsidy for Threshold challenege. Fairly easy
to apply for the subsidy. There was a criteria in the presentation.
m. AECES- not familiar
II.

Criteria
a. What project will you apply a subsidy for?
i. Baybayin Project beyond the organization, externals, projects
which include other members outside Baybayin. Kung bigyan
kami ng pera, might as well makinabang yung buong Ateneo sa
pero na binigay sa amin.
ii. YFC-A Membership formation such as camps instead of
income generating projects. Maybe 2 out of 3 camps since
venue and food are expensive.
iii. ABS Membership development and formation. Especially
rehearsal venues which are expensive and charged per hour.
Practice as a group is very helpful. Would better represent
Ateneos name being the premier orchestra. Many instruments,
and equipment make venue choice limited. 5 th floor library is
difficult, logistics-wise. ISO is expensive.
2

iv. ACIL Flagship project because it invites catechists around the

country and we hold workshops for them.
v. PMSA Membership formation such as the leadership formation
camp. Lacking funds to make it overnight, which made their
formation difficult.
vi. ACLC Projects that require money from the volunteers.
Volunteers pay sometimes which leads to lower turnout of
volunteers. Few people volunteer but numbers can improve if
Subsidy will be given. Higher impact as well.
b. General success Indicators of your orgs projects
i. Assembly- Political formation wherein we see our projects being
an avenue for discourse.
ii. Baybayin Most basic is attendance or the scale of the project.
For big projects, number of partner orgs inside and outside
Ateneo.
iii. MEA Aligned with our Core Advocacy, Corporate Sustainability,
the triple-bottom line of people, planet, profit.
c. Ranking of criteria
i. PMSA- 1. Financial Need 2. Impact- Subsidy should be
meaningful, 3. Member involvement
ii. YFC-A
1. Financial Need - funds
2. Member Involvement For Membership formation
3. Consistency with orgs year goal each orgs event is
directed
iii. ACLC
1. Impact Money will help project make an impact
2. Financial Need
3. Reach
iv. Baybayin
1. Reach mahalaga na yung proyekto ay hindi para sa
mga exclusive
3

2. Impact Mahalaga kasi doon nakikita kung may point

yung project
3. Financial need
4. Maybe consistent with the goals of the Ateneo or OSA.
v. MISA
1. Impact/ Reach They go hand-in-hand
2. Project Management project should be up to the orgs
standards.
3. Financial Need
vi. AJMA
1. Impact No impact, not worth executing
2. Project Management- Execution is the main point of the
project, better execution, better project
3. Member Involvement- Members are worth investing in
4. Impact should be based on the nature of the organization
or the event.
vii. ABS
1. Consistency what you want your members to take away
2. Financial Need Financial status should be known per
org. some orgs really need it.
3. Impact Encompasses a lot of this, something that we
strive to do, something that sticks to the org and the
audience.
4. Projected expenses should also be taken into
consideration of the specific project. Whether reasonable
yung subsidy.
5. Each org is different in their own way, so a super general
criterion for impact is not accurate. Maybe a criteria per
cluster.
6. Nation-building isnt exactly the thing of PAC orgs, since
each org has their own thing and some orgs have a
difficult time trying to align it to what Ateneo/OSA wants.
4

7. For impact measurement, more on member development

and revenue which measures the number of people. Not
nation oriented.
viii. Peers
1. Impact The point of executing a project.
2. FN
3. Reach
ix. MEA
1. Consistency- Alignment with goal makes it worth doing
2. Member Involvement- MEA has a focus on Members this
years.
3. Impact
4. Hindi enough yung DCB since there are orgs that dont
stop at the schoolyear and work year-round. So a yearly
measurement isnt as accurate.
5. Agree with the fact that differences of the orgs stemming
from advocacies. Maybe the measurement is based on
how aligned it is with the advocacy of the organization.
x. CompSAt
1. Impact goes hand in hand with 2 especially for the
people outside the org.
2. Consistency
3. FN Need money for the push or the thrust for the org
xi. Assembly
1. Impact/ Reach Hand-in-hand; its important for the
quality of the impact on the people. Such as the plebiscite
2. Financial need Non-profit org, since many projects do
not generate income and subisidies arent always
sustainable
xii. ACIL
1. FN
5

2. Consistency not executed if not consistent, no point in

executing if not aligned with thrust
3. Impact- must impact not just the org but outside the org
and outside Ateneo
4. Project proposal should also be taken into consideration.
5. Agree with the criteria being inline with the goals of the
Ateneo.
xiii. AECES
1. FN
2. Consistency Includes what the org has for the members
too.
3. Impact important to see what the point of the project
really is.
III.

Distribution of funds. Either many orgs, little percentage of what they ask
for, or konting orgs or big amount of subsidy.
a. AECES Prefer many orgs pero maliit. Para lahat mabigyan ng
chance para magawa yung advocacies nila.
b. ACIL Same. Difficult for other orgs if they dont get a subsidy just
because other orgs get the majority of their request.
c. Assembly measure of equity vs. equality, no definitive answer just
yet.
d. CompSAt Many orgs even if its small, its still a small push to push
through with the project. Depends on how well it can be used as well.
e. MEA Few orgs, big funds. More on considering the different natures
of orgs since some orgs dont really need as much money.
f. Peers- Agree with previous; as long as everyone gets a small amount/
has an equal chance, those who need it more may not get as much
money as they need.
g. ABS Agree with former(2 people); everyone has an equal chance.
And it really depends on the financial needs. Equal amounts wouldnt
be as helpful for large-scale projects. Challenge for orgs to step up and
say how much they really need and how much effort theyre going to
put into the project.

h. AJMA- Agree with former; some orgs are forgotten because they do not
get the proper amount of funds. Some orgs really need it.
i. MISA Whats important depends on the criteria of determining the
subsidy. Leaning on agreeing with the former, if the criteria is okay, less
orgs, bigger money. 2 - Bigger impact and quality not quantity.
j. Baybayin Pwedeng tingan yung impact nung budget sa ibibigay sa
project. Proportion sa kailangan ng project. Kapag na-asses nang
mabuti, may magsastand-out so mas maganda yung mas kaunti pero
mas malaki yung pero since mas deserving sila.
k. ACLC Agree with former. Thats the purpose of the criteria, to gauge
who really needs it.
l. YFC- A Proper allocation and proper criteria. Mas gusto ko yung mas
maraming orgs pero hindi lahat ng orgs bibigyan kasi any amount will
help..
m. PMSA- Leaning more towards less orgs, bigger amounts, because of
the financial needs of the orgs. A very small amount of money wouldnt
help as much. It would be better if the criteria would be judged better
so that the proper amount will be given.
IV.

Retrospective evaluation
a. Baybayin: May chance be na pwede retrospective yung pagkaevaluate?
b. ACLC: Kahit tapos na yung project, pwede pa rin bigyan ng subsidy
para fair din.
c. YFC-A: I think okay lang yung retroevaluation for the subsidy, maybe
there can be a different criteria
d. MISA: Agree with the retrospection of the projects since you cant really
base it on the project of the project.
e. Steph: Will eventually become merit-based if that is the case
f. ABS: Dont agree with the retrospective evaluation of the project.Since
it would just be adding to the profit of the org since mawawala yung
point ng subsidy.

V.

What if org-based?
a. AJMA - The project subsidy is difficult, what if it was not project based
but rather based on the organization. Depends on the expenses of the
org.
7

b. MEA - Some orgs dont need a whole lot of money. Some orgs can
have some projects that have subsidies granted to them.
c. ABS Main source of expense is flagship preference, better for project
based.
d. Baybayin- Parang hassle kung per org. Tingin ko sa COA subsidy,
parang showcase ng big project for the year, parang skill yun ng org to
pick which specific project ibato sa COA, sa tingin ko its part of the
adventure.
VI.

MEA: Paano yung Subsidy?

a. COA DCB to orgs DCB (transfer) and may report form.

VII.

AJMA: How much budget is given to COA?

a. Steph: No Definitive answer for now

VIII.

AJMA: Hopefully, use of Ateneo facilities shouldnt be paid for.

a. Steph: Overtime and maintenance payments.

IX.

MEA: Cash on hand is sometimes a problem. Since sometimes walang

pera yung org since mabagal yung pagkabalik ng pera sa org revolving
fund. Bureaucracy is a problem.
a. Steph: Last year lang yung revolving fund. Kaya ginawa yung revolving
fund since mabagal yung reimbursement.
b. ABS: Okay lang yung amount, sana mas mabilis yung pag replenish ng
pera.
c. MEA: Some projects maraming maliliit ng expenses, kahit operational
lang yung sinabi mo, mahirap pa rin magkeep-up.
d. YFC-A: Mabagal yung replenishment ng orgs. So ginawa last year, pag
binawasan, replenish agad so medyo hassle process.
e. AJMA: Hassle yung pagka-encash sa Chinabank.
f. YFC-A: More efficient sa PCV. Since 2k lang yung limit ng PCV.