ON Dec. 4, 2022, I wrote a column about the online senior citizen's data form of the National Commission of Seniors Citizens (NCSC), the government agency that was created three and a half years ago, right after Republic Act 11350 was signed into law on July 25, 2019. I categorically stated that I did not fill out this lengthy data form because there were many items in the research instrument that were problematic. That is why I asked whether the questionnaire was pre-tested systematically, online and offline. I also raised issues about the data collection implementation process, data privacy and security.

I have, however, inadvertently excluded in my previous column the fact that the NCSC's data collection implementation process is coursed through the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and all local government units (LGUs), particularly their Office for Senior Citizen Affairs (OSCA). DILG Undersecretary for Local Government Marlo Iringan released a memorandum on Sept. 12, 2022, requesting all the DILG regional and field offices and the LGUs (provincial, city and municipality) to 'collect Senior Citizens' Data through their Office for Senior Citizen Affairs (OSCA) using the prescribed SC data form attached in the memorandum. The collected data shall be submitted to the NCSC.' In addition, the DILG enjoined all its regional directors to 'cause the immediate and widest dissemination' of its memorandum and its attachment 'to all DILG field offices and local government units within their respective area[s] of jurisdiction.' Some of my questions regarding data collection are answered by this DILG memorandum.

I wonder though whether the OSCAs have trained human resources and the logistics for assisting senior citizens who want to utilize online data forms, and in encoding data obtained from offline interviews. Most likely the OSCAs would rely on their network of barangay (village) seniors' associations or organizations to disseminate and collect data from the elderly population in their respective domains. Since the original online data form is in English, I also wonder whether the printed copies for offline respondents are available in Filipino or in the appropriate local language. Are training and logistical support provided to the OSCAs' barangay senior associations' data collectors for the varied population segments of the elderly that include the immobile or sick, indigenous people and the illiterate from urban poor and hard-to-reach rural communities? These sectors are the indigents who do not have access to many basic services and who badly need government support for survival. What are the mechanisms to ensure reliability and validity of the data? How does the NCSC uphold data privacy and security in light of the LGUs' major involvement in data collection?

I recently heard some disturbing information from a college classmate who resides in a middle-class subdivision in Davao City. She said her elderly neighbor who is a retired pensioner after over three decades of government service, told her that the senior citizens in their community are required to submit six copies of the NCSC's data form — one for the barangay, one for the subdivision, one for the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), and three for other agencies that were not identified. If six other entities are provided with the filled-out NCSC data form, it would be difficult to ensure data privacy and security for the senior citizens in that community. The senior citizens' personal information in the NCSC form might fall into the wrong hands and can be utilized by scammers whose numbers are on the rise these days. It was not ascertained that the multiple copies of the filled-out NCSC questionnaire are a citywide instruction, or just by the barangay and its seniors citizens' association.

My college classmate's neighbor said she would comply with the foregoing requirement because she was informed that there would be 'ayuda' for senior citizens. Ayuda in the Philippine context means aid or assistance in the form of food or cash, often given after a disaster or calamity, and during the Covid-19 fourteen-month lockdown. It was understandable why ayuda was given to all seniors during the pandemic lockdown because they were not allowed to leave their homes to obtain food and other essential needs.

It appears that the ayuda is being used to entice senior citizens to fill out the questionnaire or to agree for an interview. What I understand from the NCSC is that it is collecting personal data from all senior citizens to update its database. It does not promise any assistance after this activity. What the NCSC is mandated to distribute is the 'Social Pension for Indigent Citizens,' which used to be done by the DSWD. The eligibility criteria for this assistance would include senior citizens who a) are frail, sickly or with disability; b) do not have pension from the Social Security System (SSS) or the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) or from any sources of pension in government and private agencies; and c) have no permanent source of income, compensation or financial assistance from relatives to support their basic needs. Initially, indigent senior citizens were provided with P500 monthly assistance to augment their daily needs and medical needs. Recently, another P500 was added to the social pension, giving a total of P1,000 monthly assistance to qualified senior citizens. I learned that the 'cleansed' list of indigents that was prepared by the DSWD will be used by the NCSC to carry out its mandate. The DSWD's cleansed list has already removed several recipients from some OSCAs' lists of social pension beneficiaries because they did not meet the government's eligibility criteria.

I was told by some family members and friends that the questions I have raised or continue to raise are inconsequential because the NCSC, through the DILG and the LGUs, has been circulating the data form that I commented on, and there is nothing I can do but to fill out the questionnaire if I wanted to be counted. If I find some items silly or irrational, then I just do not answer them. Take the path of least resistance in this case, and just write about good practices in the South, I was further told.

I really believe that it is a waste of resources to implement a lengthy data form that asks many personal questions about the elderly population without a clear framework or rationale and assurance of privacy and security. For example, I do not understand why membership identification card numbers for OSCA, SSS/GSIS, PhilHealth and Tax Information Number (TIN) are asked. Specific data are also asked about one's business, current pension and occupation, income, age and work status of each of the children and dependents of the elderly. There are structured responses in some sections that I find preposterous. For example, the housing situation responses are really constraining because the choices are: 1) no privacy, 2) overcrowding in home, 3) informal settlers, 4) no permanent house, 5) high cost of rent, and 6) longing for independent living quiet atmosphere. The first five responses are addressed mainly to disadvantaged seniors, while the sixth is an aspirational item that anyone can answer. What does 'longing for independent living quiet atmosphere?' What does 'no privacy' also mean?

Does it mean an overcrowded home, or living in a one-room dwelling unit with many children and relatives, or living in an informal settler community?

The selection of responses about social/emotional aspect implies sadness at old age: 1) feeling neglect/rejection (printed twice in the form), 2) feeling helplessness/worthlessness, 3) feeling loneliness/isolate, 4) lack leisure/recreational activities, 5) lack SC friendly environment, and (6) others (specify). Why is a senior asked to enumerate about his/her maintenance drugs?

Does the NCSC intend to provide these medicines to every ailing senior citizen in the country?

I wonder whether the NCSC has sought the assistance of social research experts from the National Economic and Development Authority, the Philippine Statistical Authority, the Commission on Population, or from the University of the Philippines Population Institute. If they did, they would have developed a relevant, user-friendly self-administered online and offline questionnaire. It appears that this new government agency did not, and I should learn to accept its mediocre senior data form.