To populate Scholarly, sign in here .


Title Social Welfare Program (R.A. 9994): Exploring Senior Citizen's Experiences through Self-Disclosure and Feedback
Posted by Minnie Mamauag
Authors Minnie Besin Mamauag, MAN,RN
Publication date Sept. 2014
Journal CNU Journal of Higher Education
Volume 8
Pages 48-64
Publisher CNU Journal of Higher Education
Abstract This study evaluated actual program implementation and its perceived effectiveness through the self-disclosure and feedback from the Senior Citizens (SC) as evaluator. The framework of this study relies on Robert Stake's Countenance Model and the effectivity and efficiency of the six (6) program benefits and privileges, pursuant to the provision of the R.A. 9994. The study utilized qualitative and quantitative approaches using the descriptive (quantitative) and focus group discussion (qualitative) as data gathering tool.The primary data were derived from purposive sampling of fifty-three (53) respondents for the demographic profile and the second ,self-disclosure Focus group discussion of ten (10) Senior Citizens concerning programs implemented. The statistical treatment utilized was frequency and percentage for the demographic profile of the Senior Citizens; to interpret the items in the questionnaire, an over-all mean was used; for the interpretation and analysis of the interviews, content analysis was used. The result of this study isthat although Senior Citizens are aware of some provisions of the law, they have not read the full extent of their benefits and privileges. Thus, the 6 mandated benefits and privileges are availed according to the SC are as follows; on discount privileges, availed sometimes; for free services, availed rarely; for exemptions, availed sometimes; for incentives and government assistance, availed rarely, whereas for priority in express lanes, it was availed most of the time. Based on the self-disclosure and feedback from the personal interview conducted with the SC, it showed 7 potential barriers namely; lack of knowledge and awareness of the law; discrimination through non-acceptance and passive implementation by partner institutions; procedural barriers; poor information dissemination; health (physical and mental) barrier; financial barrier and non-advocacy for the plight of Senior Citizens’ welfare. It is recommended that a more in-depth study with a large number of Senior Citizen respondents (including non-member) should be included. This is to dwell more on their needs and further assess the implementation of the said law. Strict and thorough evaluation is also recommended to give ample check-and-balance of the plans effectively done and the congruency of the goals to the outcomes.