Homelessness As A Way of Life: Survival Strategies of The Street Homeless in Manila, Philippines

HOMELESSNESS AS A WAY OF LIFE: SURVIVAL STRATEGIES
OF THE STREET HOMELESS IN MANILA
A Thesis
Presented to
The Faculty of the Graduate School
Ateneo de Manila University
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts in Sociology
by
Emily B. Roque
2012
The thesis entitled:
submitted by Emily B. Roque has been examined and is recommended for Oral
Defense.
EMMA E. PORIO, Ph.D. LIZA L. LIM, Ph.D.

Chair Adviser
JOSE M. CRUZ, S.J., Ph.D.

Dean
School of Social Sciences
Comprehensive Examination Passed: 7 and 14 February 2009

The Faculty of the Graduate School of the Ateneo de Manila University
accepts the thesis entitled:
submitted by Emily B. Roque, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of Master of Arts in Sociology.
LIZA L. LIM, Ph.D. EMMA E. PORIO, Ph.D.

Adviser Member
FERNANDO N. ZIALCITA, Ph.D. MARY RACELIS, Ph.D.

Member Member
JOSE M. CRUZ, S.J., Ph.D.

Dean
School of Social Sciences
Grade: A = Excellent
Date: 23 June 2011

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am deeply grateful to my brilliant adviser, Dr. Liza Lim. Her expertise and
insights provided greater depth and focus to my thesis. Her limitless patience and
confidence in me made it possible to hurdle every step. She is truly a great mentor. I am
also indebted to my panelists, namely, Dr. Emma Porio, Dr. Mary Racelis and Dr.
Fernando Zialcita. Their valuable advice and intellectual contributions greatly shaped
this study. I am thankful to Ms. Bernadette Pascua for her generous assistance and to
the Department of Sociology and Anthropology for honing me over the years in the
discipline which I have come to love.
I am thankful to the DSWD, JFC, MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit, RAC-Manila,
Manila City Social Welfare, and the MPD for sharing their time and thoughts on the
street homelessness issue. I am also grateful to the feeding program organizers of CCT
and the churches of San Sebastian, Paco and Ermita for imparting their passion in
helping the street homeless.
I owe my deepest gratitude to my parents, Edwin and Nellie, for their endless
patience, encouragement and love. I am also grateful to my bestfriend, Czarina, for the
sleepless nights and spirited rants we shared while doing our theses. My warmest
thanks are also due to Acee, Abby and Hazel for making fieldworks easier. I would also
like to give my deepest appreciation to JM for selflessly sharing his time, for inspiring me
to always be at my best, and for teaching me to take chances.
This thesis is dedicated to my thirty street homeless respondents and to all
homeless individuals who continually struggle to live a dignified life in the streets.
v
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................. ix
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................ x
ACRONYMS USED ........................................................................................... xi
CHAPTER
I INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 1
Background of the Study ............................................................ 1
Statement of the Problem ........................................................... 4
Significance of the Research ...................................................... 5
Scope and Limitations ................................................................ 6
Review of Related Literature ...................................................... 8
Defining homelessness ......................................................... 8

Macro and micro factors leading to homelessness ............... 10
Everyday life of the homeless people ................................... 13
Space and spatial location .............................................. 15
Social networks ............................................................... 16
State and non-state entities in the issue of
homelessness ........................................................... 19
Theoretical Framework ............................................................... 21
Analytical Framework ................................................................. 26
Research Methodology ............................................................... 32
Research design ................................................................... 32

Site selection ........................................................................ 32
Data sources ........................................................................ 34
Selection of respondents ...................................................... 35
Data collection ...................................................................... 37
Data analysis and interpretation ........................................... 38
Thesis Organization ................................................................... 40

vi
II MANILA AND ITS STREETS: GEOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-

POLITICAL CONTEXT ..................................................................... 41
Geographic Context of Manila .................................................... 41
Homelessness as Vagrancy: National and Local Policies ........... 46
Article 202 or the Anti-Vagrancy Law .......................................... 48
City Ordinance 4638 on Vagrancy .............................................. 48
History of vagrancy in Manila ...................................................... 49
National Welfare Policies on Homelessness ............................... 52
Chapter Summary ...................................................................... 54
III GOVERNMENT ENTITITES AND RELIGIOUS GROUPS:

LOCATING THE STREET HOMELESS AMONG WELFARE
INSTITUTIONS ................................................................................ 56
Government Entities: National Welfare Institutions ..................... 56
Department of Social Welfare and Development .................. 59

Jose Fabella Center .............................................................. 62
MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit ........................................... 65
Government Entities: Local Government Institutions in Manila ... 66
Reception and Action Center ................................................ 69

Manila Police District ............................................................ 71
Religious Groups and Feeding Programs in Manila .................... 74
Summary of Relationships of Homelessness-Related

Institutions: Locating the Street Homeless ............................ 77
Chapter Summary ...................................................................... 86
IV PROFILE OF THE ―YAGIT‖: THE STREET HOMELESS OF

MANILA ........................................................................................... 88
Identifying the ―Yagit‖: Street Homeless in Manila ...................... 88
Street Homeless Respondents: Socio-demographic Profile

and Causes of Homelessness .............................................. 91
vii
Male street homeless ............................................................ 96

Female street homeless ....................................................... 99
Homosexual and bisexual street homeless ........................... 102
Becoming Homeless: Socialization to the Streets ....................... 104
Chapter Summary ...................................................................... 107
V ADAPATIVE STRATEGIES OF THE STREET HOMELESS IN

MANILA ........................................................................................... 110
Survival Strategies of the Street Homeless in Manila .................. 111
Male Street Homeless: Survival Strategies ................................. 111
Access to basic needs: food strategies ................................. 112

Work strategies ..................................................................... 115
Negotiated spaces ................................................................ 117
Relationship with institutions ................................................. 119
Drinking and substance abuse as coping strategy ................ 123
Social networks .................................................................... 124
Attempts to get out of homelessness .................................... 129
Female Street Homeless: Survival Strategies ............................. 130

Work strategies ..................................................................... 132
Social networks .................................................................... 139
Homosexual and Bisexual Street Homeless: Survival

Strategies ............................................................................. 144

Work strategies ..................................................................... 146
Social networks .................................................................... 152
Synthesis .................................................................................... 157

viii
Access to basic needs: food ................................................. 157

Work strategies ..................................................................... 163
Institutions as forms of support and constraint ...................... 167
Social networks .................................................................... 170
Attempts to get out of the streets .......................................... 171
Chapter Summary ...................................................................... 172
VI THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF HOMELESSNESS:

PERCEPTIONS OF STREET HOMELESS AND WELFARE
INSTITUTIONS IN MANILA .............................................................. 174
Street Homeless: Perceptions of Street Life ............................... 174
Streets as escape ................................................................. 175

Acceptance of identity as homeless ...................................... 178
Reciprocity versus trust ........................................................ 182
Functional over emotional relationships ................................ 185
Assessment on government institutions ................................ 186
Assessment on feeding programs and religious
organizations .................................................................. 187
Perceived solutions on homelessness .................................. 192
Government Institutions and Religious Organizations:

Perceptions on Street Homelessness ................................... 193
Reception and Action Center ...................................................... 193
Manila Police District ............................................................ 197

DSWD, Jose Fabella Center and the MMDA Street
Dweller Care Unit ............................................................ 202
Organizers of Feeding Programs ................................................ 207
Conflict Among Institutions on the Issue of Homelessness ......... 212
Habitual Homelessness: Institutionalization of Homelessness

as a Result of Interactions Between Actors ........................... 218
Chapter Summary ...................................................................... 222
VII HOMELESSNESS AS A WAY OF LIFE: ANALYSIS,

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................... 228
ix
Marginalization of the Street Homeless: Constraining Factors .... 228
Adaptive Strategies as Response to Marginalization: Enabling

Factors ................................................................................. 233
Socialization to the homeless way of life ............................... 233

Gender shapes survival strategies ......................................... 235
Feeding programs as spaces for dignity ............................... 238
Spaces of contestation, negotiation and transitoriness ......... 239
Social networks, trust and reciprocity .................................... 240
Dynamics of Constraining and Enabling: Institutionalization of

Homelessness as a Way of Life ............................................ 241
Conclusion ................................................................................. 243
Recommendations ..................................................................... 244
APPENDICES ................................................................................................... 250
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 259

LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Number of Persons Arrested for Vagrancy in Manila . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
2. Number of Persons Arrested for Vagrancy

and Prostitution in Manila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
3. Detailed Summary of Institutions and their Functions. . . . . . . . . . . . 79
4. Encounter with MPD by Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
5. Profile of Street Homeless Respondents in Manila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
6. Summary Profile of Homeless Respondents (in percentages) . . . . . 94
7. Summary of Statistical Profile of Homeless Respondents

by Gender (in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
8. Schedule of Feeding Programs in Manila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
9. Adaptive Strategies of Street Homeless Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . 158
10. Work Strategies of Street Homeless Respondents

According to Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
11. Actors‘ Constructions on the Issue of Homelessness . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Analytical Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2. Map of the Districts of Manila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3. Spaces Occupied by Street Homeless Respondents . . .. . . . . . 47
4. Relationship of National Government Institutions for the

Street Homeless . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5. Relationship of Local Government Institutions for the

Street Homeless in Manila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
6. Summary of Relationships of Homelessness-Related

Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
7. Use of Earnings of Street Homeless Respondents

(in Percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
8. Perceptions of Street Homelessness Respondents

on Institutions Encountered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
x
ACRONYMS USED
CCT Center for Community Transformation
DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development
JFC Jose Fabella Center
MCSW Manila City Social Welfare
MMDA-SDCU Metropolitan Manila Development Authority Street

Dweller Care Unit
MPD Manila Police District
RAC Reception and Action Center
xi
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Homelessness is the most visible form of poverty reflected by the number of
people living and depending on the streets to survive. Studies have often depicted
homelessness in particular themes: reasons for homelessness, the socio-demographic
description of the homeless and their individual stories of how they came to end up on
the streets, and the conditions of street life through the vulnerabilities and risks that the
homeless experience. These themes attempt to obtain a complete picture of
homelessness by showing how certain economic, social and political conditions push
vulnerable people into becoming homeless, thereby resulting in the restriction of their
access to certain institutions and spaces. Moreover, the loss of a home means
uncertainty of acquiring a sustainable source of material needs such as food and shelter
and social needs such as companionship and the feeling of belongingness. As the
homeless are cut off and excluded from the formal economic, social and political sectors
to which they used to belong, they are forced to encounter and respond to the
challenges that street life offers in order to survive.
Although the presence of homeless people in the streets of Manila seems to
grow, a comprehensive count of the homeless population is not easily accessible.
Assumptions can only be made as state-based institutions believe it difficult to count the
homeless people living in the streets due to their mobility. Despite this, the same
institutions initiated several programs and were able to count the homeless people they
1
2
served. Aoki (2008) found an unpublished report by the Department of Social Welfare
and Development in the National Capital Region (DSWD-NCR), which indicated that a
total of 121 outreach activities conducted between January and June 2006 which
catered to 2,100 street homeless. The report indicated that among the recipients, 52%
were street homeless, 40% were street children and 8% were families living in the
streets. Within these same months, a report by the Jose Fabella Center showed that
they accepted 2,794 homeless people composed of 461 vagrants, 86 beggars, 2,193
people living in the streets, 42 victims of squatter evictions and 12 others (Ibid.).
Similarly, interviews conducted by the researcher four years ago showed that a former
feeding program in Quiapo Church used to prepare rice porridge good for 300 to 500
homeless, while San Sebastian Church continues to feed an estimated 200 to 300
homeless people every week. Aoki (Ibid.) estimated that there are 100,000 street
homeless in Manila. He deduced this from statistics which included the street children
and street homeless accommodated by the Jose Fabella Center.
Despite these numbers and the visibility of the street homeless in the main cities,
it is interesting to note that the issue of homelessness in the Philippines does not
constitute a main interest in terms of research and government interventions. Moreover,
the few studies available on homelessness fail to differentiate the squatter population
from the street people. They focus more on addressing the issues of the former and, just
recently, have considered the latter as the ―new homeless‖ or those who are constantly
moving in the street and ―cannot even live in the squatters‖ (Delfin 2007). Similarly, they
are recognized as ―street dwellers‖ as they reside in public spaces such as sidewalks,
3
building lots and parks (Ferrer 2003). This lack of common definition of who and what
exactly comprise the homeless population is reflected in how institutions address the
issue of homelessness. State-based institutions treat the homeless as belonging to the
general group of vagrants, beggars and mentally ill who loiter in the streets. The Jose
Fabella Center, a temporary shelter under the DSWD-NCR, is said to cater to ―rescued
vagrants, mendicants and psychotic, transient clients‖ (DSWD 2009). Working closely
with DSWD is the Street Dweller Care Unit, an initiative of the Metropolitan Manila
Development Authority (MMDA). Along with the local police, the unit has conducted
―rescue operations‖ on the streets of Manila and brought street dwellers to the Jose
Fabella Center. They are said to cater to the ―welfare and eventual relocation of vagrant,
mendicants or beggars, psychotics, and nomads who roam and inhabit the major roads
of the metropolis‖ (MMDA 2009). Most operations are said to be futile, as the homeless
stay away from the police due to violence and return to the streets after being
temporarily housed at shelters. Depending on other institutions such as non-government
entities, religious organizations and informal economies, tension between the state and
homeless people make the latter find living on the streets more attractive than staying in
the shelters. Moreover, the lack of knowledge on how the street homeless live is
reflected in local policies which, in the long run, do not seem to address effectively the
problem of homelessness.
From being housed individuals, people face a different manner of living when
they lose their homes. Homeless people ―live on the street, by the street and through the
street‖ (Aoki 2008: 169). Finding food, money, a secure place to sleep, among others,
4
become the basic concerns of everyday. The dynamics on the street, along with the
constraints and risks associated with it, shape how homelessness has not only become
a long-time urban problem but has also turned into one of the most unexamined ways of
living. Lacking attention both in the academe and the local government, the issue of
street homelessness in Manila deserves to be studied. As such, this research hopes to
bring attention to the experience of homelessness in the Philippines. From individual
experiences of the street homeless, it hopes to dig deeper into how the homeless as
agency shapes and is shaped by the interplay of state and non-state institutions, spatial
environment and social networks. In general, this research hopes to provide an insight
as to how and why homelessness continues to persist.
Statement of the Problem
Most studies on homelessness concentrate on either structural factors which
push people to take the streets or on the individual experiences of homeless people. A
comprehensive study on homelessness that looks into the dynamics between structural
factors and individual experiences, especially in the Philippines, is yet to be conducted.
While most research view the homeless as mere victims of structural constraints, looking
at them as empowered agency will highlight their role not only in how they are shaped by
structures but also how they affect the course of the homelessness issue as well. This
paper would like to explore the complementarity of agency and structure in shaping the
issue of homelessness. As such, this study is an attempt to describe and explore the
5
everyday survival of homeless people through the adaptive responses they form amidst
structural constraints. By doing so, the research hopes to gain an insight on how
homelessness persists through the dynamics of the street homeless and the
institutionalized sources of survival they depend on. The specific questions related to
this study are:
1) What are the strategies and routines that homeless people form in order to
survive?
2) How does the relationship between actors (i.e. street homeless, religious
organizations, state and non-state institutions) enable the survival strategies of
homeless people?
3) How do the street homeless negotiate space in terms of survival? How does the
spatial location of services affect the survival strategies of the street homeless?
4) How do the street homeless use social networks to achieve street knowledge for
survival?
5) What are the implications of these subsistence strategies to the overall condition
of homelessness in Manila? How do institutional relationships, negotiation of
space and extent of networks contribute to the persistence of homelessness?
Significance of the Research
The lack or absence of studies on homelessness in the Philippines in terms of
everyday survival and relationships with institutions is one of the primary concerns of this
research. This study aims to contribute not only to the growing literature of
6
homelessness in general but also to the conditions of homelessness in the Philippine
setting. By looking deeper into their everyday life, the homeless and the sociospatial
conditions they move in are hoped to be more understood also in relation to why
homelessness continues to persist.
The presence of a student researcher in the area can help contribute to the
production of discourse among homeless people and related institutions. Through
interviews and correspondence, actors may reflexively articulate their perceptions and
roles and create certain awareness on the issue of homelessness. In this light, it is
hoped that the results of the study can contribute to policy-making and serve as one of
the grounds for future research and practical endeavors with regard to the
homelessness issue.
Scope and Limitations
This study mainly focuses on the everyday interaction between the street
homeless and several institutions in Manila. To be more specific, it gives attention to the
street homeless who frequent feeding programs and interact with state and non-state
institutions. For state entities, it includes state representatives related to the
homelessness issue such as the Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD), the Street Dweller Care Unit of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority
(MMDA), the Jose Fabella Center (JFC), the local government of Manila, the Reception
Action Center (RAC) and the Manila Police Department (MPD). For non-state entities, it
involves non-government organizations and religious organizations who organize regular

7
feeding programs and projects for the street homeless. This paper discusses the roles
and perceptions of each actor and how these shape in the interactions, or lack thereof,
taking place among them. Moreover, it attempts at mapping out the pathways of
subsistence—feeding schedules, shelters, threats to security, concentration of homeless
population, among others—in Manila.
Given the premise, the study limits itself to the meso- and micro-level analysis of
socio-cultural contexts. Though globalization and urbanization may have an effect, the
study nevertheless includes structural factors which have a more evident impact on the
issue of homelessness: governing welfare policies and push factors which cause people
to take the streets. These elements are also seen to influence the interaction of actors in
the study of homelessness.
Moreover, the study does not hope to generalize and is only valid for the
research site. The strategies and experiences of the street homeless and the socio-
cultural dynamics in Manila may differ in another context. In order to address this
limitation, the study expands its scope to accommodate three groups based on gender:
male, female, and homo- and bisexual homeless groups. By doing so, experiences are
hoped to be more diverse and varied and could somehow represent the experiences of
homeless people with similar characteristics and circumstances.
Also, aside from local welfare institutions, this study includes national welfare
institutions concerned with the issue of homelessness. In this way, the study attempts to
somehow connect the local and national institutions to determine whether experiences
are similar in both sites.

8
Limitations concerning the technical aspects of the research include constraints
to time and resources. Though the outsider perspective is advantageous, gaining access
and trust of informants and a holistic understanding of the people‘s beliefs and
assumptions are possible limitations and should be considered.
Review of Related Literature
Defining Homelessness
What is homelessness? Homelessness takes on a variety of meanings and
understandings from one culture to another (Glasser 1994: 3). They are also called
different names: hobo, vagrant, tramps, wandering poor, among others. They are known
not only for their shabby clothes but also for their dwelling areas which are mostly in
public spaces such as parks, streets, sidewalks, old buildings, under the bridges, among
others. As they have no homes, they keep their possessions with them and bring them
wherever they go.
The United States has pioneered studies on homelessness over the years. A
study of sixty local and national primary data collection investigations of the
characteristics of the homeless population conducted from 1981 to 1988 was done by
Shlay and Rossi (1992). They found that the literature on the homeless consisted mostly
of males who were unmarried, black and more young than elderly. Moreover, long-term
unemployment characterized the homeless, alongside with a claim that a majority of
them are mentally ill with either schizophrenia or manic depression. Total isolation was
not experienced by the homeless as social ties were present; there was less contact with
9
domiciled friends and families and more with other homeless people. As such, one
widely quoted definition is that of Caplow, Bahr and Sternberg (1968):
Homelessness is a condition of detachment from society

characterized by the absence or attenuation of the
affiliative bonds that link settled persons to a network of
interconnected social structures (494).
Although becoming homeless makes one lose networks which enable one to become
―settled‖, it does not mean that there is a complete detachment from society. Shlay and
Rossi (1992) noted a shift in the networks of homeless people, that they had less contact
with domiciled people but ―had a social network comprised of other homeless people‖.
Affiliation, in this case, is more into survival. For example, for the basic needs such as
food and shelter, they are dependent on religious organizations or certain government
agencies for such. In terms of employment, they are cut off from ―prestigious‖ jobs and
are more dependent on casual labor.
In the Philippines, the notion of homelessness is different. The homeless in the
Philippines are those who live in makeshift houses but are staying in the land that does
not belong to them. Although there are people who do not live in the squatter‘s area,
they are not popularly recognized as homeless but rather—according to the few studies
on the homeless in the Philippines—―street dwellers,‖ the ―new homeless,‖ or ―yagit‖.
Street dwellers are those whose homes are in public spaces: sidewalks, parks, parking
and building lots, beside buildings, and so on (Ferrer 2003). The ―new homeless‖ are
those who are constantly moving in the street. They are classified into three: (1) those
whose homes in the slums were demolished and were not given or do not want to live in
10
relocation sites, (2) those who migrated to the cities to find a better life but do not have
relatives and cannot afford to rent houses or rooms, (3) and those who migrated from
tribal and religious communities such as the Aetas and Muslims (Delfin, 2007). ―Yagit” is
the most commonly used term in the Quiapo area, usually referring to a wide variety of
cases but are said to be ―victims of injustice of all kinds‖: those abandoned by spouses
or beaten up by family members, some lost homes in a fire, others were fired from their
jobs, there are beggars, those gypped by recruiters and have no money for the fare back
home (Coronel, 2005). In a recent study on the homeless in Metro Manila, Aoki (2008)
differentiates between squatter homeless and street homeless. Squatter homeless are
those who have fixed and permanent shelter and live collectively, albeit in lands that do
not belong to them. On the other hand, the street homeless are those who ―do not have
permanent and fixed houses, who do not have relatives with whom they can live, and
who live alone or in a family unit on the streets in a fixed spatial range‖ (Aoki 2008: 160).
To be more specific, this paper looks at the everyday lives of the street homeless.
Although the homeless consist of the groups having the characteristics
mentioned above, issues still occur as to the basic task of defining who and what groups
of people consist of the homeless and how they are included and mentioned in the laws
and policies of the state. Stefl, in her study of the new homeless, attested that
researchers and policymakers are seeking ways to ―classify the homeless persons or the
homeless condition as an acknowledgment that the homeless situation is complex and
multifaceted‖ (1987: 52). In the Philippines, the Vagrancy Law includes a definition
where the homeless can be considered as such: ―any person found loitering about public
11
or semi-public buildings or places or trampling or wandering about the country or the
streets without visible means of support‖ (Revised Penal Code). This law is considered
as a criminal offense, and punishment comes with arrest and a fine. Without a clear cut
definition, the homeless are readily considered as vagrants and criminals. As such, a
definition should be established in order to include who the services or policies should
be directed to.
How, then, will the homeless be identified? For this study, the street homeless
are those who interact with religious organizations, state and non-state institutions for
subsistence purposes. Service providers, or those working in homeless institutions such
as soup kitchens and shelters, often interact with homeless people and can identify who
they are. In this way, the study hopes to contrast the street homeless from the vagrant
group defined by the Revised Penal Code.
Macro and Micro Factors Leading to Homelessness
How do individuals become homeless? Hoper, Susser, and Conover (1992:14)
provided an explanation as to how social factors lead to homelessness:
People become homeless when other ways of subsisting

are rejected for specific reasons or are impossible.
Becoming homeless requires some action on the part of
individuals, but this action is forced upon them by the
social forces that create their extreme poverty.
Specifically, in the study of Shlay and Rossi (1992), for example, factors causing
homelessness have been narrowed down to housing market dynamics, economic

12
restructuring and the labor market, welfare and income maintenance policy, and policy to
support vulnerable, disabled groups. Housing market dynamics refer to the reduction of
affordable housing through the demolition of low-income housing and capitalists claiming
low-rent housing as unprofitable. As such, the inability to meet housing expenses due to
its losing affordability causes individuals to go to the streets. Homelessness due to
economic restructuring and the labor market pertain to the loss of manufacturing
employment, rising skill level demanded in new jobs that pay well and the increasing
number of low wage jobs in the service sector (Ibid.: 147). This follows the major and
most common reason for homelessness which is unemployment. The failure of the city
to provide jobs that give enough income to less skilled people in order to maintain tenure
in permanent housing has contributed to the issue of homelessness. Welfare and
income maintenance policy show how there is reduced federal funding for employment
and training programs, income maintenance assistance and food stamps when there
was an increasing need for them. These support systems have fallen short in preventing
individuals from becoming homeless. The role of disabilities in creating personal
vulnerabilities refers to the inability of certain individuals with physical defects and
mental and substance abuse problems to participate in the labor market and maintain
stable and secure relationships with family and friends (Ibid.: 147). As such,
homelessness becomes their fate.
In a study by Ferrer (2003) on the street dwellers of Manila, there are economic,
social and accidental reasons why individuals end up in the streets. The economic
reasons which pushed them to the streets constituted of migration to the cities, loss of
13
jobs, failure in business and low income. The social reasons are mainly due to poor
family relations, family problems, death of breadwinner, separation from spouse, lacking
tenure of housing, being sent to jail, being victims of crime such as theft and rape. The
accidental reasons are those caused by calamities such as fires, volcanic eruptions,
floods, and displacement due to war and armed conflict. Furthermore, Ferrer connected
these reasons mainly with the event of migration of individuals to the cities despite the
risks that they may encounter in doing so. The top reasons for migrating were looking for
employment and running away from home due to family conflict. Other reasons for
migrating and which eventually led to a homeless condition were: demolished house,
evicted by landlord, victim of illegal recruitment, difficulty with rural life, burned house,
abandoned by parent or spouse or child, tried luck or better life, jailed, joined bad
company, fought with somebody, and sold land in province.
Everyday Life of the Homeless People
In order to understand the character of homeless street life in a particular
community, it is important to look at the interaction of structural constraints and
subsistence practices of homeless people (Snow and Mulcahy 2001:154). The
conditions to which the homeless are exposed to show how they encounter and respond
to the risks and vulnerabilities of everyday street life. Knowledge of where to obtain
resources is critical in survival. Food, personal hygiene, safety, and possible sources for
obtaining money and work are among the concerns of homeless people. Strategies for
obtaining food and money include begging, collecting garbage, receiving leftovers from
14
restaurants or bars, and waiting on soup kitchens and homeless centers. These
strategies, however, are adaptive. Also, stigma makes surviving more difficult. Being
without a decent home comes with its social repercussions. Homeless people are
stigmatized for their appearance and have an outlaw status, which according to Hombs
and Snyder (1986):
The person who lacks shelter is constantly occupied with

meeting daily and basic needs—eating, sleeping, washing,
urinating, defecating—that are often illegal when
performed in public. These are ―status offenses‖ which
inevitably result from the very existence of homelessness‖.
Likewise, in the study of stigma by Phelan, Moore and Stueve (1997:331), perception on
the homeless brought about by the media or the presence of few highly visible homeless
individuals become more negative and cause social distance, mistrust, discrimination in
terms of housing policies and an over-all perception of the homeless as dangerous,
worthless, dirty and lacking in intelligence. Homeless people are also perceived to
commit street crimes, where males are more likely to steal and females are more likely
to work as prostitutes (McCarthy and Hagan 1992: 620). In addition, the homeless are
also exposed to harassment and arrest by the police, street bullies or gangs, hunger,
substance abuse, depression, diseases, among others.
Given such constraints, certain factors are to be considered in order to achieve
such strategies. This paper includes the concept of spatial location, institutional
involvement and extent of social networks as some of the factors which shape the
subsistence strategies of the homeless people.

15
Space and Spatial Location. Interest in the concept of space has been increasing in a lot
of disciplines, particularly sociology. Space is usually viewed as a contributing factor to,
or outcome of, social relations, groups or individuals, or social events. Space shapes,
and is shaped by, social processes. As elaborated by Tickamyer (2000), space is:
...a locale that may operate as a container and backdrop

for social action, as a set of causal factors that shape
social structure and process, and finally as an identifiable
territorial manifestation of social relations and practices
that define that particular setting (806).
In the homelessness literature, space is a significant concept. Without a fixed home, the
homeless people convert public spaces into their private abodes. Because of this, space
becomes political. The right to occupy and use a certain space is restricted to housed
residents, leaving the homeless powerless and with no legal claims as a citizen. As
such, they are gathered by authorities and brought to shelters or are asked to go back to
their respective hometowns. In some cases, however, space is utilized by the state as a
form of controlling the homeless population. Los Angeles and Berlin use containment,
where service facilities for the homeless are strategically placed away from commercial
areas and in poor neighbourhoods. There are even facilities which are called ―service
agglomerations,‖ where clusters of homeless service and shelter facilities are grouped in
a certain area (Wolch and Dear 1993: 174). In Los Angeles, for example, more than
thirty facilities are contained in a one-square meter area.

16
However, space is an important factor for survival. In a study conducted by
Schor, Artes and Bomfim (2003) on the spatial distribution of homeless people in Sao
Paolo, Brazil, homeless people tend to stay in areas most favorable to their survival. It
was assumed that the more favorable opportunities for meeting the basic needs of
homeless people are those areas with a high concentration of commercial and service
activities. To elaborate, these are: (1) areas with commercial activities leading to plentiful
supplies of waste paper, cardboard, and aluminum as material to collect to obtain
monetary income, (3) places with high concentration of bars and restaurants providing
food supplies in the shape of meals or leftovers, and (3) spaces for overnight
accommodation, given the low level of activity at night due to prohibitive legislation (Ibid:
595). It was found, however, that contributing to the level of concentration of homeless
people in certain areas is the ―availability of private and state services and programs‖
(Ibid: 599). Then again, greater dependence on the streets happens due to limited
services and refusal of homeless people to receive such assistance. This refusal is
elaborated in the following sections.
Social Networks. Social networks view not only the extent of relationships but also the
meaning and function that they serve. Social networks are social interactions by
individuals related to one another and from ―whom one obtains material, emotional
and/or logistical support‖ (Fischer 1982). In addition, such ties structure the flow of
information, social norms and social support (Ennet, Bailey and Federman 1999:64).
More specifically, social networks of the poor can become elaborate resource exchange
17
structures despite their networks being less extensive and resourceful than those of
higher income groups (Eckenrode 1983). Networking practices among poor people are
effective in their own right, often involving ―close relations, a definite measure of mutual
exchange or reciprocity among members, and at least a moderate degree of inter-
connective ties or clear evidence of network density‖ (Fischer 1982). Strong social
networks characterize a ―definite reciprocity, or a unidirectional exchange of resources
among network members‖ (Molina-Jackson 2008:48).
Contrary to stereotyped notions of homeless people, it is very seldom that
homeless people live in isolation. After becoming homeless, the streets introduce them
to a different field of social interactions. Homeless people develop new social networks
which form a significant role in their subsistence strategies. Rowe and Wolch (1990)
discovered how social networks created by homeless women in Los Angeles replaced
spatially-fixed home base and workplace functions. Being detached from traditional
networks, they were able to establish both peer and homed social networks to survive.
Peer networks include homeless friends and family, homeless lovers or spouses,
informal homeless communities in street encampments and members of homeless
political organizations. On the other hand, homed networks are those remnants of the
individual‘s prior social network, panhandling clients or donors, workmates in casual
labor, social workers and other service providers (Ibid:190). These networks provided
emotional support, protection, and a constant point of reference in the daily path.
Replacing traditional networks, these new homeless networks reflect the ongoing
18
negotiations of individuals struggling to reconstruct their worlds through a complex mesh
of social relations (Molina-Jackson 2008:42).
Though necessary for survival, social networks, however, lead the homeless to
be trapped in this lifestyle. Conley (1996) proposed that the social norm on the streets is
a factor which prevents an individual from mobility off it. An example would be that of a
homeless intending to look for a steady work. However, upon encountering other
homeless peers, he or she may choose to spend the day with them instead. Moreover,
as an individual gets more socialized in the streets, the less likely he is to be oriented
from getting off it. The bonds that homeless individuals create with other homeless peers
make it more difficult for them to do so, as they cannot ―risk alienating themselves from
the peer group which they depend for both social and material support‖ (Ibid.:25).
According to Phillipson (2001), social networks are seen as structures of
opportunity with several dimensions and facets which can help in understanding the ties
formed by homeless people. Social capital has two directional dimensions, namely
horizontal and vertical networks (Putnam 1996). Horizontal networks are defined as
associations formed among people with similar status and power. On the other hand,
vertical networks form connections with asymmetrical status and power that it is
characterized by ―hierarchy and dependence‖ (Abad 2005). Ties are also said to be
strong and weak. Such ties are specifically termed as bonding and bridging social
capital. Bonding social capital, or strong ties, have relationships which is distinguished
by a ―high level of emotional intensity and intimacy‖ (Granovetter 1973) and includes
family members, close friends, neighbours and co-workers. In contrast, bridging social
19
capital, or weak ties, is defined by ties to distant associates and colleagues (Gittel and
Vidal 1998). Another type is the linking social capital. This is characterized by ―ties to
people in positions of authority and influence such as representatives of public
institutions or private organizations‖ (World Bank 2000). In general, horizontal networks
encompass both bonding and bridging social capitals while vertical networks have
linking social capital as example.
State and Non-State Entities in the Issue of Homelessness. On the macro-level,
homelessness can also be attributed to the state‘s failure to address the problem. It is
either that programs or services created to deal with the homeless are not actually
focusing on the root of the problem, or that they are not implemented properly.
Government agencies who are supposed to tackle on this issue are sometimes
becoming the threat, such that:
Relations between homeless persons and service

providers vary. Rejection by agency workers,
ineffectiveness of care by professionals and tolerance by
providers of what appears to homeless persons as
intolerable conditions have made many homeless persons
wary of providers or professionals (Jahiel 1987: 112).
In the same manner, Ferrer (2003) conducted a study on the street dwellers in Manila
and found several reasons as to why homeless people are not availing government
services. This is due to: 1) experiences of arrest and being jailed, 2) perception as
nuisance by government institutions, 3) government doesn‘t care, 4) ignorance or lack of
information on available programs, 5) problems with requirements or bureaucratic

20
process in applying for such programs, and lastly, 6) temporary and lack of long-term
effect of services. As such, state services fail not only due to their inefficiency but also to
the lack of support from their intended patrons.
Despite the absence of the state and its internal issues of inconsistencies in
policies, there is an aspect of society which is able to focus their attention on the
excluded majority especially in developing countries. The role of civil society in the form
of non-government and religious organizations, academia and trade unions, among
others, is important when it comes to addressing the needs of the informal and
marginalized sector. The social ties of homeless people are replaced from mainstream
societal institutions to voluntary institutions such as ―shelters, blood banks, aluminum car
redemption centers, and the Salvation Army‖ (Conley 1996:28). Faith-based or religious
groups are the most active in dealing with some issues of the homeless, as Racelis
(2004) states:
Faith-based or religious groups responded to the neediest

through feeding programs for children and poor families,
and mobilizing wealthier groups to share their resources
through donations of food, money, clothing and other
needed items.
As such, most homeless people rely on feeding programs put up mostly by religious
organizations. However, in a study in North America, feeding programs are no longer
―emergency‖ in nature because they already form part of the homeless people‘s
everyday food intake (Glasser 1994:49). Although the concerns of certain studies on
soup kitchens and feeding programs are mostly on the nutritional value of the food that
21
they provide, perhaps it would be best to shift these concerns to the problem of
homelessness and the dependency on feeding programs and services instead.
Dependency has become a way of living. For the homeless, social service providers,
along with panhandling, function like a job: providing money and in-kind income,
structuring the homeless individual‘s daily path, and generating a set of social contacts
which offer emotional and material resources beyond alms or public assistance grants
(Rowe and Wolch 1990:201). Given these, where the state lacks or fails to enter into an
issue, the role of civil society or the third sector comes up with programs to address
these—although not really solve it in the long-term. This supports the argument of Snow
and Anderson that:
Street-based relationships do exist [may] provide social

and material support on the streets [but]...fail to provide
resources for getting off the streets (1993:184).
They are often there as forms of relief, and as charitable institutions, operate on certain
principles which may tackle the immediate need but not the root cause of an issue.
There is still a need for the government to intervene in addressing such issues.
However, a study on homelessness in Athens by Arapoglou (2003) observed how the
state, church and voluntary agencies take on different understandings of pity in response
to the issue of homelessness. He found that these institutions were more interested in
promoting their charity work but often resorted to spatial containment of the homeless
(Ibid.:636). The roles of the state and non-state institutions should be balanced in order
to address the issue of homelessness properly.

22
Theoretical Framework
Over the years, homelessness has been studied through different perspectives.
This paper, however, concentrates on the contributions of Giddens‘ agency-structure
relationship and Berger and Luckmann‘s (1966) social construction of reality in
understanding the survival strategies of homeless people. The concept of deviance,
specifically in terms of differential association, is also discussed.
The theory of structuration involves the duality of structure, which relates to the
―fundamentally recursive character of social life, and expresses the mutual dependence
of structure and agency‖ (Giddens 1979). Giddens highlights the complementary
characteristic of agency and structure and attests that they cannot be analyzed
independently of each other. Agency refers to the individuals as perpetrators of actions
creating and shaping the context they move in. However, actions are meaningful only
through the background of structure, which refers to the rules and resources produced
and reproduced by actors in their practices (Marshall 1998:648). Contrary to classical
notions, structure both enables and constrains (Cassell 1993:12). As such, actors are
able draw on rules and mobilise resources to re-enact practices that are found
comforting within such structural limitations. Moreover, actors are reflexively monitoring
their actions. This is to say that the continuous flow of activities is monitored along with
the social and physical aspects of the context they move in (Giddens 1984). In the
context of this research, the condition which continually shapes the homelessness issue
is the dynamics between the adaptive responses of homeless people and the structural
23
elements of spatial location, institutional involvement and social networks. Homeless
people move around the constraints of structure and find ways in order to survive. Such
routines enable them to shape institutions and structures, and empower them despite
being viewed as hopeless victims of structural constraints.
Elaborating on the concept of institutionalization, Berger and Luckmann (1966)
argue that the reality of everyday life is shared and experienced with others. All human
activity is subject to habitualization, which is ―any action that is repeated frequently
becomes cast into a pattern, which can then be reproduced with an economy of effort
and which, ipso facto, is apprehended by its performer as that pattern‖ (Berger and
Luckmann 1966:70-71). However, institutionalization becomes more significant as
habitualized actions are reciprocated and shared among actors. As such,
institutionalization implies historicity and control (Ibid. 1966:72). Institutions control
human conduct by ―setting up predefined patterns of conduct, which channel it in one
direction as against many other directions‖ (Ibid. 1966:72). In the case of homelessness,
obtaining basic needs in the streets becomes a routine. Shelters, soup kitchens and
state based service providers may provide assistance and immerses into the routine of
homeless people, thus becoming institutionalized as sources for food and security.
Whether certain institutions provide assistance or constraints, how they are spatially
located controls the survival pathways of homeless people. Likewise, social networks
provide information on where resources can be found. The knowledge shared and
transferred from one homeless individual to another suggest that certain resources have
been institutionalized and are adapted as part of their subsistence strategies.

24
Homelessness is considered to be a deviant act. Without homes, homeless
people are breaking a cultural norm by living in the streets and engaging in informal
ways of survival. Deviance is the ―violation of definitions of appropriate and inappropriate
conduct shared by members of a social system‖ (Jensen 2007). Howard Becker (1963)
takes it further by saying that ―whether a given act is deviant or not depends in part on
the nature of the act and in part on what other people do about it‖. The responses of a
group are important whether an act is considered deviant or not. Such deviant acts,
however, are acquired and learned rather than inherent. Homelessness is considered as
a deviant act, but how people are socialized into being homeless is a different matter.
This is best expressed by the differential association theory by Sutherland (1947), where
deviant or criminal behavior is learned through the interactions between individuals and
groups. Sutherland has several basic assumptions about this theory. First, criminal
behavior is learned and not invented or inherent. Second, deviant behavior is learned in
interaction with individuals or groups in a process of communication and gestures. Third,
learning criminal behavior occurs within intimate personal groups. Fourth, learning
criminal behavior includes certain process of knowing the techniques of committing the
crime and the ―motives, drives, rationalizations and attitudes‖ behind it. Fifth, such
motives and drives are learned from definitions of legal codes as favorable and
unfavorable. Sixth, ―a person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions
favorable to violations of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law‖. This means
that deviant behavior is learned through more associations and interactions with those
favorable to the violations than those unfavorable to them. Because most homeless
25
people avoid government institutions which aim at offering assistance to them, they are
reinforced more to pursue the ways and strategies of living in the streets. Seventh,
―differential associations may vary in frequency, duration, priority and intensity‖.
Frequency and duration in the streets, most especially those who have been exposed in
their early years, are more knowledgeable and dependent on the strategies found in the
streets and tend to have difficulty getting out of their situation. Eighth, the ―process of
learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anti-criminal patterns involves
all of the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning‖. Ninth, ―though criminal
behavior is an expression of general needs and values, it is not explained by those
general needs and values since non-criminal behavior is an expression of the same
needs and values‖. This means that both criminal and non-criminal behavior have the
same general needs and values. The differential association largely figures in how the
homeless are socialized to the way of life in the streets through their personal
associations and rationalizations.
Homelessness literatures have also failed to recognize empowerment when
homeless people are discussed. Most literatures look at the homeless as victims of state
inefficiencies and as marginalized groups. Although literatures on their survival
strategies exist, they are mere descriptions, statistics and outcomes of such
phenomenon. By considering them as empowered agencies, the role of homeless
people in shaping institutions and structures becomes highlighted. At least in the aspect
of surviving daily life, perceiving them as empowered for once could provide an insight
26
into the gravity of the homelessness problem—that being homeless is not just a social
problem but has already become a way of life in itself.
Analytical Framework
Drawing from the literature review, significant factors contributing to the adaptive
strategies of the homeless people were identified. Interactions with institutions, extent of
social networks and spatial location become primary considerations for the homeless in
developing strategies to survive the streets with the most ease. In the long run, however,
these strategies are reinforced and institutionalized as these factors form a significant
part in the routine of being homeless such that homelessness becomes a way of life.
The following diagram (Figure 1) illustrates this process. It can be seen that structural
factors consist state laws and extreme poverty. Contributory to these are the homeless‘
individual background which has an impact on their survival on the streets, namely,
gender, civil status, age, educational attainment, place of origin and number of years in
the street. These factors serve as a backdrop for individuals to take the streets and be
continually constrained as homeless people. Extreme poverty, however, is important as
a push factor for people to take the streets. On the other hand, state laws take part in
marginalizing individuals who have become homeless as it constrains their movements
in the streets. The following, namely institutional interactions, social networks and space,
serve as primary considerations on how the homeless develop adaptive strategies in the
streets.
27
INSTITUTIONAL INTERACTIONS
Relationships formed with state & non-state
entities
ASSISTANCE CONSTRAINT
STRUCTURES
-Extreme Poverty
-State Laws & SOCIAL NETWORKS
Welfare Policies Extent of connection with peer & homed
networks; networks as knowledge resources
-Gender, Civil
Status, Age, BRIDGING BONDING
Educational
Attainment, Place
of Origin, Number ADAPTIVE
of Years in the STRATEGIES OF
Street STREET
HOMELESS
SPACE
Subsistence pathways of street homeless;
contested spaces of the homeless
MARGINALIZED NEGOTIATED
Reinforcement of
Adaptive Strategies in Everyday Life
HOMELESSNESS AS A WAY OF LIFE

Persistence of Homelessness
Figure 1. Analytical Framework

28
The street homeless and their adaptive strategies, however, are shaped by their
relationship to these factors. On the streets, they encounter state and non-state
institutions which either assist or constrain them as homeless people. As a result of
such interactions, they develop social networks that could be categorized as bridging or
bonding. Spaces consumed by the homeless are either marginalized or negotiated. As
the strategies which enable the homeless to survive daily life are developed, they are
reinforced and institutionalized. As a result, homelessness becomes a way of life,
causing it to persist. Depicted by arrows going back to the beginning of the paradigm,
homelessness is characterized to be a cyclical way of life.
Interactions with institutions: assistance versus constraint. State and non-state
institutions and their relationship with homeless people is highlighted in this study as the
basis of identifying homeless respondents starts with the extent of support or, at least,
the level of interaction, they have to such institutions. It is significant in that the dynamics
enables homeless people to determine whether institutions present themselves as
constraints or as patrons of their subsistence strategies. As constraints, institutions who
deal with the street homeless are seen as threats to the latter‘s subsistence pathways.
As patrons, institutions are seen as a dependable source of food, shelter and other
assistance the homeless need. On the other hand, focusing on the role of institutions will
hopefully provide the research with the bigger picture of why homelessness continues to
persist and why homeless people are able to develop strategies of dependence despite
the presence of such institutions. As such, the study evaluates the activities and
29
alternative solutions of these institutions to the homelessness dilemma. It is important to
assess whether certain policies and programs implemented by these institutions are
providing long term or short term solutions that may actually be contributory to the
dependence of homeless people on them.
State institutions include the city government of Manila, local police, Reception
and Action Center (RAC), DSWD, Street Dweller Care Program of the MMDA and the
Jose Fabella Center. Non-state institutions include religious organizations and non-
government organizations which provide feeding programs to the homeless. While the
state is seen as inefficient in its policies, non-state organizations are said to tolerate and
encourage homeless people to become dependents. Homeless people stay away from
state-based initiatives due to unsatisfactory or limited service provisions and the
negative treatment of the staff. Because of this, homeless people prefer going to non-
state institutions for subsistence. The state blames the latter for encouraging homeless
people to stay on the streets. While the roles of these institutions are unresolved, the
homeless people take advantage of being in between.
Social Networks. While struggling with institutions which might extend their assistance or
present themselves as constraints, homeless people develop two main networks: homed
and peer. In this study, the role of social networks in allowing the homeless to form
adaptive strategies is important. It identifies not only whether the social capital they
create are bonding or bridging, but also how these types function between and among
homeless individuals and groups. Bonding social capital is characterized by strong ties
30
with high emotional intimacy, where family members and friends form the circle of trust.
On the other hand, bridging social capital is rendered by weak ties and is composed of
distant associates and colleagues.
Space and spatial location: marginalized versus negotiated. Space can be used as
―context, cause or outcome‖ for social processes (Tickamyer 2000: 806). In the context
of homelessness, space and spatial location shape the social processes of the
homeless‘ survival. First, spaces become fixed or temporary home bases for homeless
people. Public spaces such as sidewalks and parks are occupied by homeless people
provided that the state does not contest their use of space. In most cases in the city of
Manila, homeless people are able to occupy such spaces and treat them as secure
areas for sleeping, leaving their things, washing and drying their clothes, among others.
Second, the spatial location of state and non-state services determine their subsistence
pathways. Because most homeless people depend on institutions for food, they take on
the schedule of daily feeding programs as part of their routine. The regularity of such
feeding programs makes them feel secure that they will have food at least two to three
times a day, as long as they know that they are able to keep up with the schedule. Third,
how homeless institutions are geographically located denote the concentration of
homeless people in a certain area. In areas in Manila where a number of institutions are
supporting them, the homeless people are distinctly visible. However, in the business
district of Makati, for example, homeless people are nowhere to be seen. It could be
assumed that the number of institutions providing for the homeless implies the tolerance
31
for homelessness that homeless people perceive this as secure areas for them.
Subsistence pathways which have been purposely developed by the homeless and
spatial locations of institutions supporting them seem to contribute how homelessness
persists and shape the issue of homelessness. This study identifies not only how the
street homeless navigate their subsistence pathways but also how they negotiate their
survival through their use of space.
Institutionalization of adaptive strategies. Homeless people are, in some way,
empowered as they survive the streets despite the structural constraints which pushed
them to become homeless. Though structural constraints such as unemployment, lack of
affordable housing, extreme poverty and the stigma that they continually face as street
homeless limit their subsistence pathways, homeless people find ways to survive. Street
resources, as well as institutions catering to the homeless, enable the street homeless to
come up with survival strategies. The spatial location where they roam, their relationship
with institutions and their perceptions, and the social networks they form combine to
allow them to move around the limitations of being homeless. As these factors are
reinforced by the repetitive actions of homeless people continuously supporting them,
institutionalization happens. Subsistence strategies become adaptive and homeless
people are able to continue being homeless through their dependence on such
structures and the consequent tolerance associated with it. Moreover, the fluidity of
system processes enables a subsequent response from the beginning. This means that
as homelessness becomes a way of life, the other elements in the process also change.
32
Institutions tend to modify their relationships and may alter programs and policies to
address the daily influx of homeless people they cater to. Changes can also be seen in
how the homeless construct their relationship with such institutions or choose the spaces
where they occupy. This dynamics between actors and elements tolerate each other and
seem to create a certain kind of subculture leading to why and how homelessness
continues to persist.
Research Methodology
This section discusses the design of the study and the procedures that were
taken in the selection of the research site and key informants. It also explains how the
data were obtained and analyzed.
Research design
The study is heavy on the use of qualitative approaches, specifically
ethnography, face-to-face interviews and participant observation. More importantly,
spatial and cognitive mapping is also employed. Such approaches hope to obtain a
clearer picture of how survival routines are established in a certain environment through
interactions among actors, spatial location and extent of networks. Qualitative
approaches are used because the homeless are considered deviants and are usually
hesitant to be included in positivist researches such as surveys.
Site selection
33
The study was conducted in the City of Manila, in locations where homeless
people and representatives of institutions mostly interact. For this study, it is important to
highlight the programs done at the national and local levels.
In terms of state institutions, the national level includes DSWD, Jose Fabella
Center, and the MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit. These institutions provided a
comprehensive study on the national and regional efforts done by the government for
the homeless people. They also provided the background and framework by which local
policies are built and implemented. On the local level, the Manila Department of Social
Welfare (MDSW), the Reception and Action Center (RAC) and the Manila Police District
(MPD) are interviewed. These local institutions provide a more holistic and in-depth look
at the street homeless in Manila.
Several religious organizations catering to the homeless people exist around
major areas in central Manila, as identified by a documentary about the homeless in
Manila (GMA Public Affairs 2008), are also be interviewed. Among them are the San
Sebastian Church and Ermita Church. The Center for Community Transformation (CCT),
a non-government organization focusing on the cause of the homeless people, is also
included.
Homeless respondents were mainly interviewed in three areas: (1) feeding
programs, (2) parks, and (3) a government shelter. Feeding programs made it easier to
locate respondents because they have a fixed schedule and a venue. Moreover, most
respondents who attend such programs qualify the requirements of this study. This is
because most street homeless depend on feeding programs for food, hygiene and other
34
purposes. Interviews were conducted before the main programs started so as not to
interrupt the respondents attending. Respondents were also interviewed in parks, mainly
Rizal Park and Salamanca Park in Manila. Parks serve as spaces for work and sleep for
the homeless. However, it was difficult to recognize who the street homeless are in
these areas as they easily blend in with the crowd. Lastly, some respondents were
interviewed in the Jose Fabella Center (JFC). They serve as respondents who are
currently experiencing life inside the shelter and are prepared to go back to their families
and stay out of the streets.
Data sources
Data are obtained from informants, participant observation by the researcher and
secondary data. The key informants are the following: (1) homeless people, (2) officials
and staff of state institutions such as the local government, police and related agencies,
and (3) ministers, staff and volunteers of religious organizations and non-government
organizations. Direct observation was done during subsistence activities and interactions
of homeless people and various institutions. Secondary data such as written documents
of surveys, local policies and reports related to the homelessness issue were also
obtained through state institutions and non-state institutions. These include the
Department of Social Welfare (DWSD), Jose Fabella Center (JFC), MMDA Street
Dweller Care Unit (MMDA-SDCU), Reception and Action Center (RAC), and the Manila
Police District (MPD) for state institutions, while non-state institutions include San
Sebastian Church, Ermita Church and the United Central Methodist Church.
35
Selection of respondents
The respondents for this study are the adult street homeless aged 20 to 50
years, who live in the streets of Manila and are attending feeding programs and
engaging in strategies under the context of the streets. Since this study is exploratory,
respondents have been categorized as male, female, and homosexual and bisexual
respondents so comparisons may be done in terms of their experiences of being in the
streets. This makes data on the perceptions, values and differences among street
dwellers more elaborate. Each category has ten (10) respondents who were asked
about their life history, survival strategies in the streets and future plans. The
experiences of these respondents have been written as cases. The total number of
homeless respondents for this study is thirty (30).
Gender. Respondents were categorized according to their gender: male, female
and gay, lesbian and bisexual homeless. Each group has ten respondents. In the
homosexual and bisexual group, there were seven (7) gays, one (1) lesbian and two (2)
bisexuals who were interviewed.
Civil Status. Most female respondents are married (8 out of 10), while only some
are separated (2 out of 10). Male respondents have an almost even distribution with their
civil status as single (4 out of 10), married (4 out of 10) and separated (2 out of 10).
Gays, lesbians and bisexuals are mostly single (5 out of 10), in a relationship (3 out of
10) and married (2 out of 10). There are two couples—married and in a relationship—
who are respondents in this study.

36
Age. Most respondents are aged 20 to 30 years (14 out of 30), while other
respondents are aged 31 to 41 years (11 out of 30) and 42 to 52 years (5 out of 30).
Majority of female respondents are aged 20 to 30 years (6 out of 10), as well as gays,
lesbians and bisexuals (5 out of 10). The majority of male respondents, on the other
hand, are aged 31 to 41 years (5 out of 10).
Place of Origin. Respondents mostly came from the Luzon area, namely
Cagayan Valley, Mindoro, Cabanatuan, Bulacan and Samar (10 out of 30). Other
respondents came from Manila (7 out of 30), Mindanao area (5 out of 30), Visayas and
cities near Manila (4 out of 30). According to gender, male respondents mostly came
from the Mindanao area (4 out of 10), while most female respondents and gays, lesbians
and bisexuals came from Luzon (4 out of 10).
Educational Attainment. Most respondents finished or at least reached primary
school (15 out of 30), while others have stepped into secondary school (13 out of 30).
Two out of thirty (2 out of 30) respondents have reached tertiary school. Most female
respondents have only reached primary school (8 out of 10), while two have gotten to
secondary school but none received tertiary education. Male respondents, on the other
hand, have gotten to secondary school (7 out of 10), primary (2 out of 10) and tertiary (1
out of 10). Gays, lesbians and bisexuals have gotten to primary school (5 out of 10),
secondary (4 out of 10), and tertiary (1 out of 10).
Years in the Streets. Most respondents have been in the streets from 2 to 11
years (11 out of 30). Others have been in the streets for 22 to 31 years (8 out of 30), one
37
year less (7 out of 30) and 12 to 21 years (4 out of 30). Across genders, the number of
years in the street is evenly distributed.
On the part of institutions, the criteria for the informants were that they were
knowledgeable on policies and regulations on the homelessness issue, the conditions
and survival strategies of the homeless people. Representatives of the local government
and agencies who have firsthand information and experience in interacting with
homeless people were chosen. These are the directors and staff of the Jose Fabella
Center, MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit, and the Reception Action Center in Manila.
Police officers who conduct raids were also interviewed. Ministers and project organizers
in missions catering to religious-based activities were likewise interviewed. These
organizers came from San Sebastian Church, Ermita Church and the United Central
Methodist Church.
Data collection
The study uses qualitative methods, such as key informant interviews, in-depth
interviews, life histories, and direct observation. It includes secondary data collection for
statistical data and published materials such as reports, policies and related documents
on homeless people.
More specifically, key informant interviews are aided by an interview guide. The
interview guide is a list of questions and issues written in a way which allows a narrative
of the processes of certain social inquiries (Arce 2001). Furthermore, questions, follow-
up questions and even how they are phrased in the interview guide should be elaborate
38
enough to make sense to the informant. Lastly, questions asked using interview guide is
left to the discretion of the interviewer during an interview. A Summary Data Collection
Scheme (SDCS) which elaborates the data collection and data source on particular
research topics is appended at the end of the study.
Data analysis and interpretation
The study mainly utilized the grounded theory method, which ―draws theoretical
ideas from observations of data themselves‖ (Glaser and Strauss 1967). It also used
ethnography, case studies and social and cognitive mapping.
Ethnography hopes to highlight both the insider and outsider perspectives where,
for the latter, the context becomes more meaningful as it is grounded with an
explanation from the former. Fetterman (2009) elaborates on ethnography as a story
which is ―told through the eyes of local people as they pursue their daily lives in their
own communities‖ and the ethnographer as someone who ―adopts a cultural lens to
interpret observed behavior, ensuring that the behaviors are placed in a culturally
relevant and meaningful context‖.
This research used case study methods which highlight experiences of homeless
people. Case studies provide an in-depth understanding of a phenomenon within its
context while using a variety of lenses to reveal multiple facets of the said issue (Baxter
and Jack 2008). It is important especially in analyzing processes and events that took
place in the life of homeless individuals.

39
Because the study assumes that homeless people have a routine, it is important
to track down their subsistence pathways. Spatial and cognitive maps summarize the
individual‘s spatial relationships, perceptions, attitudes and preferences towards places.
Maps determine how individuals perceive the social environment they live in, providing
information as to how it is organized. For the homeless, cognitive and spatial mapping
would determine how they view their social, cultural and geophysical environment. More
specifically, it locates the organization and relationship of the city, service institutions
and homeless spaces.
In order to analyse the data collected for the study, interviews were first
transcribed and coded. Following the framework of the study (see Figure 1), the data
were categorized according to the factors of spatial location, institutional relationships
and social networks. Themes and the relationships of these factors were identified.
Coded data were represented by visual models, such as tables and social and cognitive
maps. The data were validated using researcher, participant and reviewer standards.
Moreover, validation was done through member checking and triangulation. Member
checking entailed going back to the respondents to check if the researcher got the
latter‘s understanding of the social phenomenon right. Triangulation involved using
several sources such as respondents and secondary data analysis to check whether the
results obtained were unbiased.
Supported by interviews, observation notes and secondary data, the general
analysis hopes to prove whether such interplay between adaptive responses, the agency
and structural constraints lead to the persistence of homelessness as a whole. Data

40
analysis and interpretation were simultaneously processed as data gathering ensues.
During data gathering, the researcher used field notes, a digital recorder and a digital
camera.
Thesis organization
The thesis is divided into eight chapters. Chapter I discusses the research
background, statement of the problem, significance of the study, scope and limitation of
the study, major issues in the literature, theoretical considerations, analytical framework,
and methodology. Chapter II describes the geographical context and national and local
policies concerning the street homeless in Manila. Chapter III elaborates on the
institutions encountered by the street homeless, namely government, non-government
and religious institutions. Chapter IV describes the profile of the street homeless in
Manila, reasons why they came to live in the streets and their general condition as a
poor and marginalized sector. Chapter V goes into the daily lives of the street homeless
by elaborating on their adaptive strategies, focusing on how they access basic needs,
the support groups they form in the streets and how they maintain family connections
despite being in the streets. Chapter VI discusses the constructions of homelessness by
the street homeless, the institutions they encounter and how their interactions become
structured into routines leading to the institutionalization of homelessness as a way of
life. Chapter VII analyzes and concludes how survival strategies become
institutionalized, leading to the persistence of homelessness. It also includes
recommendations on addressing street homelessness based on the findings of this
study.
CHAPTER 2
MANILA AND ITS STREETS:

GEOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-POLITICAL CONTEXT
Geographic Context
of Manila
The phenomenon of street homelessness often occurs in highly urbanized cities.
With its commercial centers, business districts and economic lure, the City of Manila has
become a home to many homeless people. The streets have become their sources for
food, work and secure spaces to sleep. Religious institutions, food establishments and
university students provide them food. Tourist areas open opportunities for them to work
informally. Parks, church compounds and universities serve as secure places for them to
sleep. As such, the street homeless in Manila find their place and locate themselves
within the complex dynamics of geographic, economic and socio-political factors as they
shape and are being shaped by institutions and structures in their everyday lives.
Located at the east of Manila Bay, Manila is seated next to Quezon City in its
northeast, Mandaluyong in its east, Makati in its southeast and Pasay in its south.
Though Pasig River bisects the city, Manila is considered as the most densely populated
city in the world with 1,660,714 people occupying 38.55 square kilometres according to
the 2007 Census. Manila is divided into sixteen (16) geographical districts and six (6)
legislative districts. The sixteen geographical districts are composed of Binondo, Ermita,
Intramuros, Malate, Paco, Pandacan, Port Area or BASECO Compound, Quiapo,
41
42
Sampaloc, San Andres, San Miguel, San Nicolas, Santa Ana, Santa Cruz, Santa Mesa
and Tondo. Sampaloc is the most populated district with population of 255,613 while
Intramuros is the least populated district with a population of 5,015. These districts are
further divided into barangays.
The six legislative districts of Manila (see Figure 1) are allowed to elect officials in
Figure 2. Map of the Districts of Manila
Source: http://www.mapsir.com/1118/
43
the House of Representatives and the City Council. Districts 1 and 4 primarily serve as
residential areas, Districts 3, 5 and 6 accommodate commercial centers, business
establishments, government institutions, historical and cultural landmarks and recreation
centers. Because of the presence of such institutions, most homeless people are found
in the latter.
District 1 includes the western area of Tondo which lies near Manila Bay and is
considered as the most densely populated congressional district in the country. District 2
covers the eastern inland portion of Tondo. Tondo is known as one of the poorest and
most underdeveloped districts of the country. Smokey Mountain, the landfill which is now
closed, can be found in these districts. Also, Divisoria, a major business center and
shopping area for retail and wholesale products, are within these districts. The North
Harbor and Manila Container Port are also in the area. District 4 consists of Sampaloc,
which is mainly a residential area. It contains academic and business landmarks such as
the University of Santo Tomas and the Dangwa Flower Market.
District 3 comprises the geographical districts of Binondo, Quiapo, San Nicolas
and Santa Cruz. It houses three of the minor basilicas, namely the Minor Basilica of the
Black Nazarene (Quiapo Church), Basilica Minore de San Lorenzo Ruiz (Binondo
Church) and the Basilica Minore de San Sebastian (San Sebastian Church). Also, the
three largest cemeteries are found in this district namely the La Loma Cemetery, Manila
Chinese Cemetery and the Manila North Green Park. Binondo, or Chinatown, is
populated by the ethnic Chinese living in the country. Quiapo, on the other hand, is
home to majority of Muslims. It also offers well-known shopping hubs such as the Raon
44
Shopping Center for cheap hardware electronics and Hidalgo Street for discounted
photography equipment. Aside from these, it is infamous for pirated movies and
software, herbal products and fortune tellers who conduct their business beside Quiapo
Church. Heritage houses such as the Nakpil-Bautista House, Boix House, Ocampo
Mansion, among others, can also be found along Hidalgo Street. This is where the
Department of Social Welfare and Development for the National Capital Region (DSWD-
NCR) is also located.
District 5 is composed of Ermita, Malate, Port Area, Intramuros, San Andres and
a portion of Paco. Historical landmarks and tourist spots in this district include the walled
city Intramuros, Rizal Park, Paco Park, Manila Zoo, the National Museum and the
Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP). Ermita houses most government institutions
such as the Manila City Hall, Supreme Court of the Philippines, and the Department of
Tourism. The Reception Action Center (RAC), the city government shelter, can also be
found in this district. Intramuros holds a number of churches, among which are Manila
Cathedral, San Agustin Church and the Santo Domingo Church. The Nuestra Senora de
Guia (Ermita Church), Parroquia de San Fernando de Dilao (Paco Church) and the Sikh
Temple are also located in the district. Academic institutions such the University of the
Philippines Manila, Adamson University, Philippine Normal University (PNU),
Technological University of the Philippines (TUP), St. Paul‘s University of Manila,
Universidad de Manila, Mapua Institute of Technology, Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng
Maynila (PLU), Colegio de San Juan de Letran and the Lyceum of the Philippines are
included in this district. Ermita and Malate, which used to be a red district for prostitution,
45
have been ―cleaned‖ by Mayor Alfredo Lim and is now famous as nightlife and
entertainment spots for tourists. San Andres, on the other hand, is a residential area for
those living a little above the poverty line.
District 6 includes Pandacan, San Miguel, Santa Ana, Santa Mesa and a portion
of Paco. This district houses the University Belt, which includes universities such as the
Far Eastern University (FEU), Centro Escolar University (CEU), Arellano University (AU),
San Beda College (SBC), Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP), University of
the East (UE), Technological Institute of the Philippines (TIP), National University (NU),
among others. Malacañang Palace can also be found in this district.
Majority of the homeless people can be found in Districts 3 and 5 as these areas
present the most number of opportunities that they can engage in terms of everyday
survival: food, work and rest. For food, the homeless depend on feeding programs held
by religious institutions, leftovers given by university students and canteens, restaurants
and other food establishments. Feeding programs are regularly held in the following
institutions and areas: Paco Church, Ermita Church, United Central Methodist Church in
Kalaw, Jesus Reigns Ministry in Nakpil, San Sebastian Church, Intramuros, KKK
Monument in Padre Burgos, Sikh Temple in United Nations Avenue, Binondo, among
others. Outside Manila, they also go to the feeding programs in Calvary Church in
Cubao, Immaculate Concepcion Church and RVM Beatery in New Manila. For work,
scavenging, vending and begging are mostly done in Luneta Park and in commercial
and populated areas around Manila. For sleep, the homeless can be found mostly in
parks and commercial institutions after closing hours, namely in Paco Park, Luneta Park,
46
Plaza Dilao in Ermita, Plaza Salamanca in Kalaw, Escolta, FEU compound, malls in
Recto, Quiapo, among others. On the other hand, homeless people avoid certain
institutions that may constrain their daily activities in the streets. As identified by them,
these institutions are mainly the Reception Action Center (RAC) near Mayor Antonio
Villegas Road and the Manila Police District (MPD), most especially Station 5 in Ermita,
Station 3 in Santa Cruz, Station 6 in Santa Ana, Station 11 in Binondo, Station 8 in
Santa Mesa and the Manila City Jail. These institutions conduct rescue operations
where they either apprehend homeless people for vagrancy or bring them in government
shelters such as to the Jose Fabella Center (JFC) in Mandaluyong and Boystown in
Marikina. These institutions can be seen in Figure 2.
Homelessness as Vagrancy:
National and Local Policies
Although there are no laws directly implemented for, and against, homelessness,
the street homeless in Manila are treated as vagrants and are usually apprehended
under the Anti-Vagrancy Law. This section discusses the national policy and local
ordinances which are used by government authorities to justify arrests of the street
homeless. It also includes a history of the laws and policies in Manila to provide a social
and political background to the homelessness issue.

47
Figure 3. Spaces Occupied by Street Homeless Respondents
Legend
Sources of food: feeding
programs
Spaces for work: scavenging,
vending, begging
Spaces for rest
Authorities, government
institutions, shelters
Spaces for leisure, bonding
with peers
Source: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=manila+map
48
Article 202 or the Anti-Vagrancy Law. According to Article 202 of the Revised Penal
Code, a vagrant is ―any person having no apparent means of subsistence, who has the
physical ability to work and who neglects to apply himself or herself to some lawful
calling‖. A vagrant is also ―any person found loitering about public or semi-public
buildings or places or trampling or wandering about the country or the streets without
visible means of support‖, ―any idle or dissolute person who ledges in houses of ill fame;
ruffians or pimps and those who habitually associate with prostitutes,‖ and ―who shall be
found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to another without any
lawful or justifiable purpose‖. Lastly, the article includes prostitutes as a certain type of
vagrant. Violators are given a fine not exceeding 200 pesos. If violators are recidivists, or
recurring vagrants, they are fined 200 to 2000 pesos and are imprisoned for one to thirty
days.
City Ordinance 4638 on Vagrancy. City Ordinance 4638 follows the same definition of
vagrancy as Article 202, except that the fines and punishments are relatively lesser.
Violators of Ordinance 4638 are given a fine of 110 pesos and are imprisoned for a
maximum of 7 days. This ordinance is attributed to the street homeless who are not,
after being questioned, deemed suspicious of committing or having committed a criminal
act.
49
History of Vagrancy in Manila. The Anti-Vagrancy Law started in 1846 under the Spanish
Governor-General Narciso Claveria. The Law allowed provincial authorities to question
idlers and employ them in public works for one month before sending them back to their
hometowns. In 1932, the law was enacted to keep workers inside factories. During this
time, Manila had its own policy on vagrancy. The current Ordinance 4638 is an
amendment of Section 822 of the Revised Ordinances of the City of Manila. Sec. 822
was commonly used in the pre-war area to convict female prostitutes who engage in
sexual acts with American soldiers and foreigners. This ordinance also identified eleven
kinds of vagrancy. One type of vagrancy was described as any person who ―habitually
and idly loiter about, or wander abroad, visiting or staying about hotels, cafes, drinking
saloons, houses of ill repute, gambling houses, railroad depots, wharves, public waiting
rooms and parks‖.
Under the Marcos and Arroyo administrations, however, the law was said to have
been abused by authorities in curtailing people‘s movements, with or without an imposed
curfew. As such, in 2009, Senator Francis Escudero called for the decriminalization of
the vagrancy law. According to him, the law is anti-poor and has been used to violate the
rights of citizens. It has also been abused as a ground offense to charge the poor when
the authorities are unsure. In January 2011, the call to amend the law became more
publicized when a vendor was raped by a police officer in Manila after being arrested for
vagrancy. According to Senator Escudero, the anti-vagrancy law has become an
opportunity to ―mulct money from and take advantage of people‖ (GMANews.TV, 7
January 2011). Authored by Senators Escudero, Jinggoy Estrada, Richard Gordon and
50
Loren Legarda, Senate Bill Nos. 1965 and 2367 aim to amend the said article and
decriminalize vagrancy. Prostitution, however, remains as punishable by law. Others
have asked to repeal the law, such as the Ang Ladlad party for the Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual and Transvestite (LGBT) groups. According to them, policemen use the law
and extort bribes from gays who have no identification cards (Philippine Star, 17 March
2011).
The City of Manila has also enacted policies related to vagrancy and
homelessness. Scavenging, for one, garnered attention that local policy measures were
undertaken to manage the issue. In December 1973, Manila Mayor Ramon Bagatsing
released an ordinance limiting the spaces that scavengers could conduct their affairs.
According to the ordinance, scavenging was authorized from seven to eleven in the
evening except in tourist and commercial zones. Scavenging, in this sense, meant
―obtaining papers, tin cans, bottles, and other materials from garbage receptacles and/or
garbage heaps for business purposes‖. Scavengers should not be below 18 years of
age, must secure permits such as Mayor‘s Permit, Health Certificate and Police
Clearance, and should be equipped with luminous green pushcarts. Violators of this
ordinance were fined with 20 to 100 pesos and/or imprisoned from one to six months,
with their pushcarts confiscated by the local government. In May 1974, however,
scavenging was totally banned by the city government under Ordinance No. 7150.
Violators were fined with 50 pesos and/or imprisoned for two months. In the span of five
months, a total of 1,000 families who solely depended on scavenging starved as a result.
Keyes (1974) conducted a study on the scavengers in Manila and appealed to the mayor
51
to reconsider the ban. However, his appeal was denied. According to the Mayor
Bagatsing, the pushcarts of scavengers ―pose formidable traffic hazards and litter the
public streets‖ and were used to carry ―stolen articles such as manhole covers and
telephone and electric wires‖ (Ibid.). From the late eighties to the early nineties, the most
common problem of Manila is its red-light districts. During the term of Mayor Alfredo Lim,
clean-ups and raids were conducted in Ermita and Malate to improve the reputation of
the city from being known for prostitution (Manila Standard Today, 23 June 2010; Los
Angeles Times, 1988). When he assumed position, Mayor Lito Atienza organized an
urban renewal campaign which improved the lighting and sidewalks of Roxas Boulevard,
making Manila an entertainment center (Manila Standard Today, 1 February 2010).
In 2008, the Manila Police District (MPD) started to conduct anti-criminality
campaigns, increasing police visibility in crime-prone areas such as Tondo, Quiapo,
Santa Cruz, the University Belt, among others. As a preventive measure, these
campaigns have apprehended petty criminals, drunks, vagrants, illegal gamblers and
others in breach of peace. In 2010, Mayor Lim intensified clean-up drives where
criminals and vagrants staying in the streets are apprehended by MPD (Philippine Star,
7 November 2010). Table 1 shows the number of persons arrested for vagrancy from
2008 to 2010. Such activities continue to increase the interactions between the police
and the street homeless.

52
Table 1. Number of Persons Arrested for

Vagrancy in Manila (2008-2010)
Year Number of Persons
Arrested for Vagrancy
2008 1,581
2009 1,571
2010 1,091
Source: DOD-MPD, 2010
National Welfare Policies

on Homelessness
In 1999, the government under President Joseph Ejercito Estrada made a
mandate to address the growing concern on the street families and street children in
Metro Manila. As such, an inter-agency task force called Sagip Kalinga Project was
formed. The goal was to bring down and prevent the ―growing number of vagrants,
mendicants, children and adults from frequenting the streets and have even taken
shelter in the streets‖ (DSWD 2003). According to the project, the targeted clientele are
the informal dwellers defined as ―individuals or families of any age who spend significant
amount of time on streets, markets, parks, premises of malls and other public areas,
adopting the said places as their homes, as a source of livelihood, or both‖. As such,
these people include ―street dwellers, street children, mendicants, indigenous people,
beggars and the like‖. This project is still being implemented as of current.
53
Sagip Kalinga rescues street dwellers and provides them with several services
including transportation assistance, counselling, educational assistance, medical or
hospital referral, effective parenting and para-legal training programs. This project
consists of the following entities: (1) Metropolitan Manila Development Authority
(MMDA), (2) DSWD, (3) PNP-NCRPO, (4) local government units (LGUs), (5)
Department of Tourism (DOH), (6) Department of Health (DOH), (7) Department of
Transportation and Communication (DOTC), (8) Department of National Defense (DND),
(9) Philippine Information Agency (PIA), and the (10) Commission on Human Rights
(CHR). The street dwellers were identified and brought to staging centers for processing,
interview and immediate relief where meals and sleeping quarters are provided.
Depending on the need, their intervention consists of either transportation assistance
back to their respective provinces or livelihood assistance, skills development and other
basic services for those living within Metro Manila. As of 2003, there has been a total of
12, 452 street dwellers rescued by the project (DSWD 2003).
Though the DSWD has oversight of the project, the actual execution and
operation are allocated to the local government units. In turn, the local government unit
assigns its City Social Welfare and Development Office (CSWO) to be in-charge of the
rescue operations of street dwellers. In Manila, the CSWO coordinates with the
barangay units, the Manila Police District (MPD) and the Reception Action Center
(RAC), its local shelter. After the operation, the clients are assessed and provided with
the necessary interventions. Those who are not living in Manila are brought to the Jose
Fabella Center (JFC), the regional shelter in Mandaluyong.

54
Aside from the said program, a research forum was held last December 2010 to
assess why there are a number of habitual homeless cases. It identified why certain
homeless people have been going back to the streets after they have been rescued by
institutions. The findings revealed that the homeless are going back because of the
livelihood opportunities and social networks they have established in the streets.
Recommendations were made, with suggestions on reviewing the intervention done by
the Jose Fabella Center and delegating the homeless issue down to the barangay level
(DSWD-NCR 2010).
Chapter Summary
With Manila being a highly urbanized city, street homelessness is inevitable to
appear and present itself as an issue. The districts show how the socio-geographical
context makes it possible for the homeless to survive and occupy its spaces. Certain
areas, such as parks, business establishments, and churches, provide viable spaces for
food, work and rest for the homeless. As such, Manila becomes a sustainable area for
homeless people to survive.
However, the city government of Manila has created policies and measures by
which they can limit and discourage homelessness in the city. The street homeless are
also considered as vagrants therefore making them part of a criminalized group. The city
uses two policies: Article 202 or the Anti-Vagrancy Law, and City Ordinance 4638. The
55
police use discretion on which policy to apprehend the street homeless with. Article 202
is allotted to those who are suspicious and have been associated with criminal activities
in the past, while City Ordinance 4638 is given to those who are not deemed as
criminals, like the street homeless who are caught sleeping in parks. However, the
boundaries created between criminals and homeless people in terms of definition are
still unclear. Aside from these policies, the history of vagrancy and street homelessness,
especially in Manila, has a general theme of removing and displacing these people as
they are considered as eye strains for tourists where they ―litter the public streets‖.
At the national level, however, welfare programs for the homeless have been
created, such as the Sagip Kalinga Program. This program involved several national and
local government institutions to address the issue of street people. However, as this was
created and dependent on current government administrations, it is not sustainable. As
such, there are no assessments on whether the program was effective. Government
researches on homelessness have also been conducted as the problem continues to
increase. As of current, DSWD has conducted a study on the rise of habitual
homelessness. Measures are yet to be undertaken to address this.

CHAPTER 3
GOVERNMENT ENTITIES AND RELIGIOUS GROUPS:

LOCATING THE STREET HOMELESS AMONG WELFARE INSTITUTIONS
The way welfare institutions, policies and systems are structured reflects how
they understand and respond to certain disadvantaged groups. Such structures mirror
how they treat certain groups as priorities and others as liabilities. Without intending
such as a consequence, some groups are marginalized by institutions whose priorities
are set on what they deem as ―more vulnerable‖ groups. This chapter tries to locate the
street homeless group among the welfare policies and programs of the national and
local government entities and religious groups. First, it introduces national welfare
systems provided by government institutions for the street homeless. These include the
Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), Jose Fabella Center (JFC)
and the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority Street Dweller Care Unit (MMDA-
SDCU). In the context of Manila, the Manila Department of Social Welfare, Reception
and Action Center (RAC) and the Manila Police District (MPD) serve as primary
institutions concerned with the issue of homelessness. Aside from state institutions,
religious groups also have a hand in providing their own assistance to the street
homeless.
Government Entities:
National Welfare Institutions
56
57
At the national level, the government entities catering to the street homeless are
the Department of Social Welfare and Development, Jose Fabella Center and the
MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit. As will be elaborated in the succeeding sections, their
relationship is illustrated in Figure 1.
Department of Social Welfare and Development

(DSWD)
-technical and administrative function
-networks with other government agencies
-has regional offices (eg. DSWD-NCR)
Jose Fabella Center (JFC) MMDA Street Dweller

-regional shelter of Metro Manila Care Unit (MMDA-SDCU)
-accepts referrals from RAC- -turns over apprehended street
Manila dwellers and vagrants to JFC
Figure 4. Relationship of National Government Institutions for the Street Homeless

58
DSWD encompasses all government welfare institutions in the country. However,
their function is mostly technical and administrative. The implementation of the social
welfare programs they develop is assigned to shelters located throughout the country.
Since it is the closest to Manila, the Jose Fabella Center which is the regional shelter of
the National Capital Region is focused on this study. MMDA-SDCU conducts daily
rescue operations and turns over apprehended vagrants and street dwellers to JFC.
Though JFC and MMDA-SDCU have no formal partnership as represented by the dotted
arrows in Figure 1, these two organizations work together in catering to the needs of the
street homeless.
Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). The Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD) is the government agency tasked with providing
assistance and other welfare services to the poor, displaced, and disadvantaged
members of society. Part of the agency‘s mission is to ―provide social protection and
promote the rights and welfare of the poor, vulnerable, disadvantaged individuals,
families and communities‖ through social welfare development policies and programs
and by collaborating with the different sectors namely local government units, non-
government organizations, people‘s organizations, other government organizations and
members of civil society (DSWD Website, n.d.). DSWD has several field offices in
Regions 1 to 12, National Capital Region (NCR), Cordillera Autonomous Region (CAR)
and CARAGA Region. These offices respond to the welfare needs of their region and
coordinate with and implement policies given by the Central Office in Quezon City.
59
DSWD‘s major projects are dependent on the priorities of the current
administration. Under the Aquino government, for example, DSWD projects geared
towards poverty alleviation include the Self-Employment Assistance-Kaunlaran (SEA-K),
the Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan-Comprehensive Integrated Delivery of Social
Services: Kapangyarihan at Kaunlaran sa Barangay (KALAHI-CIDSS: KKB), and the
Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) or Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT).
Recipients of such major DSWD services are mostly communities and households in
rural areas. However, center-based services1 which are forms of temporary relief and
support cater to the needs of certain groups identified according to youth or children,
persons with disabilities (PWD), mentally-challenged individuals, disadvantaged women,
the elderly, and vagrants, transients, strandees and mendicants. Out of the fifty-four (54)
centers and institutions throughout the country, the distribution of centers is categorized
according to groups. Thirty-seven (37) centers belong to the youth classified as either
disadvantaged, physically and sexually abused, or as minor offenders. Ten (10) centers
cater to women who are either disadvantaged, abused or psychotics. Three (3)
institutions serve persons with disabilities. One (1) institution each is allotted to the group
of mentally-challenged adults and children and the elderly. Likewise, one center —the
Jose Fabella Center (JFC) —serves vagrants, beggars, mendicants and the psychotic
males and is the only one located in the NCR field office. This center assumes the street
homeless as included in this category.
1
Center-based services address immediate crisis or developmental concerns of an individual, group or
family. There are physical facilities which provide services on a daily basis (NCRFW 2008).
60
Though no concrete definition is provided for homelessness, DSWD uses terms
such as ―homeless‖, ―street dwellers‖, ―street families‖, ―street children‖, and ―habitual
homeless‖ in reports, researches and press releases. The term ―homeless‖ has been
commonly used for those who have lost their homes due to natural disasters such as
typhoons and landslides. Interventions mostly consist of providing relief goods but at
times include provision of homes through the Core Shelter Assistance Program (CSAP).
CSAP, however, is limited only to victims of typhoons and natural disasters. Shelters are
constructed by beneficiaries in relocation sites and new communities. Another aspect
where the term ―homeless‖ is used is to refer to abandoned and neglected children,
elderly and persons with disabilities. Interventions include placing them in temporary
shelters and finding families who can adopt them.
The terms ―street dwellers‖, ―street families‖ and ―street children‖ have started to
gain more grounding within the DSWD recently. In November 2010, DSWD conducted a
rapid appraisal of the street families and street children in Metro Manila, namely ―Metro
South, Metro East, Quezon City and Manila‖ (DSWD-Social Marketing Service, 19
December 2010). It identified 5,086 street dwellers, which consisted of 2,873 street
children, 199 infants and 2,014 adults. Following the rapid appraisal, DSWD Secretary
Corazon ―Dinky‖ Juliano-Soliman held in December 2010 a Christmas project entitled
―Paskong Ligtas sa Batang Kalye: Kapwa Nating Palayain sa Panlilimos Ngayong
Pasko” which aimed at keeping street children from carolling and begging in roads.
According to DSWD, this served as a ―preliminary activity‖ for the Comprehensive
Program for Street Families geared at addressing ―home-based street families and
61
homeless street families‖. For homeless street families, coordination with the Housing
and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC) and the National Housing
Authority (NHA) will be done in building new communities in either in-city, near city or out
of city locations. Other interventions include livelihood assistance for families, further
psycho-social assessment, shelter and/or transportation assistance. For community-
based street families or those who have houses, interventions will include livelihood for
parents and out-of-school youth, technical skills training for job generation, and
assessment for psycho-social interventions needed. The agencies which will be involved
are the DSWD Central Office, DSWD-NCR, MMDA, Council for the Welfare of Children
(CWC), NCR-LGU representatives, and NGO representatives engaged in programs and
activities for homeless people based in NCR. DSWD will also provide monetary
incentives worth 50,000 pesos to barangays which will keep children off the streets.
According to the Technical Working Group (TWG) of the DSWD Central Office,
the main goal for the issue on homelessness is to remove the street dwellers from the
streets and provide them with decent living and livelihood opportunities. As of current,
the role of DSWD is to provide interventions after the street dwellers are rescued and
brought to assigned processing centers and institutions. Social workers then provide
recommendations after interviewing and assessing the clients. Often, the interventions
consist of sending the street dwellers back to their provinces, finding accommodations in
resettlement areas, or are temporarily housed at JFC for further assessment.

62
Jose Fabella Center (JFC). Based in Mandaluyong, the Jose Fabella Center (JFC) is a
government shelter under the DSWD-NCR field office. Their clients mainly consist of
vagrants and mendicants rescued by the MMDA-SDCU in Pasay, Balintawak,
Monumento, Mandaluyong and other parts of Metro Manila. Aimed at providing for and
improving the ―well being of distressed and disadvantage individuals, groups and
families who are in transient situation,‖ JFC works closely with DSWD-NCR, the MMDA-
SDCU and the Crisis Intervention Unit (CIU). DSWD-NCR refers persons wanting to go
back to their home province but has no means to do so. On the other hand, MMDA
brings in an average of thirty (30) vagrants found along EDSA and Metro Manila every
day. Based at the DSWD headquarters, CIU is a twenty-four hour action center catering
to individuals and families in need of social, medical and psychological services. CIU
also does referral of clients to JFC and other centers and institutions for the whole
metropolis.
JFC has a bed capacity of two hundred twenty (220), with a total of forty-nine
(49) employees working within the shelter. Its staff members consist of six social
workers, one doctor, three nurses, one dentist, one psychologist, twenty house parents2,
one productivity personnel, one dietary officer, three administrative staff, one driver, and
five security guards. JFC has rehabilitation indicators to evaluate the changes in clients‘
attitudes, behavior and socialization skills within the shelter. JFC also approaches
different denominations which regularly provide spiritual ministrations to the religious
needs of clients and, at times, food and snacks.

2
A house parent is a person who supervises the clients and oversees daily operations within the shelter.
House parents in the Jose Fabella Center (JFC), as well as in other centers, are trained by the Department of
Social Welfare and Development (DSWD).
63
Clients brought to JFC are initially interviewed and provided with food, clothing
and temporary shelter. Their cases are then diagnosed by social workers, who contact
their respective DSWD field offices and existing families and close associates to further
the case study of the clients. Interventions are made according to the recommendation
of the social workers. Services such as medical, legal, educational, psychological
assistance are provided. Moreover, the Center conducts livelihood skills development for
those clients who are in need of furthering their work opportunities. After intervention is
done, clients are discharged but are monitored by social workers who ask for feedback
from the family and close associates of the client.
Though JFC is able to accommodate two hundred twenty (220) clients, numbers
tend to go up until two hundred fifty (250) due to daily rescue operations and referrals
made by other institutions. JFC ideally allots 90 pesos per client daily for food needs
alone; however, with the additional clients, they actually spend 40 pesos consisting of
three meals. As such, JFC has difficulty supporting the basic needs of their clients due to
the insufficient budget provided by DSWD. They depend on connections and other
resources to fill in such gaps. For example, to have bathing soap, part of the productivity
activity of the clients is to make soap. At times, JFC would ask for rejects from big
companies to have laundry soap. For minor repairs of infrastructure and facilities within
the shelter, JFC taps on clients skilled in electricity, carpentry and plumbing and
provides them with food incentives as reward. JFC also asks the help of MMDA for
firewood because of the costly price of cooking gas.

64
Clients in JFC usually consist of both psychotic and able-bodied persons. Able-
bodied clients are those who are physically competent and have no symptoms of being
mentally ill. Two types of able-bodied clients emerge. The first type of able-bodied
persons consists of those who originally came from the provinces. Their interventions
consist of the being enlisted under the Balik Probinsya Program and provided with
livelihood training while in the shelter. Usually, they stay in the shelter for a minimum of
one week to six months depending on whether they already have financial support from
their local government. The second type of able-bodied clients includes those who live
within Metro Manila and its neighboring cities. They have jobs but have been brought to
the center by the MMDA as they were found sleeping and loitering in the streets and
looked like vagrants. They are assessed and provided with ―mild‖ intervention. According
to Director Benjie Barbosa, head of JFC, they are ―not admitted, but served‖. Though
they are given food and clothing, they only stay in the shelter for one night. They are
also told not to loiter in the streets. The psychotic persons, on the other hand, are those
who are mentally ill but are mostly male. DSWD also has an institution which can house
female psychotics3 but not males. As such, they are brought to JFC. In general, the
composition of clients is usually 20 psychotic persons and 80 able-bodied clients who
are waiting to be brought back to their home provinces. The rest are composed of
families, children, clients who are under mental rehabilitation and the habitual homeless.
With this kind of client composition, Director Barbosa proposes to have more
concentration on the transportation assistance service or the Balik Probinsya Program
3
Sanctuary Center is an institution of the DSWD which specifically houses psychotic women vagrants
aged 18 and above. It is located in Mandaluyong and is under the DSWD-NCR office like JFC.
65
allotted for able-bodied clients who want to go back to their provinces. Because the JFC
is not mainly a medical facility, it also has to spend for the medicine of clients who are
being rehabilitated for mental illness. Moreover, other clients are bothered at being
mixed with psychotic persons.
MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit (MMDA-SDCU). The MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit
aims to have ―beggar-free‖ streets and ensures that there are no vagrants sleeping in
the highways of Metro Manila. More specifically, they rescue ―mendicants, solvent
people4, street children and vagrant psychotics‖ found sleeping or staying along the
Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA). The clients they rescue are then brought to the
Jose Fabella Center (JFC). Two teams conduct rescue operations every day from six in
the morning until two in the afternoon and two in the afternoon until ten in the evening. A
total of thirty (30) clients are said to be rescued daily. They also conduct special
operations upon receiving requests from the barangay, local government units and the
police. They also provide home conduction operations, where they return rehabilitated
clients to their homes.
There are, however, several issues on the existence of MMDA Street Dweller
Care Unit. As of current, there is no formal memorandum of agreement (MOA) on the
role of MMDA in terms of the welfare scheme of DSWD. Moreover, it has been raised
that MMDA is in no position to handle social welfare issues. However, DSWD and JFC
have been positively receptive of the help that MMDA has been providing for them.
4
Solvent people are those who hang out or stay in the streets and caught sniffing solvents such as rugby.
66
MMDA has assisted JFC in a number of ways, including providing transportation and
other technical assistance to the Center.
Government Entities:
Local Government
Institutions in Manila
The City Government of Manila has three entities which are involved in the issue
of street homelessness: the Manila Department of Social Welfare (MDSW), Reception
and Action Center (RAC) and the Manila Police District (MPD). Though their policies are
similar to national welfare institutions, they have high level of autonomy and enforce
these according to the directive of the city government. The relationship between the
national and local institutions, however, is limited to networking, client referrals and
partnership for technical and administrative development. Figure 2 shows the
relationship of these institutions. As represented by arrows with straight lines, the City
Government of Manila, MDSW, RAC and MPD work closely together on the street
homeless issue. On the other hand, arrows with dotted lines connecting DSWD, MDSW
and RAC indicate their weak relationship with each other. DSWD has no authority over
what local welfare institutions do with the street homeless.

67
City Government of Manila

-Mayor directs MPD and/or MDSW to clean the streets of criminals and vagrants
Manila Department
Department of Social Welfare
of Social Welfare (MDSW)
and Development (DSWD)
-administrative and technical
function
function
-networks with government agencies
-networks with government agencies
such as DSWD
such as MDSW
Reception and Action Center Manila Police District (MPD)

(RAC) -conducts vagrancy raids
-local shelter for street children and -coordinates with RAC & MDSW for
vagrants raids & turn-over of apprehended
-refers non-residents to DSWD-JFC street children & vagrants
Figure 5. Relationship of Local Government Institutions for the Street Homeless in Manila
Manila Department of Social Welfare (MDSW). The Manila Department of Social Welfare
is tasked with developing programs for local residents in need of social services. Like
DSWD which is its national counterpart, MDSW performs administrative and technical
functions such as developing social welfare programs for groups such as the street
children, child laborers, out-of-school youth, vagrants, beggars, battered women, drug
68
dependents, families and adult offenders5. Implementation of services are delegated
towards shelters such as the Manila Youth Reception Center (MYRC), Reception and
Action Center (RAC), Boys Town, Girls Home, Home for the Aged, and Foundling Home.
There are also welfare offices in each of the six districts of Manila. Such offices have day
care centers, youth services, family life education, volunteerism programs, drop-in
centers for the elderly, social services for street children, slum clearance and squatter
relocation units, and socio-legal services. MDSW also networks with other government
agencies such as DSWD for partnership and support services.
Reception and Action Center (RAC). The Reception and Action Center (RAC) is the local
government shelter in Manila which houses mendicants, vagrants, and displaced,
neglected and abandoned persons. It accommodates eighty to one hundred (80-100)
clients most of the time. Usually, the composition of the shelter is 80 percent children
and 20 percent adults who were rescued in Manila. Most of the children were housed in
the shelter because they were in conflict with the law, while adults were detained due to
cases of vagrancy and mendicancy. RAC classifies the homeless as male or female
adults living in the streets who took the risk of going into the city to have better lives.
They also do not have homes and are jobless. These are the cases they usually
encounter. As such, RAC believes that homelessness is caused by more people who
are migrating to Manila from the provinces because of poverty.
5
Accessible at http://www.manilacityph.com/socialservices.html
69
RAC is under the Manila Department of Social Welfare. It has a total of forty-
eight (48) employees composed of ten social workers, thirteen house parents, six
administrative staff, two cooks, eleven street educators who also function as rescue
teams, and six security guards. House parents are oriented by the social workers and
learn their work through experience. In terms of medical cases, social workers rush
clients to the hospital as they have no in-house medical unit. Rescue teams, on the other
hand, operate upon request of the barangay, business establishments and residents
who have complaints on vagrants and street children in their area. Seven people operate
as part of the rescue team which is composed of one female social worker and six male
staff. In cases of major operations such as raiding illegally-operated bars, the rescue
team has ten to fifteen members as the local police accompany them. In terms of food,
RAC allocates forty to sixty pesos (Php40-60) per client daily.
RAC has a similar method with JFC when dealing with clients, though they are
limited to Manila residents only. After interviewing and processing the cases of clients,
they are temporarily housed in the shelter and given food. Clients are also asked to
participate in the daily activities of the Center, most of which include cleaning dorms and
wards, praying, eating meals, group work activities, medical checkups, watching
television and sleeping. Clients are discharged depending on the case. However,
because the shelter tends to be overpopulated, clients, especially adults, stay in the
shelter for a maximum of five days and are easily discharged. This issue was
acknowledged by the staff and criticized by the MPD because it leads to ineffective
intervention of cases. Moreover, it results to cases of recidivism and habitual

70
homelessness. In order to prevent this, they tell clients that they can be charged if they
were caught for the third time. According to Acting Director Edna Gunao:
“Upon ng kanilang rescue kasi, interview. Iinterviewhin ng

Social Worker tapos titingnan namin ang disposition at the
same time andoon na yung counselling na bakit sila
dinampot. Tapos meron na kaming agreement na upon
release nila, ito ay hindi na pwedeng maulit, hindi na sila
marescue. Yung kapag second time, hindi namin pwedeng
i-hold. Andu‟n na lang uli iyong ika-counseling mo
ulit...kapag third time pwede ka ng kasuhan, para third time
titigil ka na. Hindi [talaga pwedeng kasuhan], sinasabi lang
namin „yun para huwag na silang bumalik sa kalye.” (After
they are rescued, they are interviewed by a social worker.
Then we will look at their predisposition while at the same
time explaining to them why they are being apprehended.
Then we make an agreement with them that after their
release, the encounter shouldn‘t be repeated because they
won‘t be rescued again. On their second time, we cannot
hold them anymore. We can only provide them
counselling... (We also tell them than) on the third time,
they will be charged with a legal case so they would stop.
Actually, they really can‘t be charged. We only tell them
that so they won‘t go back to the streets.)
RAC also tells its clients upon discharge to avoid roaming in the streets of Manila and to
―roam in other cities‘ streets instead.‖ At times, RAC also brings the adult clients to
Marikina Boys Town to discourage them from going back to Manila. Such measures are
done by RAC to dissuade and minimize the street homeless from staying in the streets
of Manila.
In terms of internal structure, several issues are encountered by RAC. Because
of the lack of financial resources, the staff admits that the shelter is not conducive to
clients. One of the problems they pointed out was the limited budget for personal
71
hygiene products such as bath soap, laundry and cleaning detergents. Moreover, they
have insufficient clothes to provide the clients. That is why they still look filthy after
getting out of the shelter. This is also the reason why some clients contract skin
diseases within the shelter. Director Gunao said that they are not allowed to solicit funds
by the local government so they depend on donations from schools, NGOs and other
private organizations. Another issue is the reported molestations and rape cases inside
the shelter. According to the acting Director, though these are mere allegations, they
also cannot prevent such events from happening because the shelter has mixed clients.
Adults should have a separate shelter from children. However, they make sure that
house parents are able to closely monitor their clients.
Despite their existence, RAC observes that they are serving more clients and
cases of homelessness over time. As of current, they have no success indicators. They
also admit that their interventions are ineffective due to the presence of habitual
homelessness. RAC believes that homelessness could be solved by providing job
opportunities and providing houses for the street dwellers. RAC is hoping that they can
provide better services in the future.
Manila Police District (MPD). The Manila Police District is responsible for enforcing the
law and maintaining security in the city. It has eleven (11) police stations strategically
located around Manila: Station 1 in Raxabago, Tondo; Station 2 in Moriones, Tondo;
Station 3 in Santa Cruz; Station 4 in Sampaloc; Station 5 in Ermita; Station 6 in Santa

72
Ana; Station 7 in Jose Abad Santos; Station 8 in Santa Mesa; Station 9 in Malate;
Station 10 in San Andres Bukid, and; Station 11 in Meisic (MPD 2010).
The Police consider vagrancy as a non-index crime, or crime against persons
such as kidnapping and maltreatment, against property such as falsification and damage
to property, against morals and order such as prostitution, gambling and vagrancy, and
against chastity such as abduction and lascivious acts. It also includes illegal possession
of firearms, smuggling, carnapping and prohibited drugs (NSCB n.d.). The District
Operations Division (DOD), which is in charge of all crime operations conducted in the
eleven police stations in Manila, yielded the following statistics on vagrancy for the last
three years: The number of persons arrested for vagrancy alone was 3,944 in 2007,
1,581 in 2008, 1,571 in 2009 and 1,091 in 2010. This statistics was separated from
persons arrested for prostitution, which were significantly more than half the reported
cases of vagrancy. The number arrested for prostitution was 313 in 2007, 438 in 2008,
584 in 2009 and 59 in 2010 (see Table 1).

73
Table 2. Number of Persons Arrested for Prostitution

and Vagrancy in Manila (2007-2010)
Year Number of Persons Arrested
Prostitution Vagrancy
2007 313 3,944
2008 438 1,581
2009 584 1,571
2010 59 1,091
Source: DOD-MPD, 2010
However, with Article 202 and City Ordinance 4368, the Police use their
discretion when apprehending and filing cases on vagrancy. Because punishment for
Article 202 is more severe, it is allotted to the more suspicious-looking characters such
as those who have tattoos which are distinctly interpreted to mean that they are ex-
convicts. Ordinance 4368 is found to be less serious and is allocated to vagrants and
harmless looking individuals caught in the streets.
More specifically, the Police classify the homeless as different from vagrants.
The homeless are those who came to the city with the hope of finding better job
opportunities but have been duped by illegal recruiters. Vagrants are residents of Manila
and neighboring cities but are staying and ―loitering‖ in another district and have no job
or official business in the said area. They are considered to be more suspicious
especially if they have no identification cards (ID) to present. According to the Police, the
latter are usually the ones who commit petty crimes such as snatching and robbery.
However, because the vagrancy law and ordinance are active, both the homeless and
vagrants are apprehended. Though the Police tend to be more lenient with the street
homeless, they are nevertheless apprehended for violations such as drinking in public,
littering, urinating in public, making noises at night, staying and sleeping in the streets
74
past curfew, among others. As such, they are charged only with City Ordinance 4368
and are detained for a maximum of seven (7) days until they are able to pay 110 pesos.
If they are not able to pay the fine after fifteen (15) days, they are brought to the Manila
City Jail where they are detained for a day, tried before a court and allowed to go after
the hearing. On the other hand, those with distinct ex-convict and gang tattoos, who
carry sharp objects and who are recidivists are charged with Article 202. They stay in
prison for 15 days and are fined with 1,010 pesos. In Police Station 5 in Ermita, the
police specifically cover significant areas such as M.H. del Pilar, Mabini, Kalaw,
Intramuros and along UN Avenue for vagrants and homeless. They are, however, not
allowed to apprehend those sleeping in parks as it is a public area.
In general, the Police view street dwellers with both sympathy and suspicion.
They understand the situation of street dwellers but have to enforce the law whenever it
is violated. Most cases filed by the Police on street dwellers are vagrancy and breach of
public peace and offenses against morals, which include urinating in public, making
noises at night, being intoxicated and loitering in the streets after curfew.
Religious Groups
and Feeding Programs
in Manila
Several religious or charismatic organizations have been holding feeding
programs in Manila as part of their apostolate mission. These are the Ermita Church,
San Sebastian Church, Jesus Reigns Ministry, United Methodist Church, Paco Church,
Sikh Temple, Tatlong Pari Church, among others. These institutions have organized
75
regular prayer sessions and feeding programs which are open to anyone who wants to
attend. However, over time, feeding programs have become known to be attended by a
common group: the street homeless. According to organizers, these are the ones who
do not have homes and have lived and worked in the streets for a long time. Organizers
have also observed some informal settlers as attendees, but only for a short period of
time. The street homeless are the ones who have attended their feeding programs on a
regular basis. As such, feeding programs have become attributed to catering the street
homeless group.
Most of activities in feeding programs include prayer sessions, Bible readings,
sermons and other spiritual activities. Afterwards, meals consisting of varied
combinations of rice, viand, bread, hamburger, juice, coffee and rice porridge are served
to the homeless. Though the schedules differ, feeding programs happen every day
except Mondays.
Each program estimates that at least two to three hundred (200-300) homeless
people regularly attend their feeding programs. Without fail, these religious organizations
have allocated their time and financial resources to sustain the feeding programs for the
homeless. One church has revealed that a feeding program costs 5,000 pesos for three
hundred homeless people. Most of their funds came from the church they serve, while
other resources such as clothes and groceries were donated and provided for by private
organizations connected to the organizers. During Christmas, churches would provide
groceries and second hand clothes donated by their members. Usually, this serves as
76
the last feeding session for the year. Some feeding programs would continue during the
Christmas season, while others will resume in January.
Some feeding programs, like the churches in Paco and Ermita, have
incorporated volunteer systems to their sessions. The homeless are the ones listing the
number of attending peers, facilitating the reading of biblical verses in masses and
assisting the priest, singing in choirs, and ensuring the orderly arrangements of food
lines, among others. As such, homeless volunteers who consistently attend and assist in
programs are provided with certain benefits such as more food, monetary allowance and
livelihood opportunities.
Generally, charismatic organizations view street dwellers as grounded by their
faith. They look at them as people who are most in need physically and spiritually. They
call them ―anak ng Diyos” (children of God), ―kaibigan” (friend) and ―kapatid” (sibling).
They also treat them as members and volunteers of their organizations since they
regularly attend feeding programs. Outside feeding programs, organizers extend
assistance to street dwellers who have been apprehended by the police and RAC. When
dealing with these government institutions, they ask the police and social workers to let
the street dwellers go because they are members and volunteers of their charismatic
groups.
77
Summary of Relationships of
Homelessness-Related Institutions:
Locating the Street Homeless
To locate where the street homeless stand in terms of welfare, it is important to
understand the relationships that exist between the national and local government
entities and religious groups. Their relationship is illustrated in Figure 3 and is elaborated
in Table 2. Arrows with straight lines indicate strong and frequent interactions, while
arrows with dotted lines mean weak and occasional interactions.
At the national level, DSWD is the main institution addressing the social welfare
of the country. It develops welfare programs for disadvantaged groups and oversees that
these are implemented through its regional offices. In relation to the homelessness
issue, DSWD perceives the street homeless as either ―homeless street families‖ or
―community-based street families‖. As of current, DSWD is still setting up a program
specifically for the street homeless where interventions would include livelihood and
skills training, transportation assistance and housing support. While the program is still
being developed, DSWD temporarily houses street dwellers such as vagrants, strandees
and mendicants in JFC. Though currently without a formal partnership, MMDA-SDCU
conducts rescue operations with the main goal of cleaning Metro Manila‘s highways by
apprehending individuals sleeping on sidewalks and public spaces. They then turn over
apprehended street dwellers to JFC for client assessment. JFC provides necessary
interventions, such as transportation assistance through the Balik Probinsya Program
livelihood seminars and medical support. Most of their clients are able-bodied who are in
78
Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)

-technical and administrative function; networks with other gov’t agencies
-has regional offices (eg. DSWD-NCR)
-street homeless as “homeless street families” & “community-based street families”
NATIONAL
Jose Fabella Center (JFC) MMDA Street Dweller

-regional shelter of Care Unit (MMDA-SDCU)
Metro Manila -turns over apprehended
-accepts referrals from RAC- street dwellers and vagrants
Manila to JFC
-street homeless as “strandees”; -street homeless as
no such thing as homeless as individuals sleeping on the
everyone has a family streets & without homes
City Government of Manila

-Mayor directs MPD and/or MDSW to clean the streets of criminals and vagrants
Religious Organizations
Manila Department in Manila
of Social Welfare (MDSW)
-conducts feeding programs for the
street homeless
function -negotiates with gov’t entities to
-networks with government release street homeless from the local
agencies such as DSWD
shelter and jails
LOCAL
-street homeless as “friends”, “children

of God”, “church members”
Reception and Action Center Manila Police District (MPD)

(RAC) -conducts vagrancy raids
-local shelter for street children -coordinates with RAC & MDSW
and vagrants for raids & turn-over of
-refers non-residents to DSWD-JFC apprehended street children &
-street homeless as “vagrants” or vagrants
“caught committing vagrancy” -street homeless as those without
homes & duped by illegal
recruiters in provinces
Figure 6. Summary of Relationships of Homelessness-Related Institutions

79
Table 3. Detailed Summary of Institutions and their Functions
Institution Type Function Perception of Structure/ Budget per Issues

Street Manpower client
Homeless &
Perceived
Solutions
National Level (NCR, Metro Manila)

Department of Social Government -Formulates policies & Perception on Technical Working - -Existence of
Welfare and –National programs on Homelessness Group (TWG) Habitual Homeless
Development Level homelessness and Two types:
(DSWD) – Central other welfare cases - home-based -Have yet to
Office and National street families & implement the
Capital Region (NCR) children Comprehensive Plan
field office - homeless street for Street Families
families & children
Perceived
Solution/s
-shelter
-job opportunities
Jose Fabella Center Government -Provides shelter for Perception on Clients Per client: -Shelter tends to be
(JFC) –National vagrants, mendicants Homelessness -220 bed capacity; - overpopulated
Level & stranded persons in -―clients‖; reaches 250 clients Php40/da -Clients are mixed;
NCR vagrants, -Composition: 20 y (ideally male & rehabilitating
-under mendicants, psychotics, 80 Php90) mental clients are
DSWD-NCR -Gives intervention: strandees able-bodied waiting brought to the shelter
psychological, -not homeless but for transportation -Financial resources
livelihood assistance stranded persons assistance not enough for
and transportation who can‘t go back Total: 49 maintenance of
assistance back to to provinces employees facilities & clients‘
provinces Perceived -6 social workers needs (i.e. personal
Solution/s -1 psychologist hygiene needs)
80
-job opportunities, -20 house parents -Existence of

esp. in provinces -1 doctor, 3 nurses Habitual Homeless
-1 dentist
-1 productivity staff
-1 dietary staff
-3 administrative
staff
-5 security guards
Manila Metropolitan Government -Conducts rescue Perception on Rescued daily - -No formal
Development – National operations along Homelessness -30 street dwellers agreement to conduct
Authority Street Level EDSA and in Metro -street dwellers Rescue Team rescue operations
Dweller Care Unit Manila twice a day who loiter & sleep -5 social welfare with JFC & DSWD
(MMDA-SDCU) -coordinates -Brings at least 30 in the streets, use aids -Existence of
with JFC rescued clients to JFC solvent, and are -1 driver Habitual Homeless
daily psychotics
-Responds to Perceived
complaints from Solution/s
barangay, business -job opportunities
establishments -shelter
Local Level (Manila)

Reception and Action Government -Provides shelter to Perception on Clients Per client -Shelter
Center Manila (RAC- – LGU mendicants, vagrants, Homelessness -80 to 100 clients -Php40 to tends to be
Manila) and displaced, -vagrants & -Composition: 80% 60/day overpopulate
-under the neglected & street children children, 20% adults d
Manila abandoned persons; who are in -Clients are
Development mostly street children conflict with the Total: 48 employees mixed; male
of Social & adult vagrants law -10 social workers &
Welfare -13 house parents rehabilitating
(MDSW) -Conducts rescue -6 administrative staff mental clients
operations upon Perceived -6 security guards are brought
request of the Office Solution -2 cooks to the shelter
of the Mayor -job opportunities -11 street educator/ -Financial
81
rescue team/ volunteer resources not

-Responds to enough for
complaints from Rescue Team maintenance
barangay, business -1 social worker of facilities &
establishments (female) clients‘ needs
-6 staff (male) (i.e. personal
-10 to 15 (if with police hygiene
for major cases) needs)
-Early
discharge of
client due to
budget
problem;
ineffective
intervention
-Existence of
Habitual
Homeless
Manila Police District Government -Conducts daily Perception on Precinct capacity No food -Encounters
(MPD) – LGU rounds in the city as Homelessness -50 to 60 persons budget for cases of
part of the police -distinguishes detainees vagrancy &
visibility campaign between street prostitution
homeless and for adults and
-Assists in rescue vagrants: minors who
operations of RAC -Street homeless are solvent
Manila upon request as duped by users &
esp. in major cases illegal recruiters commit petty
(eg. bar raids) & have no means crimes
to go back to -Critiques
provinces; more RAC-Manila
sympathetic for ineffective
towards them intervention
-Vagrants as of minors
82
residents of
Manila &
neighboring cities
who suspiciously
loiter & commit
crime; stricter
enforcement
towards them
Perceived
Solution
-job opportunities
San Sebastian Church Religious -Conducts weekly Perception on Serves: Budget: -street
―Agnus Dei Charismatic Organization - feeding programs Homelessness -300 to 350 street -Php5000 homeless are
Group‖ Manila with spiritual activities -―anak ng Diyos‖ homeless per week sleeping, not
for street homeless (children of God) -Composition: mostly (funds listening and
(Fridays, 6 to 9 pm) males & elderly; provided by unruly during
women & few children Church) spiritual
Perceived programs
Solution Staff:
-job opportunities -Mostly church
volunteers
Ermita Church Religious -Conducts weekly Perception on Serves: Budget: -street
―Tagumpay ng Panginoon‖ Organization - feeding programs Homelessness -300 street homeless -not homeless are
Charismatic Group Manila with spiritual activities -vagrants treated -Composition: mostly disclosed sometimes
for street homeless as members & elderly & women; -funds from unruly during
(Thursdays, 5 to 9 volunteers males & very few donations spiritual
pm) children of private programs
organizatio
-provides livelihood Perceived Staff: ns
opportunities Solution -Mostly church
-shelter volunteers
-job opportunities
83
United Central Methodist Religious -Conducts weekly Perception on Serves: Budget: -street
Church Organization/ feeding programs Homelessness -190 street dwellers in -not homeless are
―Center for Community NGO - Manila with spiritual activities -street dwellers Kalaw; total of 500 disclosed sometimes
Transformation (CCT) – for street dwellers in who are called street dwellers in -funds from unruly during
Kaibigan Ministry‖ seven areas ―kaibigan‖ seven areas donations spiritual
(friend) of private programs
-provides medical Staff: organizatio
assistance during -development ns and -need more
feeding programs Perceived practitioners who use members resources &
Solution spirituality as abroad networks for
-provides livelihood -job opportunities development strategy providing
opportunities for -shelter -volunteers who used livelihood
volunteers to be street dwellers opportunities
84
need of transportation assistance. As such, JFC attests that there is no such thing as
homeless individuals because everyone has a family which can house them. JFC
sees the street homeless as more of strandees rather than homeless.
At the local level, the City Government of Manila conducts its own clean-up
operations where criminals and vagrants dwelling in the streets and parks are
apprehended. Clean-up operations are led by MPD, which apprehends criminals and
vagrants alike. With police discretion, MPD distinguishes between criminals and
vagrants and enforces corresponding violations. Most vagrants are detained in jail,
while others, especially women and children, are brought to RAC. As the local
shelter, RAC houses them and conducts assessments. Since the shelter tends to be
overpopulated, RAC immediately releases clients, especially adults, who do not have
grave cases. One of the interventions includes counselling where they are told to
avoid roaming the streets of Manila and to ―roam other cities instead‖. Such kinds of
interventions, as well as the limited facilities and funds of the shelter, are deemed
ineffective even by the social welfare officers in RAC.
The relationship between national and local welfare government institutions is
limited to networking, support in the technical and administrative level, and referrals
of clients. This means that DSWD, despite being the primary welfare agency, has no
authority over MDSW and RAC. The latter has a high level of autonomy in that it has
its own ways of implementing interventions, which are mostly conducting clean-up
operations and counselling aimed at minimizing the visible homeless. One example
where DSWD has no authority over them is its non-intervention on the issues of
molestation inside RAC, where they claimed it to be ―their [MDSW] local problem‖.
85
Because of this weak relationship, the national and local welfare government
institutions are connected by arrows with dotted lines.
Unknown to MDSW, RAC and other government institutions, Manila has
several religious groups which provide feeding programs to the street homeless.
Held in churches, these programs serve as their apostolate mission where they hold
feeding sessions and spiritual services weekly. Such groups treat the street
homeless as their own members, friends and as ―children of God‖. As such, their
relationship with them extends to negotiating with RAC and MPD to release their
detained ―members‖. Dotted lines which box feeding programs indicate how their
existence is unknown to government institutions. One-way arrows with dotted lines
connecting feeding programs to government institutions denote how their relationship
is one-way; feeding programs only interact with government institutions and not vice-
versa.
In summary, the street homeless are difficult to locate in the national and
local government institutions. Though they have been specifically identified by
institutions as individuals ―without homes, sleeping and staying on the streets, duped
by illegal recruiters, and are able-bodied‖, they are still categorized as vagrants and
criminals who are vulnerable to police arrest. The lack of welfare institutions
specifically catering to able-bodied individuals who are without homes and decent
jobs resulted to their vulnerability and marginalization. With ineffective welfare
interventions and severe measures involving police force, the street homeless are
further pushed backwards as a nameless, invisible group, undeserving of state
services. Because of this, the street homeless resort to informal forms of assistance
provided by religious groups. Though the homeless have access to basic needs such
86
as food, they are nevertheless trapped into obtaining only short-term reliefs and are
still inaccessible to long-term solutions to their homeless state.
Chapter Summary
This chapter attempted to locate where the street homeless stand in terms of
existing welfare policies and programs in the country. By doing so, it provides a
background of how state and non-state entities perceive the issue of homelessness
as well as how they treat the street homeless.
As policies and programs are elaborated, it can be seen that it is difficult to
locate the street homeless. Services for able-bodied persons who do not have
homes do not exist. As can be seen in the national programs by the DSWD alone,
the focus of most services is on the youth and women who are disadvantaged,
physically and sexually abused, and are considered offenders. Only one institution is
catering to the issue of vagrants, stranded persons or transients, and beggars. What
is more, major programs on poverty alleviation service communities and households,
which the street homeless do not clearly have. Moreover, the terms ―homelessness‖
and ―street homeless‖ are not clearly defined in the vernacular of such government
institutions. Most officials refer to them as ―vagrants‖, ―mendicants‖ and ―stranded
persons‖. There is recognition, however, of ―street children‖, ―street families‖ and the
―habitual homeless‖, but they have always been assumed to have homes in informal
settlements or in rural areas. As such, interventions for them consist of being sent
back to their provinces, being provided houses in resettlement areas and given jobs.
However, as will be seen in the succeeding chapters, most street homeless prefer to
87
live in the streets and choose not to go back home or have a home. This becomes a
point of contention between the street homeless and government institutions.
In the local sphere, city welfare agencies have a high extent of autonomy
from the national level. RAC has its own way of implementing policies and providing
interventions, despite having similarities with DSWD and JFC. In terms of controlling
issues such as molestations and abuse inside the shelter, DSWD has no clout to
investigate such matters as it is a problem of the local government. Moreover,
measures done by the city government are usually to apprehend the street homeless
to discourage them from frequenting the public streets of Manila.
With the lack of welfare services addressing specifically the street homeless
and the measures undertaken by the city government such as apprehending them as
vagrants and criminals, the homeless have become a marginalized group. However,
the homeless can be located within the confines of churches as they are accepted by
religious groups who do not select recipients of their feeding programs. Though
assistance is given to the street homeless, they are nevertheless limited to short-
term reliefs.
Given these realities, welfare structures catering to the street homeless need
to be modified if they are to address the issue of homelessness. As of current, long-
term solutions to homelessness are difficult to attain as the street homeless have
become an unintended marginalized group trapped with only short-term strategies to
survive their daily life.

CHAPTER 4
PROFILE OF THE ―YAGIT‖:

THE STREET HOMELESS OF MANILA
This chapter presents a general profile of the street homeless respondents. It
also highlights the different reasons why they ended up in the streets of Manila.
Moreover, it discusses how they became homeless and how they were introduced into
the street life and socialized to certain survival strategies.
Identifying the “Yagit”:

Street Homeless in
Manila
In the streets, homeless people are known by different names. Within the feeding
programs, they are most commonly called ―yagit” and “young ones‖ by church organizers
and amongst themselves. Though the homeless did not know where these terms came
from, they have acquired it as part of street language. Though ―yagit” is still being used
among the homeless, church organizers have changed the term to ―young ones‖
because the latter has a negative and ―degrading‖ connotation and is synonymous to
―rubbish‖ and ―riffraff‖.
The yagit is a highly heterogeneous group. Aside from the common male and
female street homeless, they categorize themselves as: (1) the ―young ones‖ or
―teenagers‖ group, which consist of the minors, (2) the ―tanders” or ―senior citizens‖
88
89
group, who are comprised of the old homeless, (3) the ―blangag” group, which have
couples as members, and the (4) “beki” group, which is for a group of gays. The yagit
further form themselves into more intimate groups which consist of individuals of various
gender and age.
Determining who the yagit are is not easy as they take careful measures to
conceal their appearance to avoid being suspected by the Police. Most of the yagit had
brushes with the law. Table 1 below indicates that 17 out of 30 respondents in this study
had been apprehended by the Manila Police. Majority had been caught for vagrancy
while few had been apprehended for committing petty crimes. Though such activities are
low-level and non-violent crimes, they nevertheless contribute to the ―collective labelling
process‖ (Rosenthal 1994: 121). Homeless people with previous criminal records are
more likely to be arrested by the police. However, most homeless people are associated
with committing petty crimes although they strongly negate the idea of committing such.
This accounts for the homeless‘ need to appear more presentable and to look more
―homed‖. In addition, Police detainment also disrupts their daily routines.
Table 4. Encounter with MPD by Gender

Gender of Respondent
Gay/Lesbia
Male Female n/Bisexual Total
Encount Yes 7 6 4 17
er with No
MPD 3 4 6 13
Total 10 10 10 30
90
The yagit departs from the filthy and dishevelled appearance of a sickly
mendicant and are disguised as clean, homed persons. They usually wear unsoiled
shorts or pants, t-shirts and slippers which rightly fit them, just like any normal homed
person. What makes them identifiable as yagit, however, is the number of bags they
carry wherever they go. With several backpacks in hand, they carry their possessions
such as clothes, food, sleeping mats, the materials they are selling and all their
belongings. Others carry a few bags but have sacks which contain scavenged empty
plastic bottles and cans. Furthermore, most of them are able-bodied and are
characterized by a high level of mobility as they go from one church to another to attend
feeding programs within Manila. If the feeding programs take place simultaneously or
one immediately after another, they would be seen going in groups and traversing inner
roads. They also sleep in groups in parks and closed establishments with their bags.
Lastly, the yagit can be easily identified in feeding programs as they usually frequent
them. During the study, it was easier for this researcher to locate them in churches
during feeding programs where they are concentrated rather than in parks where they
work as they tend to blend in with the crowd. As one homeless describes what a yagit is:
“Yagit kasi yung iba madungis. Maaawa yung pastor,

bibigyan sila ng damit, paliliguin na, kasi may paliguan din
dun. „Yun ang tawag na yagit. T‟saka walang tutulugan,
walang titirahan, sa kalye matutulog. Kahit umulan, silong
lang sa malaking ano. Eh yung mga squatter, meron sila.
„Yung mga tawag na yagit, walang bahay talaga „yun.
Kahit saan-saan „yan natutulog. Binabagansya „yan.”
(Yagit is the term used to describe them because some are
unclean. (Sometimes), the pastor takes pity on them, gives
them clothes, allow them to take a bath because there are
91
washrooms there [in the feeding programs]. [The yagit]

have no place to sleep. They have no home, [so they]
sleep on the streets. The squatters have [homes]. Those
who are called yagit really have no homes. They sleep
anywhere. (Thus), they are apprehended for vagrancy.)
Street Homeless Respondents:

Socio-Demographic Profile and
Causes of Homelessness
Thirty adult street dwellers aged 20 to 52 years who have been living on the
streets of Manila constitute the respondents of this study. Divided into three groups,
there are men and women, and homosexual and bisexual respondents who were
interviewed about their life history, daily routines and survival strategies on the streets.
Because it is difficult to know who the street dwellers are, they were approached and
identified in feeding programs held by religious institutions, which they regularly attend.
From there, they were asked if they had homes and how long they have been staying in
the streets.
Table 2 presents a list of the respondents, their age, place of origin, causes of
homelessness, years in the streets and list of institutions whom they sought assistance
from.
92
Table 5. Profile of Street Homeless Respondents in Manila
6
Name Gender, Age Place of origin Primary Reason for Year/s Institutions Encountered
being in the street in the (Asked for assistance or
street apprehended by police)
―Andrew M, 43, Iligan City, Cabanatuan (goes Wanted to find better job 3 MPD, JFC
Balmes‖ Separated home occasionally)
―Ian Berna‖ M, 49, Cagayan Better job in Manila 10 MPD, PAGCOR, Student
Separated organizations
―Jojo Furtado‖ M, 33, Married Paco Better job in Manila 25 MPD, RAC+
―Jericho Azul‖ M, 31, Married Samar, San Andres Bukid, Ran away from home 25 MPD, RAC, Adamson, TUP
Has 3 wives & Manila (goes home for food
4 children occasionally)
―Jobert M, 38, Married Cebu Wanted to find better job 6 RAC, Boys Town Marikina,
Ramirez‖ Has 2 children Mary‘s Home for Boys
Paranaque
―Jordan M, 21, Married Cagayan Valley Left by parent in Luneta 12 MPD, RAC, GMA Network
Crisanto‖ Has 2 children – grew up in the streets
―Jet Rigor‖ M, 20, Single Masbate Wanted to find better job 3 JFC, RAC, MMDA
months
(with
shelter)
―Mark Valdez‖ M, 28, Single Mindanao Victim of illegal recruiter 3 DSWD-Legarda, JFC
months
(with
shelter)
ah―Soren Juan‖ M, 34, Single Surigao Victim of illegal recruiter 15 (with JFC
shelter)
―Titong Akbar‖ M, 35, Quiapo House burned down in 19 MPD
Separated Baseco
7
―Ana Torres‖ F, 23, Married Cebu Wanted to find parent 8 None
―Gloria Misa‖ F, 27, Bicol Ran away—conflict with 1 MPD, RAC, Boys Town-
Separated parent Marikina
―Mira de Alas‖ F, 30, Married Masbate House burned down 10 RAC
Has 5 children
―Maria Ona‖ F, 50, Married Novaliches Ran away—conflict with 30 MPD, RAC
parent
6
Names have been changed to protect respondents.
7
According to respondents, married may refer to legally married couples or unmarried partners who assume married roles.
93
Name Gender, Age Place of origin Primary Reason for being Year/s in Institutions Encountered
in the street the (Asked for assistance or
street apprehended by police)
―Myra Lopez‖ F, 27, Married Pandacan, Manila Ran away—conflict with 2 None
parent
―Sarah Robles‖ F, 40, Married Bicol Ran away—abused by aunt 27 MPD, RAC,
DSWD- Bulacan
―Vina Samar‖ F, 22, Married Bicol, Laguna Seeking for treatment in 7 months MPD, GMA Network
Manila
―Jonalyn Serna‖ F, 20, Married Leyte, Manila House burned down 8 MPD, RAC, Boys Town-
Has 3 children Marikina
―Lea Reyes‖ F, 38, Married Mindoro, Cebu Wanted to find better job 6 MPD, RAC, Boys Town-
Has 2 children Marikina, Mary‘s Home for
Boys Paranaque
―Mona Realta‖ F, 48, Separated Las Pinas (goes home Ran away—family conflict, 31 RAC
Has 5 children occasionally) raped by sibling
―Arnold Araullo‖ H/B-Gay, 36, San Andres Bukid, Manila (lives Ran away before but 20 MPD, RAC
Single; had with relatives) frequents streets for jobs
estranged wife &
son
―Ana Rico‖ H/B-Bisexual, 24, Makati Ran away— conflict/ 3 RAC , Boys Town- Marikina
Married wanted freedom from
Has 1 child parents
―Aries Bormata‖ H/B-Gay, 45, San Jose del Monte, Bulacan Ran away— conflict/ 26 MPD, RAC
Single wanted freedom from
parents
―Bojo‖ H/B-Gay, 34, Samar House burned down; 10 RAC, MPD, Barangay
Single Lives with family in Baseco Frequents streets for job Boys Town-Marikina
―Ephraim‖ H/B-Gay, 23, In a Cagayan Valley, Bulacan Ran away—conflict/ wanted 2 Park Guards
relationship (mother) freedom from parents
―Francis Morales‖ H/B-Gay, 34, Mindanao, came back to Manila Victim of illegal recruiter 12 RAC+
Single due to peace conflict
―Lawrence‖ H/B-Bisexual, 22, Manila Ran away—conflict/ wanted 2 REMAR, RAC
In a relationship freedom from parents
―Jeremiah H/B-Gay, 22, In a Las Pinas Ran away—conflict with 3 months None
Cortez‖ relationship relative/ wanted freedom
―Janus Alberto‖ H/B-Gay, 30, Samar Victim of illegal recruiter 15 RAC, MPD
Single
―Nila Letran‖ H/B-Lesbian, 37, Manila Grew up in the streets 30 RAC, Boys Town- Marikina
Married
94
Table 3 shows a summary of the profile of the respondents in terms of age,
educational attainment, civil status, place of origin and years in the street. The
highlighted portions indicate that majority of respondents belong to the respective
category. Possible explanations accounting for such percentages are elaborated in
the succeeding sections.
Table 6. Summary Profile of Homeless Respondents

(in percentages)
Variables % of total
(n=30)
Age 20-30 47%
31-41 37%
42-52 17%
Educational Primary 50%
Attainment of
Secondary 43%
Respondents
Tertiary 7%
Vocational 0%
Civil Status Single 30%
Married/ In a
8 57%
relationship
Separated 13%
Place of Origin Manila 23%
Luzon area
(outside Manila) 33%
Visayas area 13%

Mindanao area 17%
Cities near Manila 13%
Years in the Street 1 month to 1 year 17%
2 to 11 years 40%
12 to 21 years 20%
22 to 31 years 23%
8
The civil status „married‟ and „in a relationship‟ were merged for several reasons. Most street
homeless claim that they are married or have spouses, but do not specify whether their marriage is
legal or not. Moreover, there are street homeless claiming to be „married‟ to street partners but have
homed spouses to whom they are separated.
95
Majority (50%) of the respondents are aged 20 to 30 years. Thirty seven
percent, on the other hand, are aged 31 to 41 years. Only 17 percent are aged 42 to
52 years. This shows that majority of street homeless respondents belong to the
early adult category.
In terms of educational attainment, only 50 percent only finished or at least
reached primary school while 43 percent of respondents also reached high school.
Only 7 percent have reached tertiary education.
Most respondents also claim to be married or in a relationship. This
comprises 57 percent of all the respondents. Only 30 percent attest that they are
single or unmarried. Lastly, 13 percent are separated or have no current partners.
In terms of place of origin, 33 percent of respondents came from Luzon. At
least 23 percent came from within Manila. 17 percent were originally from Mindanao.
13 percent of respondents came from the Visayas region and cities near Manila.
Lastly, most of them have been in the streets from 2 to 11 years at 40
percent, while 23 percent have been in the streets from 22 to 31 years. 20 percent
have been staying in the streets from 12 to 21 years, while 17 percent have only
been in the streets from a month to a year.
More specifically, Table 4 shows a summary of the statistical profile of the
respondents according to gender. It includes their age, educational attainment, civil
status, place of origin and years in the street. These are elaborated in the
succeeding sections.
96
Table 4. Summary of Statistical Profile of Homeless Respondents by Gender
Variables Gender of Respondent

Homosexua
Male Female l/Bisexual
Age Recoded 20-30 .30 .60 .50
31-41 .50 .20 .40
42-52 .20 .20 .10
Educational Primary .20 .80 .50
Attainment of Secondary .70 .20 .40
Respondents
Tertiary .10 .00 .10
Vocational
.00 .00 .00
Civil Status Single .40 .00 .50
Married/ In a
.40 .90 .50
relationship
Separated .20 .10 .00
Place of Origin Manila .20 .20 .30
Luzon area
(outside Manila) .20 .40 .20
Visayas area .20 .20 .20

Mindanao area .40 .00 .10
Cities near
.00 .20 .20
Manila
Years in the 1 month to 1
.20 .20 .10
Street Recoded year
2 to 11 years .30 .50 .40
12 to 21 years .20 .00 .30
22 to 31 years .30 .30 .20
Male Street Homeless. Male street homeless respondents have varying
characteristics in terms of age, educational attainment, civil status, place of origin
and years in the street.

97
Out of ten male respondents, 50 percent are aged 31 to 41 years, which
comprise the majority. Only 30 percent are aged 31 to 41 years and 20 percent
consist of 42 to 52 years old. Most male respondents have reached secondary
education at 70 percent, while 20 percent have finished primary school and only 10
percent attained tertiary education. In terms of civil status, married and single male
street homeless are equal at 40 percent. Only 20 percent are separated. Most
respondents (40%) came from the Mindanao area. The remaining respondents came
from Manila, Luzon and Visayas areas at 20 percent each. No male respondents
came from cities near Manila.
Their length of stay in the streets is, however, more varied. Thirty percent of
respondents have been in the streets from 2 to 11 years and from 22 to 31 years.
Twenty percent, on the other hand, have been in the streets for less than 1 year, and
from 22 to 31 years.
Male respondents ended up in the streets due to several reasons. One major
cause is due to lack of work opportunities in their home provinces. Fifty percent of
male respondents believe that job opportunities are better in the city than in their
respective provinces. As such, they migrate to the cities in the hope of finding jobs.
However, upon realizing how difficult it is to obtain a job, they end up in the streets
as part of the homeless group. Jobert Ramirez, 38, believed that better opportunities
await him in Manila. As he says:
“Dahil sa kahirapan ng buhay aming sa Mindoro,

pumunta kami sa Maynila. Nagbabasakali kami na
suswertehin kami amin. Nagbabakasakali kami na
98
makahanap ng stable na trabaho, kaso po eh minalas

yung buhay namin.” (Because of the difficult life we had
in Mindoro, we went to Manila. We were hoping that
we‘d be luckier here. We were hoping that we‘d find a
stable job, but we ended up unlucky.)
Male respondents also found themselves victims of illegal recruiters. These
respondents mostly came from the Visayas and Mindanao regions. They were
recruited by someone they knew and were brought to Manila for a certain amount.
However, upon arrival at the pier, they were left by their recruiters who then took
their money and belongings. This is what happened to 28-year old Mark Valdez.
Believing he will obtain a higher income in Manila, he went along with an illegal
recruiter who eventually stole his things and left him:
“From ano, Mindanao. Ano ako du‟n, chief ng kuryente

sa hotel may isa akong kasama na nagyaya sa akin
pumunta ng Maynila. Dahil sabi niya recruiter siya,
pumayag ako. Sabi ko, „Sige, maganda naman du‟n sa
Maynila, malaki din ang suweldo doon‟. Pagka-dating
namin dito noong nakaraang buwan, pagbaba namin
sa pier, umupo kami sandali, sabi niya, „Brad, alis
muna ako, may puntahan lang‟. Pagbalik naman siya
may dala ng pagkain, ako naman sabi ko, „Sandali lang
ikaw naman muna diyan maiwan, magbibihis ako‟.
Pagbalik ko wala na iyong bag ko. Naghintay ako sa
kanya hanggang 3am, wala talaga hindi na bumalik...
Kinabukasan, dahil wala na nga akong pera, kailangan
gumawa ng paraan para mabuhay...” (I am from
Mindanao where I worked as an electrical chief
[supervisor] in a hotel. I have a co-worker who invited
me to go to Manila. He said he was a recruiter so I
agreed. I said, ―Alright, it would be good to go there in
Manila, the pay is bigger‘. When we arrived there last
month and got off the pier, we sat for a while and he
said, ‗Friend, I‘ll leave you for a while, I have to go
99
somewhere.‘ He returned with food. I, then, said, ‗Wait

there, it‘s now my turn to go, I‘ll just change my
clothes‘. When I returned, my bag was missing, [along
with him]. I waited for him until 3 in the morning; he
never returned. The next day, because I didn‘t have
money anymore, I had to find ways in order to survive.)
Ten percent of respondents ended up in the streets after running away from home.
Another ten percent came to the streets when their houses burned accidentally.
Lastly, some respondents were homeless to begin with as they grew up in the
streets.
Female Street Homeless. Unlike the men, the female street homeless respondents
have more concentrated or less varied characteristics in terms of age, educational
attainment, civil status, place of origin and length of stay in the street.
Comprising the majority, 60 percent are aged 20 to 30 years. Only 20 percent
are aged 31 to 41 years and 42 to 52 years. In terms of educational attainment, 80
percent have reached only primary school. 20 percent of respondents have reached
secondary education. No respondent has attained tertiary school or even enrolled in
vocational courses. Having low educational attainment could affect their life chances
in the streets, such as difficulty in looking for a higher paying job.
In terms of civil status, 90 percent of women claim to be married, or in a
relationship with street partners. Only 10 percent claim to be separated. This could
100
mean that women need to have street partners in order to protect themselves from
street risks. This is discussed in the succeeding chapters.
Most female respondents came from the Luzon area such as Bicol, Masbate
and Mindoro. 20 percent originated from within Manila, cities near Manila, and
Visayas. No female respondent came from Mindanao.
Out of ten respondents, 50 percent are comprised of those who have been in
the streets for 2 to 11 years. A considerable 30 percent of female respondents have
been in the streets from 22 to 31 years. Only 20 percent have been in the streets
from one month to a year.
Several reasons appear as causes of homelessness among women. Fifty
percent of respondents became homeless after running away from home due to
different domestic dilemmas. Some respondents came from broken families wherein
their parents separated and had new families. There were also some cases where
respondents ran away because they wanted freedom from their parents. Other
respondents were neglected by their parents and felt that the streets will provide the
attention they are looking for. As Gloria Misa, 27, said:
“Hindi ko makasundo nanay ko eh. Parang kung ituring

ako hindi ako tunay na anak. Bale isang taon pa lang
ako nung mamatay ang tatay ko. Parang malayo ang
loob sa akin ng nanay ko, parang hindi ako anak.
Sinubukan ko manirahan dito sa kalye.” (I can‘t get
along with my mother. It‘s as if I‘m not her child when
she treats me. I was one year old when my father died.
My mother felt distant to me, it‘s almost as if I am not
her child. So, I tried living in the streets.)
101
Others experienced physical and sexual abuse in the hands of relatives. A more
tragic case happened with 48-year old Mona Realta, who experienced sexual assault
from a relative. From then on, her life and future became hopeless:
“Broken family kasi kami. Meron akong problem na

hindi kayang lunasan ng advise lang. Kasi naranasan
ko ang (maging) rape victim... Wala man lang
nagtanggol, and‟yan „yung magulang mo. Umiyak ka,
parang hindi ka anak... Siguro labintatlong taon ako
nu‟n... Pinakamasakit, ano, sarili mo pang dugo... Pero
tinanggap ko „yun, pinatawad ko, dahil sa magulang
ko. Alam nila kung gaano ko kamahal ang magulang
ko...Kasi kung gusto kong pakawalan ang sama ng
loob, pwede...Pero hindi ko kaya. Kasi „yung nakikita
ko, hindi na nga ako pinag-aral, sira na lahat, pati
kinabukasan ko. ‟Yun ang sinasabi nila. May mga
taong hindi nakakaintindi. Ganito ka nga, nilalait. Hindi
nila alam, tumatayo ako ng sarili ko.” (We are a broken
family. I have a problem which can‘t be solved through
advice alone. I was a rape victim...No one defended
me, not even my parents...Even though I cried, they
didn‘t even treat me as their child...I think I was around
thirteen years old...What was more painful was that
[the one who raped me was] my own flesh and
blood...But I accepted that. I forgave him because of
my parents. They know how much I love my parents...I
can let out my anger, that‘s possible...but I can‘t. In the
end, I wasn‘t given the chance to go to school.
Everything was destroyed, even my future. That‘s what
they say. There are some people who don‘t understand
why you live like this on the streets [a homeless]; they
criticize you. They don‘t know that I am doing this so I
can be independent and stand on my own.)
The remaining female respondents came to the streets due to other reasons. Twenty
percent of respondents ended up in the streets when their house burned down.
102
Jonalyn Serna, 20, and Mira de Alas, 30, were living with their husbands and
children when fire struck their community. Because their income was not enough to
afford another house, they sought the streets for temporary shelter. However, street-
based jobs such as scavenging, vending and begging still have not allowed them
access to affordable housing. Aside from this, they have to feed themselves and their
children. As such, they have stayed in the streets longer than they thought they
would. Jonalyn has been in the streets of Ermita with her husband and three children
for eight years. Likewise, Mira has made UN Avenue her home for ten years, along
with her husband and five children. Jonalyn and Mira are examples of people in
already vulnerable positions before they became homeless.
Other respondents have their own reasons for ending up in the streets. Ten
percent moved to Manila because they felt that job opportunities are better than in
their home province. Another ten percent went to Manila to look for their parents, but
ended up in the streets. The last ten percent were seeking medical treatment but
didn‘t have any relatives to stay within the city so they lived in the streets temporarily.
Homosexual and Bisexual Street Homeless. Similar to the male homeless, the
homosexual and bisexual street homeless respondents have more varied distribution
of characteristics such as age, educational attainment, civil status, place of origin
and length of stay in the street. For this study, seven gays, one lesbian, and two
bisexuals were interviewed. Majority of the street homeless are observed to be gay,
while only a few were observed and verified themselves as lesbians.

103
Fifty percent of homosexual and bisexual respondents are aged 20 to 30
years old. Forty percent of the respondents are composed of respondents aged 31 to
41 years. Only 10 percent are aged 42 to 52 years.
In terms of educational attainment, 50 percent have attained primary school.
Only 40 percent have reached secondary education, and 10 percent were able to
enter tertiary school. No respondent had vocational schooling.
In terms of civil status, 50 percent are single. On the other hand, 50 percent
claim to be ‗married‘ or in a relationship with street partners. Some homosexuals and
bisexuals have one or two children, but are with their homed birth mothers. Most,
however, are estranged from them.
Most homosexual and bisexual respondents originally came from within
Manila. This comprises 30 percent of the total number of respondents. 20 percent of
respondents came from Luzon, Visayas and cities near Manila. 10 percent only
originated from Mindanao.
Forty percent of respondents have been in the streets from a span of 2 to 11
years. It also comprises the majority. Thirty percent, on the other hand, have stayed
longer at 12 to 21 years. Twenty percent have been in the streets from 22 to 31
years, while 10 percent have just gotten used to street life from a month to 1 year.
Several reasons led homosexual and bisexual respondents to the streets of
Manila. Majority, or 60 percent, ran away from home. Like the women respondents,
homosexual and bisexual respondents have domestic problems. Some belong to
broken families and had conflicts with their parents and guardians. Most ran away
104
because they wanted to gain attention and feel a sense of belonging, which they
found on the streets. Aries Bormata, 45, is a gay homeless who ran away from home
when he was sixteen years old. He recounts how he came to the streets:
“Naglayas ako sa amin when I was 16 years old dahil I

belong to a broken family and then kumbaga hinanap
ko iyong sarili ko na parang nawawala ako. Kulang ako
sa atensyon... Kumbaga, dumating iyong time na
hinanap ko iyong sarili ko. Parang wala akong
atensyon sa pamilya, ganu‟n. Nakita ko iyon nu‟ng
makasama ko iyong mga kapwa ko batang kalsada.
Still, on my age, on that time na nagsumikap din ako sa
sarili ko. Natuto akong mamasura, natuto akong
makihalubilo sa mga batang lansangan....” (I ran away
from home when I was 16 years old because I belong
to a broken family. I felt lost that time and wanted to
find myself. I lacked attention from my family...There
was a time when I tried to find myself. It‘s like my family
didn‘t give me enough attention, which I found with
fellow street children. But, with my young age, I
persevered. I learned how to scavenge, how to get
along with other street children...)
Other homosexual and bisexual respondents also went to the streets at an early age
because they wanted freedom from their parents and relatives. They found a sense
of belonging with other street children, making street life bearable for some of them.
Twenty percent, on the other hand, were victims of illegal recruiters. Francis
Morales, a 34-year old gay homeless from Mindanao, was brought to Manila twelve
years ago and was held in a house with other recruits. When the illegal recruiters
locked them up and didn‘t give them jobs, he escaped with other recruits. He and his
companions were left with no choice but to depend on the streets.

105
Other respondents came into the streets when their house burned down.
Some have been in the streets since they were young.
Becoming Homeless:
Socialization to the Streets
For most respondents, the transition from having a home to living on the
streets is one of the most difficult phases they have to go through. Not only are they
vulnerable to hunger, harm and bad weather conditions. They are also at the same
time facing the reality of being stripped of self-dignity by losing a home. Most new
homeless tend to have limited knowledge of the streets and are too proud to beg for
money and food. Some would follow a group of homeless people and would gain
knowledge of where the feeding programs are. From there, they would get
acquainted with other homeless people. Sarah Robles, a 40-year old female
respondent who had been on the streets for twenty-seven years, explains how
homeless people get oriented to the street life:
“‟Yung iba raw „pag tinatanong, d‟yan–d‟yan lang ika sa

tabi. Kaya nu‟ng nagtitinda ako ng hopia, sabi
n‟ya,”Saan ba kayo ika pupunta?” sabi ko ika,
“manang, alam mo ika „yung Ermita? Pumunta ka ika
doon, kapag nakita mo „yung mga yagit, du‟n ka na
lang „ka ko sumunod. Oo, malalaman mo „yun. Hindi ka
magugutom.” (Others, when asked would say that [the
feeding programs] are just there. That is why when I
was still selling hopia and someone asked, ‗Where are
you going?‘ I said, ‗Older sister, do you know Ermita?
Go there, you‘ll see the yagit, follow them. You‘ll
immediately find out. You won‘t go hungry.)
106
In most cases however, people who have long been in the streets approach the new
homeless to ask about their condition. They give them food to eat and teach them
the strategies of how to survive in the streets. Susan, who has been in the streets for
ten years, recounts the time when she asked an old man who is now part of their
group:
“Kaya „yung matanda na kasamahan namin na gutom

na gutom, nakita ko du‟n sa Luneta nakaupo. Sabi ko,
“Tatang, kumain ka na ba?” “Hindi pa nga ika, eh.”
Binigyan ko ng isang supot ng hopia. Tapos ang sabi
ko, “Tatang, du‟n ka na lang „ka ko sa amin. Sumama
ka na lang sa akin.” Ngayon, malaki ang pasalamat
niya sa amin. Kami ang nagpapakain sa kanya.” (That
is why the elderly person who was very hungry that
time when I saw him sitting in Luneta. I told him, ‗Old
man, have you eaten?‘ ‗Not yet,‘ he said. I gave him
one pack of hopia and told him, ‗Old man, go with us.
Come with me.‘ He is now with us. He‘s very grateful to
us. We give him food.)
Over time, the new homeless are absorbed by a certain group of old homeless and
sleep, work and eat together with them. In the process, they not only learn the
survival strategies on the streets but also the attitudes, beliefs and norms of being
homeless. More important to note however is the associations they build with other
homeless people which also become the reasons for them to stay on the streets
longer.
Such is what happened to Lawrence, a 20-year old bisexual who ran away
from home, stayed for a week in Luneta Park and lived on water alone. He was so
weak that he wanted to go back to his family. However, a homeless person asked
107
what happened to him and gave him food. He found him kind enough to teach him
the ways of the street. Eventually, he met a group who showed him where he can
look for a job. He entered a canteen and earned 70 pesos for washing dishes. He
soon became a cook and felt that his life became easier when was earning 150
pesos a day. He was also able to stay in the place of his work, take a bath and have
meals. When he lost his job however, he went back to the streets. This time, he
knew what to do.
Despite this, he still found life difficult even if he knew certain strategies to
survive everyday. He always had to worry about three things: (1) where to earn
money, (2) when to run from the police and barangay, and (3) where to take shelter
when it is raining hard. However, he admits that having friends in the streets make it
more bearable. When he and his street friends have no food, they would eat
kaningbaw, or overcooked rice with soup. He admitted that this was far from what he
could eat if he were at home. On the streets however it was enough because he was
with friends.
Becoming homeless entails a certain kind of adjustment to the street life. In
order to survive, it is important to have homeless peers in order to gain access to
street resources such as knowing where to find food, money and secure places to
sleep.
Chapter Summary
108
The street homeless in Manila are commonly known as ―yagit” and ―young
ones‖. In terms of appearance, it is difficult to identify them since they disguise
themselves as homed persons to prevent being apprehended by the police. Going
deeper, the street homeless can be identified through the following characteristics:
(1) carries several bags which contain all their belongings, (2) carries sacks of
scavenged bottles and cans, (3) able-bodied, (4) have a high level of mobility, and,
(5) attends feeding programs held by religious organizations.
Majority of the homeless respondents in this study are male, female, and
homosexual and bisexual adults between the age of 20 and 30 years, have only
reached primary education, are married, and came from the provinces of Luzon.
Majority of respondents have also stayed in the streets from two to eleven years.
Across genders, the numbers differ. In terms of age, it is interesting to note
that women and homosexual and bisexuals comprise mostly of 20 to 30 year olds.
Males are usually older and their ages range from 31 to 41 years. In terms of
educational attainment, most female respondents have reached only primary school,
while males have obtained secondary education. In terms of civil status, majority of
women are married, while gays, lesbians and bisexuals are single. In terms of length
of stay in the streets, women are seen to stay between two to eleven years while
those from other gender have a more dispersed distribution.
There are also different reasons why respondents are in the streets. Most
male respondents who were from rural areas went to the cities to find better job
opportunities. Most female respondents, on the other hand, ran away or left their
109
homes due to family problems. Gays, lesbians and bisexuals both have economic
and familial reasons why they are on the streets. These reasons, however, make the
street dwellers in Manila different from ones described in the literature. Majority of
the homeless in the United States, Europe and Japan are on the streets because of
housing issues and economic restructuring leading to unemployment (Shlay & Rossi
1992). The street dwellers in Manila have more social and economic issues to begin
with. Social issues constitute poor family relations, family problems and being victims
of physical abuse. Economic issues, on the other hand, are the effect of rural to
urban migration with the perception that life is better in the cities.
Becoming homeless is seen as one of the most difficult phases of
homelessness. Coming from a homed life, they face the harsh reality of living in the
streets. They experience certain risks such as hunger and physical harm. They also
undergo a lowering of one‘s pride to beg for food and money and be subjected to
being labelled as criminals. Being newly homeless, it is important that they find other
homeless people who can teach them adaptive street strategies in order to survive.
The beginning of their socialization to the homeless life starts as they meet and go
along with other homeless people in their daily routines of finding food, ways of
earning money and safe spaces to sleep.

CHAPTER 5
ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES
Adaptive strategies play a great part in the lives of the street homeless as they
find alternative forms of subsistence in their non-homed state. These strategies are
important for the homeless to be able to eat, earn money, obtain safe spaces for
sleeping and reduce the risks and vulnerabilities of living on the streets. However, each
street homeless has different strategies as both are shaped by several factors. These
include their relationships with and perceptions of state and non-state entities, as well as
the extent of their social networks. Gender also serves as another factor which shapes
the adaptive strategies they utilize.
This chapter presents the survival strategies of the street homeless according to
gender. It elaborates on how they access basic needs such as food, money and safe
spaces. It also discusses how the homeless perceive state and non-state entities as
supports and constraints to their daily subsistence routines. It also includes a short
discussion on how homeless people justify drinking and substance abuse as coping
strategies on the streets. Lastly, it provides an elaborate description of the social
networks of the homeless and its functions in building adaptive strategies. Beyond
strategies, this chapter also brings in attempts of individuals to get out of their homeless
situation.
110
111
Survival Strategies
of the Street Homeless
in Manila
The main concern of homeless people on the streets is to survive everyday life.
The need to have access to basic needs such as food, money and safe spaces, as well
as their relationships with institutions and other social networks, largely shape their life
paths. In doing so, they form adaptive strategies to meet their daily necessities.
However, male, female, and homosexual and bisexual street homeless tend to respond
differently as they cope with their vulnerabilities and decrease the risks associated with
living on the streets.
Male Street Homeless:

Survival Strategies
Because of their gender, the male homeless are the most stigmatized and
marginalized among the street homeless. They are often seen as criminals and
―suspicious characters‖, thereby leading to their arrest by the police regardless of
whether they committed a crime or not. Furthermore, no programs are specifically
prepared for adult homeless males by government welfare institutions. Most institutions
cater to women, children, elderly and the disabled.
Despite these limitations, male street homeless are able to create survival
strategies for themselves. They are able to meet their everyday needs through street
resources. For food, they mainly rely on feeding programs held by religious
organizations. For earning money, they engage in street-based jobs such as

112
scavenging, vending, and repacking fertilizers. Their social networks enable them to
expand their access to other street resources. In order to cope, they fall into the traps of
alcoholism and substance abuse.
Access to Basic Needs: Food Strategies. Majority of male street homeless respondents
largely depend on feeding programs held by religious organizations for food. Such
feeding programs are held on an almost daily basis in Paco Church, San Sebastian
Church, Ermita Church, United Central Methodist Church, Liwasang Bonifacio, Lawton,
Lacson, Intramuros and Luneta. According to their accounts, this is the daily schedule of
feeding programs around Manila:
Table 7. Schedule of Feeding Programs in Manila
Day Place & Time

Monday None
Tuesday Tatlong Pari, Oroquieta (5-7 pm)

Wednesday Calvary Church, Cubao (5-9 pm)
Thursday United Central Methodist Church, Kalaw (2-5

pm)
Ermita Church, Ermita (5-9 pm)
Friday San Sebastian Church, Manila (6-9 pm)

Saturday Jesus Reigns Ministry, Nakpil (10 am-12 nn)
Sunday Paco Church, Paco (6 am-1 pm)

Jesus Reigns Ministry, Nakpil (10 am-12 nn)
Korean Feeding Program, KKK, Andres
Bonifacio Shrine, Manila (2-5 pm)
Intramuros (5-9 pm)
Daily Sikh Temple, United Nations Avenue, Manila
(6-7 pm)
113
Feeding programs by religious organizations require attendance of spiritual services
before being given food. Such services consist of prayer sessions, bible studies, and
masses. After these, they are provided rice with viand placed in plastic bags. Other
feeding programs give hamburgers, juice, rice porridge and coffee. At times, they would
provide clothing and groceries to the homeless. Aside from these, some feeding
programs, such as that held by Koreans Catholics in Liwasang Bonifacio, offer free
haircut, dental and physical checkups. Feeding programs held in the churches of Paco,
Ermita and San Sebastian allow homeless people to take a bath and wash their clothes.
Male homeless respondents use these opportunities to clean themselves up.
During feeding programs, male respondents tend to be unruly because of the
effect of alcohol. They would come to feeding programs drunk, smoking cigarettes and,
at times, would engage in fights with other homeless males. Majority of homeless males
also tend to sleep and not participate in services which take more than two hours.
Feeding program organizers would wake the sleeping homeless and scold them mildly,
saying that they should not be disrespectful in front of God. Sarah Robles, a 40-year old
homeless who has been in the streets for twenty-seven years, explains her observations
of her peers:
“Sila nakikinig sila. Naka-ganun lang. Kaya kako nakikinig

lang, pagkain lang ata ang inaano niyan. Hindi kako
nakikinig sa salita ng Diyos. Ngayon eh hindi sila kumikibo.
Paano ba kako iyon eh nagmimisa si Father eh natutulog
sila. Dapat kung nagmimisa yung pari, gising sila. Saka
pag sinabing tumayo, tatayo. Eh hindi tatayo, uupo. Gising
nga sila, hindi nga sumusunod.” (Others are listening but
they look lost in thought. If they are listening at all,
sometimes they are just after the food. They aren‘t
listening to the word of God. Sometimes, they don‘t move
114
at all. How can they sleep when the priest is saying mass?
They should be awake when the priest is saying mass.
When they are asked to stand up, they should stand up.
But some won‘t even stand up; they just sit. Even if they
are awake, they aren‘t participating in the mass.)
Regardless of whether homeless males are interested in participating in church services,
most attend feeding programs and consider them as their main sources of food. Their
daily routines are primarily based on the schedules of feeding programs. If there is no
feeding, for example on Mondays, they would either buy food if they have enough
money, find scraps of food in the garbage, ask for excess soup or food from eateries,
drink lots of water, or stay hungry and wait for the next feeding program. As Andrew
Balmes, a 43-year old male who has been in the streets for three years, shared:
”Pag walang feeding, mga plastic namumulot...Pangkain

ko na yung nakukuha ko sa pamumulot maghapon...mga
kwarenta. Yung mga sobra rin sa basurahan, kinakain
namin kung maayos pa.”(When there‘s no feeding, [I]
would scavenge for plastic [bottles]...The money I get from
these is what I would use to buy food...around 40 [pesos].
Sometimes, we also eat the excess food thrown in the
garbage if these are still good.)
Knowledge of new feeding programs is also important, as it lessens their chances of
becoming hungry. Most come to know schedules from being informed by other homeless
people, going with a homeless group, or following them to feeding programs. As Jordan
Crisanto, a 21-year old who has been living on the streets for twelve years, explains how
they came to know of feeding programs:
“May nagsasabi. Kami-kami. Mga kaibigan namin. Kasi

minsan dito, volunteer ako…Pagka sinabi nilang may
115
feeding, takbo agad ako. Ganito ganyan, may feeding

tayo.” (Someone tells us about them. We also [tell each
other]. Our friends tell us. Sometimes, I also volunteer here
so when someone says [there is] feeding, I run to the
(homeless) area and tell them we have a feeding
[program].)
In general, feeding programs are attended by most male homeless respondents
because they are able to eat more frequently. The distance of feeding programs from
one another is also not a problem for them; instead, they say that ―tiyaga”
(perseverance) is important so one can eat. The ability to attend almost all feeding
programs indicates the high mobility of the male homeless respondents.
Work Strategies. Like other homeless, male homeless respondents engage in work
strategies such as scavenging, vending, farming in provinces, and repacking fertilizers.
Others drive pedicabs and do fortune telling. Most of the time, they engage in two to
three work strategies to meet their daily necessities.
Done by almost all homeless, scavenging requires going around the city to look
for empty bottles, softdrink cans and old boxes to sell. They are able to earn 30 to 200
pesos per day, depending on their diligence. They say that the more hardworking one
is, the more money he or she is able to earn. According to them, hard work and
perseverance are important traits if a person wants to survive on the streets.
Vending or selling products is another strategy for the street homeless to earn
money. When they have capital as low as 100 pesos, they engage in selling cigarettes,
candies, toys and picnic mats in parks and in the streets. Ian Berna, a 49-year old who
116
has been in the streets for ten years, has been earns a living through fortune telling in
Luneta Park. However, a friend taught him to sell toys in parks as it is more profitable.
When Ian has capital, he buys toys from Divisoria and sells them in Luneta Park. Other
homeless would sell picnic mats for 20 pesos, giving them a profit of 5 or 10 pesos
depending on how much they got it from Divisoria.
Working in farms and going into repacking fertilizer factories are also work
strategies adopted by the male homeless. A group recruits them at night in Luneta Park
and takes them to farms and factories in Bulacan, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija and other
provinces. They either work in rice fields during harvest or in salt farms, both of which
require heavy work. From this, they are able to earn 1000 to 2000 pesos. The work
usually takes a month or less, but they could go back to Manila anytime.
On the other hand, repacking fertilizers, or what they call rebagan, requires a
more tedious process. They have to repack 50 kilos worth of fertilizers into sacks,
measure the sacks, sew them then carry the sacks into the trucks. It is a twenty-four
hour work, as each sack costs one peso. Majority of those who join the rebagan are
male, but there are also women who do the sewing. Most times, these are their wives
and street partners. Repacking of fertilizers is done in Bataan, Subic, Olongapo and
Batangas. For both jobs, they pay for their own transportation on the way home.
Most of their earnings are spent on basic needs such as food when feeding
programs are not present. They also use them as starting capital for vending. Spending
their earnings for alcohol, cigarettes and possibly for addictive substances such as
solvent is distinctive for homeless males only.

117
Negotiated Spaces. Homeless male respondents occupy spaces which need to be
negotiated most of the time. In terms of space, homeless males deal with issues of
negotiating spaces for rest and work.
Spaces for rest need to be safe from raids conducted by MPD and RAC.
Information of when and where the raids are usually conducted is passed from one
homeless person to another, especially when they meet in feeding programs. Jojo
Furtado, a 33-year old who has been in the streets of Manila for twenty-five years,
experienced volunteering in RAC for six years and had once joined rescue operations.
He used to tell his homeless peers about the raid and which places were safe to stay:
“Oo, lilipat na naman sila. Sinasabihan din namin sila na sa

susunod, „wag na kayo sa dati niyong tinutulugan. Sa iba
naman, „wag doon sa dinadaanan ni mayor. Kung hindi
man, sa hindi full public view ng tao... Kasi kapag exposed
sa tao, siyempre, inaano nila roon, lalo na kung sa daanan
yan, exposed sa tao. Siyempre „yung mismong
nagrereklamo e „yung may mga establisyemento, „yung
may mga trabaho, kung hindi man, „yung barangay...”
(Yes, they need to transfer. We tell them that next time,
they shouldn‘t sleep in the same place where they are
sleeping. Sometimes, we tell them they shouldn‘t sleep
areas where the mayor passes by. If they are exposed in
public, of course, those with business establishments,
those who work there, or sometimes. even the barangay
people will complain...)
Such method employed by RAC is considered to be a form of displacement (Snow and
Mulcahy 2001), where the homeless are discouraged to occupy spaces they frequently
occupy. The homeless, in turn, respond to these warnings by quickly moving to a safer
118
place for fear of being detained in the shelter or police stations. Others would join groups
and sleep in parks or in front of churches where feeding programs are held, most of
which require them to ask for permission to stay there. Some would sleep in closed
establishments and universities and would ask for permission from security guards or
owners. For the most part, they are allowed to do so as long as they clean up the space
they occupied. Moreover, they have to wake up before the establishments open. The
same goes for the rest of the street homeless. They have to wake up early in the
morning to move out of sight. Otherwise, the police or other institutions would arrest
them for vagrancy.
Spaces for earning a living are also similarly limited. Vending is mostly prohibited
especially when they have no permits. Homeless males, along with their street partners,
sell toys, candies, picnic mats and other products in Luneta Park. However, they are
always on the lookout for the police or park guards because vending is generally
prohibited and raids are conducted periodically. Information is quickly passed among the
homeless when there are instances like this. Moreover, being apprehended by
authorities such as the police tends to limit not only the work spaces of the homeless but
also their chances for earning more money. Jericho Azul, a 31-year old married
homeless who has been in the streets for twenty-five years, explains how difficult it is to
earn money given certain constraints:
“Kapag minsan naman, katulad ng ganito,

naghahanapbuhay ka ng marangal huhulihin ka rin. Kaya
lang sasabihan ka pa na kumuha ka ng permit. Paano ka
naman kukuha ng permit? Dati sa Sta. Cruz, nagtinda din
119
ako ng buko. Ilang taon din akong nagtinda. Mahigit

tatlong taon din ako nagtinda ng buko. Kaya lang, hinuhuli
kami eh. Pagka hinuhuli kami, tinutubos kami ng paninda
namin. Dalawang daan ang tubos. Bukod pa ‟yung
binibigay namin sa araw-araw na bawat isang pulis na
nangongolekta sa amin doon eh minsan bente, sampu.”
(Sometimes, even if you try to earn money in a decent
way, you still get apprehended. The tell you to get a permit.
But how will you get a permit? I used to sell buco in Sta.
Cruz. I was doing that for many years. For more than three
years, I sold buco there. But then, sometimes we get
caught. The fine is 200 pesos. This is aside from what we
give to each policeman everyday. They collect tenn to
twenty [pesos] from us everyday.‖
As can be seen, the male homeless have limited options as to the space they occupy.
Beyond these, however, it is the homeless males who are able to traverse a wider space
as compared to females. Despite having street partners, the role of looking after the
children, if they have any, is assigned to the female or their homed relatives. As such, it
is easier for them to have higher mobility in terms of attending feeding programs, earning
money and accessing basic needs.
Relationship with Institutions. Two types of institutions deal with the male homeless, as
well as the female and the homosexual and bisexual homeless respondents:
government institutions and religious organizations. Government institutions include the
Manila Police District (MPD), Reception and Action Center (RAC), Jose Fabella Center
(JFC), and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). Religious
organizations who give out feeding programs include charismatic groups from San
Sebastian Church, Ermita Church, Paco Church, among others.

120
Majority of male homeless respondents mostly encounter MPD in their street life.
However, basing on their experiences, they perceive this institution mainly as a form of
constraint rather than as support.
The Manila Police District has actively shape the way most homeless live their
everyday lives. With an order from the City Hall to clear the streets, the MPD would help
clear the streets on people sleeping on them. Among the homeless, it is often the men
who are detained or jailed for vagrancy for a number of times. With their tattoos and
rugged appearance, they are usually the ones questioned as they are perceived to be
―suspiciously looking persons‖. Though the Police calls this ―police instinct‖, they equate
suspicious appearance such as having distinct tattoos to that of being ex-convicts.
Moreover, people who hang out with no official business in certain areas are prone to be
suspected. The Police confirm their suspicions with observations of possession of sharp
objects as these can be used for committing petty crimes. The Police are also more
likely to apprehend male and other homeless when they violate ordinances such as
drinking in public, littering, urinating in public, making noises at night, staying and
sleeping in the streets past curfew, among others. The most common charge filed
against most street homeless, however, is still vagrancy, or bagansya.
The street homeless lists three types of vagrancy for which they would be likely
arrested: (1) bagansya tulala (vagrancy-dazed), where one is arrested for being a
―suspicious character under the influence of drugs‖, (2) bagansya tato (vagrancy-tattoo),
where one is considered a suspicious character because of his/her tattoos, and (3)
bagansya suspetsa (vagrancy-suspicious), where one is generally considered suspect

121
because they have been arrested many times for vagrancy and have tattoos. Among
those in the last category are those who used to commit petty crimes, have already
stopped yet are somehow still mistaken as thieves. When caught, the homeless struggle
to explain that they did nothing wrong. In the end however, they still submit to the Police
because they would soon be let go anyway.
At one time or another, they had been held in several police stations (PS) in
Manila: Singko (PS-5 in Ermita), Tres (PS-3 in Sta. Cruz), Onse (PS-11 in Binondo),
Sais (PS-6 in Sta. Ana), and Otso (PS-8 in Manila). The most ―infamous‖ police station
for the homeless is Singko because most of them had been detained here. Singko
covers most of the spaces that the homeless are in, namely Rizal Park, Paco, Lawton,
Intramuros, Baseco and Manila Bay.
Being detained inside the police station is also difficult for most street homeless. Without
visitors, they wouldn‘t have any food to eat. According to them, the Police only give them
water to drink. The Police rationalized this by claiming that the stations have no funds to
provide food for detainees.
From the homeless‘ point of view however, paying a certain amount in order to
get out of detention is imposed by corrupt policemen. The city does have a law which
requires violators to pay a fine of 110 pesos as dictated by the city ordinance on
vagrancy. But because the homeless are ignorant of the law, they dubbed the Police as
PNP, or “penge ng pera” (give me money) instead of what it originally stands for.
According to them, the Police asks them to give them 100 or 200 pesos. If some
homeless individuals are not able to do so, they have to wait for a week or so before
122
they can get out. However, those who were able to give money get out first. Some, on
the other hand, engage in errands and other services in order to get out. In exchange for
freedom, the street homeless sweep the floor of the police station and wash police
vehicles.
Other homeless individuals did go to jail for committing robbery. Jericho Azul
experienced going to jail in 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2002. He was sentenced to
spend two years in jail for robbery and was freed in 2004. To date, he does not engage
in robbery anymore because he found life inside prison very difficult especially when one
has no family members to visit. He opined that one is lucky if he can get out; however, if
one is unlucky, he can be brought to Muntinlupa and in other places and it will take years
before he could go free. This shows how homeless people experience arrest and the
prison life. Because of such treatment by the Police, homeless people have a negative
perception of the justice system. They feel that they are also deprived of their rights as
they are only street people.
For most homeless people, encounter with the Police does not only disrupt
their routines but also their opportunities to earn decent money. As mentioned earlier,
Jericho had been selling buco juice in a kariton (cart) for three years but the Police often
apprehend him. He also experienced driving a pedicab (bicycle ride for commuters), but
since he had no permit he also got apprehended. This shows how government
institutions, such as the Police, limit the opportunities of homeless people from having
decent means of earning. As such, some homeless males resort to petty crimes
because they find it easier to earn money despite the risks associated with it.
123
Drinking and Substance Abuse as Coping Strategy. Some male homeless find it difficult
to live in the streets. In order to cope with the depression that ensues from this, they
resort to alcoholism and substance abuse. Though this was not admitted by male
respondents themselves, Aries Bormata, a 45-year old gay homeless who has been in
the streets for twenty-six years, attest that it happens:
“...alalahanin nila na ang lahat ng batang lansangan, sa

isang daang porsyento, walo hanggang sampung
porsyento lang dyan ang matino...pero the rest, may bisyo
yan. Kung hindi man sugapa sa alak, adik yan, solvent
yan...rugby [ang gamit nila].” (...they should remember that
out of all street children, there are only eight to ten percent
who are sober. The rest have vices. If they are not
addicted to alcohol, they are drug addicts or solvent-
users...They sniff rugby.)
During the study, some male respondents were observed to be drunk during and
outside the feeding programs. They claim they have personal problems and drinking
make them temporarily forget their situation. Also, drinking alcohol with friends is a form
of getting along with the group and establishing solidarity with them. Moreover, hints of
substance abuse (sniffing solvent) can be detected although none were observed to be
under the influence of substance abuse during the interviews. Some women also
indicated that their husbands would sometimes use rugby. The husbands confirmed this
although they would say that this was in the past.

124
Social Networks of Male Homeless Respondents. The social networks of male homeless
respondents are grounded on survival in the streets. Most of them find that living with a
group provides better access to resources as well as protection from street
vulnerabilities.
Male homeless develop intimate networks by obtaining street partners and
adopting new homeless into their groups. They obtain street partners despite having
wives during their homed life. When asked why this is so, the respondents would say
that they are separated and that their wives have moved on with their lives and already
have different partners as well. Some homeless even have more than one street partner.
Having lived in the streets for twenty five streets, Jericho Azul has three street partners
with four children. This seemed acceptable, as long as he is able to support his children.
As a result, however, he has to find strategies to earn more money. He says that he is
currently a volunteer at the Ermita Church and is hopeful to get a job as an ice cream
vendor as one of its benefits.
Adopting new homeless is another strategy that the male homeless, as well as
other homeless, employ. The new homeless are adopted and taught strategies by the
homeless who were already on the streets for a long time. Once incorporated into the
group, they perform roles that are similar to a normal family unit. The ―alaga” (ward) or
―ampon” (adopted), as they are called, show their respect and gratitude to those who
accommodated them in their groups by contributing a portion of their earnings to the
group and sharing what they have. They treat those who adopted them like their own
parents and older siblings and even call them “nanay” (mother) and “tatay” (father).
125
However, discords happen when the adopted homeless demonstrates ingratitude or lack
of ―utang na loob”. Jordan Crisanto, a 21 year old who has adopted several homeless
throughout his twelve years in the streets, say:
“Binigyan mo, halimbawa, pinakitaan mo ng ganitong

kabaitan, binihisan mo. Mamaya-maya, sasabihin, „May
pinakain ka ba sa akin para galangin kita?‟ Mga ganung
salita ba na imbes, matutuwa ka na sabihin, salamat
binigyan mo ako ng ganito. Eh ang isusukli pa sayo,
katarantaduhan, kawalanghiyaan. Kaya imbes na bukal pa
sa kalooban mo, bahala ka na sa buhay mo.” (You gave
them a favor, for example. You showed them kindness or
you gave them clothes. Later on, they would even tell you,
‘Did you feed me enough for me to respect you?‘ They
would tell you this instead of saying, ‗Thank you for giving
me this and that.‘ They would repay you with ingratitude.
That‘s why rather than showing them kindness, I just tell
them to take care of themselves.)
Those who violate trust experience isolation from their group. However, this is only
temporary as they would again be in good terms with one another after a while. This
could be due to the importance of cooperating with one another in order to survive and
gain more access to resources.
Male homeless also belong to certain groups which are deemed dangerous
because members engage in criminal activities and gang wars. These include the: (1)
BNG, or Bahala na Gang, a dangerous group with members who are ex-convicts and
who resort to stabbing during fights; (2) the STK, or Sputnik Gang; and, (3) the BCJ32,
or Batang City Jail, whose members are robbers and thieves who engage in fights and
126
bully people. Evidences of these strong groups bullying weaker groups exist. Jojo
Furtado shares his experiences again on the dynamics of such street groups:
“Dito kasi, kailangan dito, matuto kang lumaban, pag hindi

ka marunong lumaban, kakayan-kayanin ka ng kapwa mo
dito. Kaya ako yung iba dito na kinakaya-kayanan,
sinasabihan ko yang ganun: kapag hindi kayo marunong
lumaban dito, kakayan-kayanin kayo. Dito pare-pareho
lang tayo. Huwag niyo isipin na mas malaki sa‟yo,
maraming tattoo sa‟yo yan--yung tattoo hindi yan
nabubuhay. Pero kapag yang tattoo niya pinalo niya sa
buhay, dun ka matakot. Yun ang hinahalimbawa ko sa
kanila. Kasi yung iba rito kinakaya-kayanan lang ng kapwa
nila eh. Kaya kapag nakikita ko, nagkakagulo. Eh papaano
hindi kasi nila kayang ipagtanggol yung sarili nila kaya ko
sila tinutulungan. Ganun ang ginagawa ko.” (Here [on the
streets], it is important that you know how to fight. If you
don‘t, you‘ll be bullied by your peers. That is why I advise
those who get bullied: if you don‘t fight here, you‘ll get
bullied. We‘re all the same here. Don‘t think that just
because they‘re bigger and that they have more tattoos
than you [they are better]. Those tattoos aren‘t alive. If he
uses his tattooed arm to hit others, then you should be
afraid. That is what I tell them. There are others here who
are bullied by their peers. When I see this, then chaos
ensues. Since they can‘t fight for themselves, I help them.
That‘s what I do.)
There are, however, male homeless who try to get along with these groups. They
believe that this can provide them protection from being bullied by one of these groups.
Because of this, their daily paths are disrupted as they are compelled to go with these
groups; else harm may befall on them. As Jobert Ramirez, a 38-year old who has been
in the streets for six years with his wife, says when he was invited by his peers to drink
rather than look for work:

127
”Matagal ko na kasing kakilala yung mga tao na yun. Kaya

nakikisama lang ako. Siyempre....o ayan patayin ka diyan.
E hindi naman marunong makisama yan eh, patayin na
yan. Patayin ka. Eh sa kalye lang po kami natutulog eh...O
siyempre, pag hindi ka marunong makisama, ay wala na
‟tong pakisama, ano, patayin na natin ‟to. Ganoon lang po
ang takbo ng buhay sa kalye, ate”. (I‘ve known these
people for some time. That is why I try to get along with
them. What if they kill me? Ah, he doesn‘t know how to get
along with us, let‘s kill him. You‘ll get killed here. We‘re
sleeping on the streets [after all]...Of course, if we can‘t get
along with them, [they could always say] this person does
not know how to get along, let‘s kill him. That‘s life on the
streets, sister.)
Discord among male homeless is most common when property and trust issues
are crossed. This happens when those they know take their personal belongings such
as bags, clothes and money. At times, conflict ensues when street partners cheat on
each other with their friends. Sometimes, they also fight over a bottle they got from
scavenging. Because of this, some personally prefer not to get too intimate with certain
groups due to trust issues. Furthermore, since they meet and interact in feeding
programs and on the streets, they think that getting along with each other is more
beneficial than holding grudges. As such, grudges are easily resolved because getting
along is a main factor in surviving the streets. As Jericho Azul elaborates:
“Minsan nag-aaway away lang kami...Pero hindi mo

naman sabihin mong away na matagalan. Minsan,
nagsasagutan lang sa salita, „yung ganun. Ganun, ganun
lang, sa bibig, pero minsan nagkakasapakan. Pero
kinabukasan, bati na agad.” (We fight sometimes but this
does not last long. We just get into a heated argument but
it‘s just that. All talk. Sometimes though, we end up hitting
each other. But the next day, we‘re back to being good
terms with one another.)
128
Male homeless also have connections with homed networks that are important for them
to have better access to resources. These consist of security guards, owners of eateries
and feeding program organizers. Bonds with security guards are essential for safe
sleeping spaces, while owners of eateries can be asked for excess food such as burnt
rice and soup. Relationship with feeding program organizers, however, needs to be
developed within the scope of trust and commitment. When organizers see these traits
in the male homeless, they allow them to become volunteers in feeding programs.
Volunteers mainly function as mediators between organizers and program recipients.
They assist in facilitating programs by checking attendance and ensuring order. They
also serve as readers and choir singers in activities. For the male homeless, this enables
them to have more access and benefits such as extra food, the choice of donated
clothes, and allowances for singing in choirs or reading in spiritual services, among
others. Most importantly, being volunteers qualify them to certain programs such as
transportation assistance back to their provinces or being given livelihood opportunities
like being vendors of Selecta, an ice cream company. In general, becoming volunteers
enable them to achieve priority status (Rowe and Wolch 1990) which provides them
access to more resources than what can be obtained in the streets alone. For the male
homeless, they use this as a form of strategy to get ahead.
Attempts to Get Out of Homelessness. Male homeless respondents have attempted to
get out of their current state. Usually, the goal of the new homeless is to get out of the
129
streets and go back to his hometown. Most respondents have undergone this phase
where they tried to earn to save money to go back to their provinces, or seek assistance
from government institutions. However, most go back upon realizing that homed life
presents dilemmas as well. This was the case with Andrew Balmes, a 43-year old
homeless from Iligan who came to Manila with a religious group three years ago to look
for his mother. When he found that his search was futile, he decided to go back with the
group; however, they said that there weren‘t enough funds for him to go back. As such,
Andrew was left in Manila to roam the streets. He lived by scavenging for empty plastic
bottles for a while, but found life difficult in the streets. He sought help from the Jose
Fabella Center transportation assistance program which brought him back to Iligan.
Upon arriving in Iligan, he realized that there was no livelihood there; hence, he decided
to go back. As he recounts:
“Pagkatapos pinauwi ako ng JFC, yung Jose Fabella

Center. Pagkatapos, pagdating ko sa Visayas, pinauwi na
rin ako sa Mindanao, sa Iligan City. Walang trabaho sa
Iligan City, bumalik na naman ako dito. Tatlong taon na rin
ako dito... Wala ring klaro yung trabaho ko doon eh, kaya
nanatili ako rito.” (I was sent home by JFC or Jose Fabella
Center. When I arrived in the Visayas, I was sent home to
Mindanao, in Iligan City. [Since] there are no jobs in Iligan
City, I went back here. I‘ve been here for three years
now....There‘s no job for me there, so I decided to stay
here.)
For most male homeless respondents, the lack of work opportunities in the rural areas
pushes them to go back to Manila. Also, with their low educational attainment, they find it
difficult to look for a more stable job and find better income earning strategies on the
130
streets. Some of them go back home occasionally when they have saved enough
money, but only to visit their families.
Such preference for the street life is reflected in how short-term male homeless
respondents plan their future. Six out of ten respondents do not have concrete plans
other than expanding their work strategies. Jericho Azul wants to pursue being a
volunteer in Ermita Church so he can be a Selecta ice cream vendor. Ian Berna plans to
continue selling toys and doing fortune telling in Luneta where he is able to earn 130 to
570 pesos a day.
There are, however, those who still want to go home permanently. Of the ten
male respondents, only four want to go back to their hometown. Three of them are newly
homeless and are in JFC waiting to go back home. The other one, Jobert Ramirez, 38, is
still in the streets with his wife. Having been on the streets for six years, he finds life
difficult and is currently seeking information on how to go home with government
assistance.
Female Street Homeless:

Survival Strategies
Of the three genders, the female street homeless are the most vulnerable group
when it comes to living on the streets. Threats of physical and sexual attacks, as well as
structural vulnerabilities such as limited educational attainment, open the female
homeless to greater street risks. As a way to cope, the female street homeless would
hook up street partners and join groups (Rowe and Wolch 1990:191) to protect them and
131
reduce street risks. Such an arrangement shapes the way they create adaptive
strategies. Because they are with a group, their strategies are directed at contributing to
the resources rather than mainly surviving for themselves.
Access to Basic Needs: Food. Like the male homeless respondents, majority of female
homeless respondents attend at least four to six feeding programs in a week. They treat
these programs as main sources of food. As mentioned by respondents, these feeding
programs are held in Paco Church, San Sebastian Church, KKK-Liwasang Bonifacio,
United Central Methodist Church, Intramuros and Plaza Dilao. There are, however,
female homeless respondents who attend one or two feeding programs. They find the
location of the other feeding programs far and prefer to stay in one area. These are
mostly female respondents who have children with them on the streets.
Unlike the male homeless who are asleep and less participative, most female
homeless are enthusiastic in performing spiritual services. They sing, clap, dance, pay
attention during songs and church activities, and observe the rules of the feeding
programs. It is not surprising that during the interviews most female homeless
respondents present themselves to be religious in their manner of speaking. Female
homeless are also more closely bonded with the feeding program organizers. They can
depend on them for material and emotional support beyond feeding programs. Feeding
program organizers would sometimes share with them food such as rice. On other
times, they share their life stories with the organizers.

132
Aside from the feeding programs, female homeless respondents obtain food from
other homed networks. They would ask for excess food such as ―sabaw” (soup) and
―tutong” (burnt rice) from the owners of the eateries.
Work Strategies. Female homeless respondents mainly engage in scavenging, vending
and begging. Because female homeless need street partners and groups for protection,
most of their earnings and resources are meant to be shared rather than be spent for
themselves.
Most females engage in scavenging and earn from 10 to 80 pesos. This is less
than what the males earn because females with partners and children tend to stay in one
place. As such, they spend more effort on other work strategies such as selling
cigarettes, candies and picnic mats in parks. Mira de Alas, a married 30 year old with
five children, supports her husband—a pedicab driver— this way. After food expenses
for her family, she is able to save some capital and ―make it grow‖ through vending. The
same strategy is employed by her 48 year old friend, Mona Realta. They would save
money together and sell candies and cigarettes in Plaza Salamanca, the park in United
Nations Avenue where they mostly stay and sleep.
Some female homeless engage in other strategies. Gloria Misa, 27 years old,
washes clothes for her homeless peers for 20 to 50 pesos during feeding programs. She
also engages in scavenging to increase her earnings. Others sell scrap pieces of hopia
(bean-filled pastry) to their homeless peers for 5 pesos.

133
Out of the three groups of respondents, the female homeless are the ones who
frequently employ begging. They feel that there are people who pity them and will be
able to help them. However, there are those who complain about their begging and tell
them to look for jobs instead. Myra Lopez, 27 years old, recounts how a woman helped
her and her husband:
“Meron din na ale na babae. Sa awa ng Diyos binilhan nya

ng gamot ang asawa ko. Pinakain kami sa Goldilocks.
Binigyan nya kami ng P300 na pera para panggastos
namin, pambili ng gamot. Nagpasalamat ako sa kanya kasi
binigyan nya kami....‟Yung time na „yun, hindi ko rin alam
na tutulungan nya rin ako. Meron din kasi minsan na tao
na... Meron din kasing tao na madamot. Sasabihin bakit
mo bibigyan...Sasabihin damulag ka, anlaki-laki ng
katawan. Kasalanan ba naming ganito ang buhay namin?
Ang sabi nga masama nga magnakaw. Anong gusto niyo,
magnakaw kami?” (There was this one woman. With God‘s
mercy, she bought my husband medicine. She also made
us eat in Goldilocks. She gave us 300 pesos for our
expenses and to buy medicine. I am thankful to her
because she gave us money....At that time, I wasn‘t
expecting her to help me. There are people who...There
are people who are selfish. They will tell us, ‗why should
we give you money?‘ They will say, ‗you‘re big enough,
you have a big body‘. Is it our fault that our lives are like
this? People say it‘s bad to steal. Do they want for us to
steal instead?)
Begging, however, is usually done when money earned from scavenging or vending is
not enough. At times, alms are given by people without being asked. Some female
homeless would stay in one place where students and foreigners would take pity on
them and give them money or leftover food. Others would depend on begging alone.
Jonalyn Serna, a married 20 year old who came to the streets after their house in
134
Baseco burned down, mainly relies on begging where she is able to obtain 30 to 50
pesos a day. Her husband takes care of majority of the earnings through scavenging.
Through their combined income, they are able to feed their two children and survive.
Negotiated Spaces. Women with children traverse a more limited space than the other
women with partners, the men and the homosexuals and bisexuals. Mira, for example,
only attends the feeding program in the United Central Methodist Church near
Salamanca Park. This feeding program happens only during Thursdays, from three to
five in the afternoon. Although there is another feeding program in Ermita Church which
is 650 meters away, Mira does not go there because she finds it is too far. She stays in
Salamanca Park most of the time with her five children. The same goes for Jonalyn who
stays in Ermita Church with her two children. She only attends the feeding program in
Ermita Church every Thursday. For the rest of the week, she and her children depend on
her husband‘s earnings and alms from the people passing by.
On the other hand, homeless women with street partners and without children
are able to traverse wider spaces. They go with their husbands and partners in most
feeding programs and engage in work strategies similar to them. Sarah Robles is a 40
year old married homeless who has lived on the streets with her husband for twenty-
seven years. Wherever her husband goes, she is there. They engage in the same work
strategies to augment their earnings. She repacks fertilizers with her husband in
provinces, sells picnic mats in parks, scavenges for empty plastic bottles and sells hopia.
They are also able to go to most feeding programs in Manila. Without children, she is
135
able to do the same strategies her husband does. Lea Ramirez, 38, also goes with her
husband. She has children but has left them in the care of non-government institutions.
As such, she is able to engage in the same work strategies as her husband.
Majority of female homeless respondents, however, complain about sleeping in
the streets. Without homes, they feel that they have lost the privilege of sleep as they
continuously worry about being arrested. Myra Lopez, 27 years old, has been in the
streets for almost two years. She describes the experience of sleeping in the streets:
“Ako rin po may pangarap rin ako. Sariling bahay para

makaalis na rin ako dito sa kalye. Hirap ng buhay dito eh.
Gising ka maaga. Bitin ang tulog mo. Anong oras ka na
matutulog sa gabi. Minsan dun sa canteen gigising ka ng
alas tres. Pag hindi husto ang tulog mo, parang masakit sa
ulo ang pagtulog mo... Eh sa kalye,hindi ka makatulog pag
tanghali, hindi ka pwedeng matulog kahit na anong oras.
Hindi ako makatulog nun nang nakaupo kasi sanay ako
nakahiga. Maya-maya huhulihin ka na. Hindi ka makatulog
nang diretso.” (I also dream of having my own house so I
can get off the streets. Life is difficult here. You have to
wake up early. We can‘t get enough sleep since we sleep
late at night. Sometimes, in the canteen, you have to wake
up at three. When you haven‘t slept enough, you get a
headache...On the streets you can‘t sleep in the afternoon.
You are not allowed to sleep at any time. I can‘t sleep
sitting up because I am used to lying down. You also worry
about being apprehended. You can‘t get a straight sleep.)
With the worry of being apprehended by the Police and local social welfare, female
homeless respondents are careful in choosing the spaces where they sleep. They
usually sleep in Lawton, Salamanca Park in UN Avenue, Luneta, Quiapo, Ermita, among
others. Like the male homeless, they make sure that they sleep in groups or in areas
136
where they are less likely to be apprehended such as parks, church compounds and
inner streets. They also ask permission from the security guards or owners of
establishments for their sleeping spaces. In return, they have to make sure that the
spaces they slept on are clean.
Relationship with Institutions. Unlike the male homeless, female respondents have less
frequent encounters with government and non-government institutions. From time to
time, they deal with RAC and MPD who arrest them for vagrancy. Most of the time, they
approach religious organizations who provide feeding programs for material resources.
Though existing, they have lesser interaction with other non-government organizations
such as the media and other shelters like Marikina Boys Town and St. Mary‘s Home for
Boys in Paranaque.
Women homeless, especially those with children, are often brought to the
Reception and Action Center, the local shelter in Manila. Majority of those who had been
apprehended by RAC found life difficult inside the shelter. According to them, they are
fed with lugaw (rice porridge) or rice which is sometimes raw, or burnt. The utensils used
are not clean. This bothered some homeless, as they are mixed with those sick with
tuberculosis. The shelter is also filthy.
When she was apprehended, Lea Ramirez‘ firstborn contracted skin diseases
while inside the shelter. Mona Realta, 48 years old and who has been in the streets for
thirty-one years, has experienced being in RAC. She recounted how they were given
137
little food compared with how they were free to choose the food they eat on the streets.
As such, most see RAC as a form of constraint rather than as assistance.
Some women homeless have also experienced being arrested by the Manila
Police District. Unlike the male homeless, the female homeless were easily let go. Gloria
Misa, 27 years old and who has been on the streets for a year was sleeping in the
streets when she and her street partner were arrested. Her partner was drunk and she
was pregnant. The Police brought them to the station, but they let her go because of her
condition. She, however, had to work for her partner‘s release from prison. Like her,
most female homeless had the ‗duty‘ of earning money to pay for the fine of their
partners who were arrested by the Police.
Others, however, were locked up. Being inside prison meant dealing with people
who were of different criminal backgrounds—criminals, robbers and thieves. Lea had the
experience of being caught by the MPD. She was apprehended by the Police for
vagrancy and detained for 24 hours in the police station. According to her, she had to
toughen up while she was inside. Other inmates bullied those who showed weakness.
As a result, others didn‘t gang up on her.
Religious organizations who provide feeding programs offer the most assistance
to the female homeless, as well as for most street homeless. Organizers of Ermita
Church, San Sebastian Church, United Central Methodist Church, among others,
regularly give food and basic needs such as clothes, medicine and hygienic products to
homeless people. On other times, organizers would be sources of emotional support

138
from homeless women. They take the time to listen to the problems and issues that the
homeless are dealing with.
Some homeless women respondents have approached non-government
institutions such as Boys Town in Marikina, St. Mary‘s Home in Paranaque and
television companies such as GMA Network. Lea Ramirez put her two children in Boys
Town and St. Mary‘s so they can have decent homes and a good education. She and
her husband, Jobert, stay on the streets and occasionally visit their children in these
institutions. According to her, the children understand their family‘s situation. Other
homeless have approached GMA Network, a television company. GMA has a foundation
which helps people who are in need. Vina Samar, 22 years old, came to Manila from
Bicol with her husband less than a year ago to have her bulging eye treated. However,
since they have no money, they stay on the streets and seek help from institutions. They
approached the foundation, which only referred them to hospitals that could provide
them free treatment. To this day, Vina is still looking for assistance. She vows that she
will only go home once her eye is treated.
Homeless women have approached government institutions for help as well.
However, they prefer the national instead of local institutions. Jose Fabella Center (JFC),
which is the DSWD shelter in Metro Manila, received positive feedback from those who
have stayed in the shelter. According to them, JFC provide shelter and decent meals for
the street homeless admitted in the shelter. Many street homeless also avail of
assistance from DSWD-JFC to go back to their hometowns through the Balik-Probinsya
Project. Gloria was one of those who have availed of this assistance to go back to her
139
home in Bicol. A social worker took her to the bus terminal while another social worker
received her in Bicol. However, Gloria went back to Manila because she had conflict with
her first husband and preferred life in the city.
Social Networks of Female Homeless Respondents. Women homeless often have street
partners to protect them from physical and sexual attacks (Rowe and Wolch 1990: 191).
Moreover, this also expands their access to material resources because they can
delegate tasks to their partners. As discussed earlier, Mira vends and looks after the
children while her husband earns as a pedicab driver. Street partnerships allow ―pooling
of resources‖ and division of labor similar to homed couples (Ibid: 192).
Like the homeless males, they form groups on the streets and adopt new homeless.
Myra Lopez recounts how she took pity on a woman who needed help and eventually
became part of their group:
“Kasi parang hindi pa siya kumakain. Yun pala

namomoblema siya. Nakulong ang tatay niya. Sabi, „May
pera ka ba? Pwede pahiramin mo muna ako pang-pyansa
sa papa ko?‟ Kahit hindi ko pa nakikilala, tinulungan
namin. Lumapit din ako sa asawa ko, „Be, yung ale
nanghihingi ng tulong.‟ Sabi niya, „Sige tutulong tayo sa
kanila para may kasama tayo dito sa Luneta.‟ E di
tinulungan namin. Sinamahan namin dun sa presinto.
Napalabas namin tapos nagsama-sama kami.” (She
looked like she has not eaten anything. Then we found out
she has a problem. Her father is in prison. She asked us,
‗Do you have money? Can you lend me some so I can pay
the bail of my father?‘ Even if I don‘t know her yet, I
helped. I told my husband, ‗Be, that woman is asking for
help.‘ He said, ‗Okay, let‘s help them so we will have
someone with us here in Luneta.‘ So we helped her. We
140
accompanied her to the precinct and got her father free.

Then they stayed with us here.)
The need for pakikisama or to get along is a form of intra-group relationship, or
bridging forms of social capital. It both benefits and restrains the homeless. As
the street homeless in Manila are a highly heterogeneous group, they need to get
along with different types of people. According to Sarah Robles, 40 years old
and who has been in the streets for 27 years:
“Pag nag-ipon-ipon na kami rito [feeding program],

nagbibigayan na kami ng pagkain. Kung sino ang wala,
bibigyan namin. Kung kami rin ang wala, sila rin
magbibigay sa amin. Ganun lang naman yun eh”. (When
we all gather here [during the feeding programs], we give
each other food. Whoever has none, we will give them
food. When it is us who don‘t have anything, they will also
give us something. That is just how it works here.)
This kind of sharing of food and material resources proves that the homeless have a
sense of community (Rosenthal 1994: 84). Nonetheless, there are repercussions in not
sharing with homeless peers. These include being badmouthed and called selfish by
others. Some also get angry when they are not given anything by those who have more.
As Sarah adds:
“‟Pag may nanghihingi sa akin, siyempre kawawa naman

wala siyang pambili. Bibigyan ko siya. Malay mo sabihan
ka pa niyang madamot ka. Kaya binibigay ko. Sanay na
silang ganun. May ganun. Pag hindi mo nabibigyan,
nagagalit.” (When someone asks something from me, I
give it to them because I feel sorry that they don‘t have any
141
money to buy it. Also, if you don‘t give them anything, they
might say you‘re selfish. So I just give them something.
They‘ve gotten used to it. Thus, if you don‘t give them
anything, they will get angry.‖
Of the three groups, it is the homeless women respondents who usually go back
to their experiences with their homed families. The families of some homeless women
look for them on the streets to convince them to go back home. Rather than pity them for
their condition, most of their relatives get angry they the homeless women choose street
life over staying at home. Gloria Misa, who ran away when she had a conflict with her
mother and siblings for choosing a street person as a partner, recounts:
“Hindi ako galit sa nanay ko pero tinitiis ko kahit pagalitan

ako. Ako na lang ang umiiwas. Minsan „yung mga kapatid
ko, pinapagalitan ako. „Mas gugustuhin mo pa sa kalye‟.
Minsan nakita ako, kumakain ako sa plastic, sabi, „sa
bahay kumakain ka sa plato! Umuwi ka na sa bahay!”
Pinagalitan ang asawa ko. Kinuha „yung mga gamit ko
nu‟ng kapatid ko. Umuwi ka na sa bahay. Humabol ang
asawa ko,‟ ate huwag naman ganu‟n, nakita niyo lang
kumakain ang asawa ko sa plastic‟. Nahuli ako minsan ng
anak ko t‟saka ng kapatid ko, kumakain sa lapag, sa
plastic. ‟Sa bahay hindi ka naman ganyan‟...Pag nakikita
ako ng kapatid ko sabi, ang dumi ko daw. Para na akong
taong grasa t‟saka nangangayayat ako.” (I‘m not angry
with my mother when she berates me. I just tolerate her
and stay away. Sometimes, when my siblings see me, they
would get mad and ask me ‗Why do you prefer [to live on]
the streets?‘ Sometimes, when they see me eating in a
plastic [bag], they would tell me, ‗At home you can eat with
a plate! Why don‘t you just go back home with us?!‘ They
also scolded my husband. They took my things, [and told
me] ‗Go back home‘. But my husband chased after us,
‗Ate, don‘t be like that. You just saw my wife eat in a plastic
[bag]‘. One time, I was also caught by my child and sibling
eating on the floor, in a plastic (bag). They told me, ‗At
home you would not be like that‘...Whenever my sibling
142
see me [on the streets], she would tell me I‘m filthy, that I
look like a street urchin and that I am under nourished.)
These show that the family is both a push and pull variable in the decision of the
homeless people to resort to the streets. Sometimes, the family becomes the push factor
which compels homeless women to escape to the streets due to unresolved internal
disputes at home. Sometimes also, family members tend to react negatively to their
homeless relatives because of their appearance and their decision to stay in the streets.
On the other hand, it can also become a pull factor when the homeless persons depend
on their street-based jobs and resources to earn money for their homed families.
Attempts to Get out of Homelessness. Getting out of the streets has often been the goal
of the female homeless because they find it difficult despite their abilities to resort to
adaptive strategies. After six years in the streets, Lea Ramirez, wife of Jobert who wants
to go back home to Cebu, describes the hardships her family has undergone:
“Kasi gusto ko po kasi na… kasi ganito na „yung estado

namin sa buhay eh. Wala kaming bahay. Hindi namin alam
kung saan kami kukuha ng makakain namin. „Yun nga,‟
yung mga anak ko, hindi ko na kuhanin doon [sa Boys
Town at St. Mary‟s Home for Boys] kasi, hindi po namin
kayang pag-aralin. Sila na po magpapa-aral. Pero paglaki,
pagdating ng panahon, ibabalik nila sa akin... „Ayun, eto
nga, hindi namin alam yung nangyari sa amin, buhay
naming „to. Nag-aapply naman ako ng trabaho, wala
namang kumukuha.” (This has been the state of our lives.
We don‘t have a home. We don‘t know where we can get
food to eat. [About my children], we can‘t get them out of
[Boy‘s Town and St. Mary‘s Home for Boys] because we
can‘t pay for their education. They will take care of that.
143
When they grow up, they‘ll return them to me...With our life
being like this, we don‘t know what would happen to us. I‘m
applying for a job, but nobody wants to hire me.)
Although her husband is willing to go back home to Cebu, Lea revealed that she
thinks this is impossible because of his drinking habits. Jobert has been drinking with
other homeless peers instead of looking for a job. Because of this, Lea plans to leave
him instead when she gets the chance. She plans to go back to Mindoro with her
children.
For most homeless however, going back to their homes and families does not
mean they would stay with them permanently. For others, specifically the women, the
gay, lesbian and bisexual respondents, unresolved family disputes force them to choose
street life over homed life. One example is that of Gloria, who narrates how the DSWD
and the Balik Probinsya program helped her go back to her province. However, she
ended up going back to Manila because her husband already found a new partner:
“Madali lang naman sa Bicol. Dyan ka lang naman

sasakay sa termina. Bibigyan ka lang ng pamasahe, pero
ihahatid ka nila. Sila ang maghahatid at magpapara.
Umuuwi ka, oo. Dati tatawagan „yung social worker doon
sa Bicol eh. Taga-doon „yung asawa ko dati, pero may
asawa na siya doon. Pero hindi sila kasal.Eh ang ano ko
lang sa asawa ko, nag-away lang kami nu‟n. Hindi na ko
nagpakita sa kanya. Nagpunta na ako ng Maynila.” (It‘s
actually easy to go back to Bicol. They [DSWD] will provide
you with your fare and accompany you to the terminal.
They will accompany you and get [the bus for you]. You
have to go home yes, because they will call the social
worker in Bicol. My ex-husband is from there, But he
already has a [new] wife. Actually, they are not married.
But my [problem] is that my husband and I, we always
144
fight. So I did not get back together with him. I just went
[back] to Manila.)
This indicates that even if welfare programs help the homeless get off the streets, family
issues push the homeless back to the streets. Seemingly, interventions should extend to
the family level as well, given that it is both a push and pull factor of homelessness.
When asked about their future plans for the next few years, majority of female
homeless respondents would say that getting a job is their priority. Only three answered
that they wish to go back home or seek to rent a house for sleeping. Many respondents
do not plan to go back home and instead opt to stay on the streets to find a job. Many
have been living in the streets from eight to thirty-one years. Conversely, those who wish
to go back home are those who have been on the streets for only seven months to six
years.
Homosexual and Bisexual

Street Homeless: Survival Strategies
Homosexual and bisexual street homeless tend to possess the most varied and
flexible survival strategies. As will be elaborated later on, they have established groups
with networks consisting of peer and homed networks.
Within their group, homeless and bisexual homeless respondents appear to have
varied characteristics. These can be categorized into three groups: permanent, transitory
and ―graduates‖. Permanent homosexual and bisexual homeless are those who have
stayed and made the streets their home for a long time. Transitory types are those who
have been in and out of the streets. These may consist of those who have houses within
145
the city but depend on street-based jobs. They sleep in the streets and attend feeding
programs. Another type includes those who have gone back home in their provinces
after becoming homeless but have returned to the streets because of better job
opportunities. Lastly, ―graduates‖ are those who have left the streets but continually visit
their homeless peers. They categorize themselves as having experienced homelessness
before, but currently have a more homed status.
Access to Basic Needs: Food. Like the male and female street homeless respondents,
homosexual and bisexual street homeless also depend on feeding programs for food.
They regularly attend feeding programs in San Sebastian Church, Ermita Church, Paco
Church, Oroquieta Church, Calvary Church, Immaculate Church, United Central
Methodist Church, Liwasang Bonifacio, Quiapo, Lawton, and in Binondo. Majority of
them attend four to six feeding programs; some would even attend more than seven in a
week. If there are no feeding programs, they would ask for “tutong” (burnt rice) from
owners of eateries.
Most of them are enthusiastic in participating in feeding programs. They are
usually in front, leading the song and dances in the choir. Some serve as volunteers and
read in masses. They find that becoming a volunteer provides them more access and
benefits such as extra plastics of food, the choice of donated clothes, and monetary
allowances for singing in choirs.

146
Work Strategies. Homosexual and bisexual homeless respondents engage in work
strategies similar to that of the male and female homeless. The difference, however, is
that they are able to go beyond street-based jobs such as scavenging, vending, begging.
They are able to expand their earning strategies through other means. Ephraim, a gay
23-year old ―graduate‖ who stayed on the streets for two years, has a regular job in a
water refilling station. Bojo, a 34-year old gay homeless who lives with his family in
Baseco but engages in street strategies, once sold his kidney for 35,000 pesos. He used
his earnings to buy two houses in Baseco: one for his family, and another for renting.
Other homeless homosexuals and bisexuals engage in prostitution. One gay homeless
admitted to engaging in prostitution in order to make ends meet. He attested that he, as
well as his other gay friends, pick up foreigners for sex by hanging out in Luneta Park.
What is important to note about the homosexual and bisexual homeless
respondents is that they give most of their earnings to their homed relatives. Aries
Bormata, a 45-year old gay homeless, gets weekly allowance by singing in the church
choir. Most of the money he earns goes to the education of his nephews and nieces who
live in Bulacan. Since he attends feeding programs which provide him food, his other
expenses consist of laundry and leisure activities like watching old movies, which costs
50 pesos. When the money he earns is not enough, he resorts to scavenging bottles and
used boxes to sell.
Negotiated Spaces. As a group, homosexual and bisexual homeless can be mostly
found in parks which they also use for recreation. They would gather and meet with
147
other homeless and non-homeless homosexuals and bisexuals just to hang-out and
have fun. However, their use of space has once been contested. There was a time a
certain gay group was apprehended by guards in Luneta Park for being too noisy.
Because they have a homosexual friend who happened to be lawyer, they were able to
get out of it.
In terms of their everyday life, homosexual and bisexual homeless respondents
traverse similar spaces as other homeless. They go to churches for feeding programs
and parks for leisure and work. They also seek permissions in order to sleep in certain
spaces. Others sleep in parks such as Lawton, Luneta, Plaza Dilao and even Cubao.
What is distinct is that some homeless homosexuals and bisexuals have houses but
prefer sleeping in the streets as it is said to be nearer to work opportunities.
Relationship with Institutions. Like male homeless respondents, homosexual and
bisexual homeless respondents have frequently encountered institutions such as MPD
and RAC. Most of their interactions, however, left them with negative perceptions of
these institutions.
Like other homeless groups, homosexual and bisexual homeless respondents
have been apprehended by the MPD for vagrancy. Most of them are brought to MPD
Police Station 5 in Ermita because they sleep on the streets despite having homes. As
Bojo says:
―Minsan naano kami doon, Natutulog kami dahil ang

hanapbuhay naman namin kahit papaano „pag wala
kaming trabaho sa ganitong rebag, nangangalakal kami.
148
Namumulot kami ng mineral. „Ayun po ang kinaso po sa

amin ay bagansya.” (Sometimes, when we have no
repacking [of fertilizers in distant areas] job, we get
[arrested] because [we sleep on the streets] when we
scavenge for mineral [water bottles]. We get charged with
vagrancy for [sleeping in the streets].)
Their main complaint against the MPD is that the police allegedly extort money and
belongings from the homeless whenever they arrest them. According to Lawrence:
“...maraming detachment. Meron sa Lawton, pero pinaka-

main nila sa UN. Du‟n talaga totally dinadala. Ttapo,s
andu‟n „yung minsan nga lang nakakapikon kasi pera lang
„yung habol nila. Mambabagansya sila without any reason.
Tapos, kung ano „yung pwede nilang makuha sa tao,
kinukuha nila.” (...[the MPD] has several detachments.
They have one in Lawton, but the main detachment is in
UN [United Nations Avenue]. It is where [most homeless]
are brought. What irritates me is that the Police are only
after our money. They will apprehend us for vagrancy
without any reason, and then they will extort whatever they
can from the homeless.)
Despite these instances, the homosexual and bisexual homeless know that they will be
able to get out of prison once they can pay the fine obtained through their homeless
friends. Once they are out of the police station, they make sure to avoid spaces where
the Police will conduct raids. For them, getting into jails is costly. It also interrupts their
daily routines.
RAC, however, is viewed by most homeless as the only kalaban (enemy) on the
street. Aries, a homeless gay who has been in the streets for twenty six years and who
cannot count the number of times he has been inside RAC, described his experiences
as ―hell‖. According to him:

149
“Kaya walang ano roon. Kumbaga, kapag hinuli ka ng

taga-RAC, huwag mo ng hintayin na makapasok ka pa sa
loob. Sa sasakyan pa lang tumalon ka na. Tumakbo ka na.
Kaya iyong iba kapag sinabi, „ayan na RAC, lahat ng klase
ng takbo ginawa na huwag lang sila mahuli ng RAC. Kasi
impyerno ang RAC, Dahil „andun si Satanas. Iyun ang
totoo roon. Iyong nire-record mo sana makarating sa kanila
yan.” (When you are being apprehended by RAC, don‘t
wait anymore for you to get in. While you‘re still in the
vehicle, you jump and run away. Others, when they are
told that RAC is there, they run as fast as they can so they
would not be apprehended. RAC is hell and Satan is there.
That is the truth. If you are recording this, I hope this
reaches them.)
This was the assessment he and other homeless has of the said shelter. If they are
given some food, it is very little compared to what they can find themselves on the
streets. Lawrence, a homeless bisexual who experienced being homeless for two years,
shared:
“As in, tapos magkakamay pa kayo du‟n. Eh siyempre,

halu-halo „yung mga taong andu‟n. Hindi naman sa
pagiging maselan „di ba?Siyempre since reception action
center sila, so parang action center sila. So, parang willing
silang tumulong, hindi kawawain yung tao. Ganun kasi
„yung lumalabas eh. Mas nakakawawa „yung tao eh.
Kapag nasa labas, nakakakain kahit papano. Eh sa kanila,
hindi eh. Although nakakakain nga, bitin naman. Kasi
kumbaga, „ yung kakainin mo ng almusal, tanghalian, ng
hapunan, pag-isahin mo‟ yun para ka lang kumain ng
isang meal.” (You‘ll be using your hands to eat there. Of
course, there are different kinds of people inside. I‘m not
being sensitive. But since they are a reception action
center, we assume they are willing to help and would not
mistreat people. (But) that is how it seems. People get
more mistreated. When we are out on the streets, we could
eat somehow. Inside RAC, we can‘t. Although they
provide us with something to eat, it‘s not enough. What you
150
eat for breakfast, lunch and dinner, if you put them

together, it‘s as if you‘ve eaten only one meal.)
Furthermore, their opinion of the RAC staff is generally negative. According to them, the
staff would sometimes call them out and hit them. Worse, homeless people have either
been victimized or have witnessed molestation and abuse happening inside the Center.
Children and women are vulnerable to molestation of male and gay staff. As Aries
testifies:
“Wala lang kasing maglakas ng loob magreklamo.

Iireklamo sa head office at saka iyong talagang
ebidensyang pinanghawakan talaga nila na meron.
Maraming minomolestya roon. Maraming inaano roon.
Kahit babae. Iyong mga staff na lalaki du‟n, iyong
karamihan sa mga babaeng bata pa na naging pick-up girl
diyan sa ano, mismo sila, minomolestya sila doon.
Personally nakikita ko eh, nung napunta ako dun eh.”
(Nobody seems to have the courage to complain to the
head office and present evidences of what‘s happening
there. There are many who are being molested
there...even women. The male staffs molest the pick-up
girls themselves. I saw them myself when I was there.)
When asked about this and about the rape incidents reported in the news to have
taken place inside the shelter, RAC Director Edna Gunao claimed these were mere
allegations. However, she added that these incidents cannot be prevented because the
shelter houses both adults and minors in the same facility.
Other government welfare institutions such as the DSWD are aware of this issue.
However, they have not intervened because according to them, it is an internal issue of
RAC and RAC is autonomous from them. This means that RAC has its own way of
151
running welfare systems under the directive of the city government. This includes taking
the street homeless that they apprehended to Boys Town Marikina to be detained and
removed from the streets of Manila. However, such measures prove ineffective as the
street homeless go back to Manila, either by walking or by begging money for
transportation.
On the other hand, homosexual and bisexual homeless respondents have
tapped non-government institutions to help them get off the streets. One case is that of
22-year old Lawrence who sought the help of REMAR (Rehabilitation of Socially
Rejected People), a Christian organization based in Cubao, Quezon City. However,
according to him, entering the institution was also part of their strategy as it was the
rainy season. As he elaborates:
“...nagwalk-in kami du‟n. Kami mismo „yung pumasok kasi

nga siyempre magtatag-ulan eh. So siyempre kanya-
kanyang paraan „yan para maging safe. Pumasok kami
du‟n. Dapat talaga kasi magiging totally volunteer din ako
du‟n or magiging staff. Kaso lang, hindi ko natapos yung 6
months eh. Kasi nag-trust na, naging kumbaga overseer
na‟ ko du‟n.Tapos, tumitingin na ko sa mga tao kung
natutulog ba „yan, ganyan, baka mamaya may ginagawang
kalokohan. Eh ang nangyari kasi, 3 months lang tinapos ko
na. Kasi,' yun nga, after ko kasing mag-REMAR, „yun,
nagpakuha na ko.Umuwi na ko sa amin. Kinontact na‟
yung family ko.” (We were walk-ins. It was rainy season, so
we have to find ways to be safe. We entered the institution.
I was supposed to be either a volunteer or staff but I didn‘t
finish the six months. I became an overseer where I
facilitate people and make sure that they don‘t do anything
foolish. What happened however was after 3 months I
asked my family to get me. Then, I went home. My family
was contacted.)
152
Social Networks of Homosexual and Bisexual Homeless Respondents. Homosexual and
bisexual respondents have varied social networks. Like other homeless groups, they
obtain street partners, adopt new homeless and form their own groups. These allow for
more access to resources through division of labor. Nila Letran, a 37-year old lesbian,
has been homeless for thirty years. She has grown up and is knowledgeable in the ways
of the street. She has a street partner, another lesbian, whom she shares her resources
with. Nila explains how she and her partner divide means of obtaining resources:
“Minsan nakakapalimos ako ng 150 pesos. Hindi kami

nagbebenta kapag namamalimos. Siya ang nagtitinda
tapos namamalimos ako. Tapos ang pagkain namin diyan
kami kumukuha sa feeding. Nanghihingi rin ako ng mga
tira sa mga canteen.” (Sometimes I earn150 pesos just by
begging. We don‘t vend when we beg. [My street partner]
vends then I beg. Then we obtain food from feeding
programs. I also ask for leftovers from canteens.)
The gay homeless has the most established homeless group that bridges peers and
homed networks. Being part of this group increases their chances of getting off the
streets, as some respondents attested.
Gays have several established subgroups. BOLOVA is the overall group for
bisexuals who hang out in Luneta. It is comprised of several subgroups, namely ―10:30‖
and INTENSITY 121. There is also the COMRADS, a bisexual group who uses Globe as
their cell phone network and the PLUA, or the Philippine Luneta University Association,
153
a group who hangs out in Luneta Park. The ―4 Wonders‖ group was borne out of PLUA
when internal conflict among the leaders divided the group. This group hangs out in
Baywalk. Overall, there are 200 members of the BOLOVA group. Such gay groups
signify that there exist loyalties among them. Moreover, these groups do not only include
homeless gays as members but also professionals and well-off homosexuals. Some
have used these connections to borrow money and obtain better jobs, enabling them to
get off the streets. Ephraim, who used to be a gay homeless, was able to organize a gay
pageant sponsored by a gay lawyer. He was able to obtain sponsorships through
connections with the group. By hanging out with well-off members of the group, they are
able to share their concerns and gain sympathy from them. At times, they are given or
are able to ask money from their wealthy friends. As Ephraim explains:
“Kumbaga „yung mga ano namin dati, „yung mga bonding

namin, years ago, almost two years. Ako nakapagtrabaho
rin. Sila, stable „yung job nila kaya kapag nag-ano kami,
nandiyan kami sa Luneta.Text-text lang, ganu‟n.Tapos,
nagkaroon ng pera, „yun, unexpected „yun.” (Our bonds
with them go back almost two years. I was able to obtain a
job. They also have stable jobs. When we [meet], we go to
Luneta. We text each other even after we were already
earning some money, which was unexpected.)
These connections also allow them to tap well-off members to get out of difficult
circumstances. There was a time a certain gay group was apprehended by the guards in
Luneta Park for being too noisy. Because they have connection with a lawyer, they were
able to get out of it. As Ephraim elaborates:

154
“Tapos ang nangyari, pinag-iinitan na „yung ano namin.

Sumama kami du‟n sa parang headquarters nila.
Pinaglaban namin ang mga karapatan ng mga.. Syempre,
may mga lawyer kami, mga professional talaga.” (After
that, our [leader] was harassed. We went to their
headquarters and asserted our rights since we have
professional lawyers with us.)
During interviews, gay homeless respondents discuss their peer networks to be leisure-
based. According to them, they usually hang out in Luneta Park to have fun with other
gays. One gay homeless however admitted to engaging in prostitution in order to make
ends meet. He attested that he, as well as his other gay friends, pick up foreigners for
sex by hanging out in the park.
Attempts to Get Out of Homelessness. Attempts by homosexual and bisexual homeless
respondents to get out of street life seem to be more successful than that of other
groups. With their connection extending to homed networks, it is easier for them to get
out of street life. Some gay homeless respondents, for example, are able to obtain more
―mainstream‖ jobs aside from those available on the streets. Some of them became
service crews in fast food restaurants, employees in refilling stations or agents in call
centers after having been referred by homed contacts. Added to this, those who got out
are specifically driven because they want to prove themselves worthy of their partners.
As Ephraim, a 23 year old gay who is in a relationship says:
“Ako, hmm, tumagal ako almost one and half years nu‟ng
wala pa akong asawa. Nu‟ng wala pa akong asawa, ay
kasama. Kinakasama. Nu‟ng may kinasama na ako,
talagang finorce ko „yung sarili ko na syempre, „di ba?
155
Hindi naman sa ganito ang estado ng buhay ng kinasama

ko. Talagang may dating naman talaga. Hindi nga n‟ya
alam na ganito ang inaabot ko. Ang alam n‟ya, angat din
ako sa buhay. Pero dinala ko siya sa mga relatives
ko.Nakita naman n‟ya kung anong meron ako.Tanggap
naman niya.” (I lasted for almost one and a half years on
the streets when I did not have a spouse yet... when I still
didn‘t have a spouse, I mean, a companion. A[live-in]
partner. When I already had a partner, I really pushed
myself, of course. I had to, right? It‘s not like this my
partner‘s status is the same as mine. [He] looks well-off. In
fact, he didn‘t even know I experienced being homeless.
What he knows is that I am also well-off. But I took him to
my relatives. He saw what I have, and he accepted me as I
am.)
Though they have regular jobs, they still go back to the streets to ―give back‖. They do
this by volunteering in the feeding program activities and by hanging out with their past
homeless peers. What is more interesting is that there are those who still employ street
strategies even if they already achieved a homed status. These strategies help them
augment their income. Moreover, they believe that having experienced being homeless
serves as their safety net when financial crisis suddenly hits them. They take their
having been homeless as an important part of their experience, and they use the
strategies they learned while being homeless in their efforts to improve their lives. As
Lawrence, who has gone back to his family but still frequents the streets for work and to
visit his homeless friends, repeatedly says:
“...sabi ko, at least dumating man sa akin ang punto na

bumagsak ako, alam ko na kung ano „yung magiging step
na gagawin ko… saan ako magsisimula.Kasi, na-
experience ko na. Kaysa naman „yung nasanay talaga ako
ng ganyan tapos hindi ko alam kung paano maghirap, „di
ba? So parang ang hirap naman nu‟n.‟Di mo alam kung
156
paano ka mag-aadjust. Kaya nga sabi ko, okay lang, buti

na-experience ko „yung ganu‟n.” (...I told myself, at least
when the time comes that everything falls apart in my life, I
would know the steps I have to take… where I would start
again because I already experienced it....Instead of getting
used to a good life and not knowing how to be destitute,
right? That‘s difficult, especially when you don‘t know how
to adjust. That‘s why I can say, it‘s okay, it‘s a good thing I
experienced it.)
There are also cases of homeless people getting out of the streets due to several
circumstances which force them to go back to their homes. Some have given up, gotten
old and became sick—factors which make living on the streets impossible. According to
Aries, who has been in the streets for twenty-six years:
“Marami na. Iyong iba naman talaga, sumuko na lang din

sa pakikibaka sa buhay dahil nga sa dala na rin ng
sinasabi nating kahinaan na rin ng loob nila. At wala na rin
talaga.Kumbaga, hopeless na sila. Iyong iba, nag-edaran
na rin. Iyong iba, nagkasakit na rin kaya no choice sila
kun‟di umuwi na rin. Marami, maraming tao.“ (There are
many who already went back home. Others gave up
struggling because of, what we call, being weak-spirited.
There are others who already became hopeless. Some
have aged already, while others got sick so they had no
choice but to go home. Yes, there are many of them [who
have gone home].)
Looking at it more closely, the homeless have several opportunities to leave the streets.
Welfare institutions as well as the money they have personally saved helped them get
out of the streets, but only temporarily. For most homeless people who have gone back
to their homed contexts, several factors pushed and pulled them back to the streets.
These include unresolved issues with family members and the perception of having
157
better chances of living in the streets than at home. The streets continue to be their
sources of escape from these situations.
Synthesis
Homeless people form adaptive strategies on the streets. Such strategies are
shaped by the state and non-state institutions and their social networks. Based on the
accounts of respondents, accessing basic resources such as food and money is
dependent on the level of mobility and extent of knowledge one has of street resources.
As such, adaptive strategies vary for different homeless people. Table 2 summarizes the
adaptive strategies that the homeless respondents utilize in terms of access to food,
work, money and space. It also includes the number of years they have stayed in the
streets, institutions they have encountered and their specific plan to leave the streets.
Access to Basic Needs: Food. One of the major concerns of homeless people is
obtaining food. Some ask for leftovers from eateries and restaurants, while others
forage from trash. The street homeless in Manila, however, have found an adequate
and regular source of food to survive: feeding programs. Held weekly, feeding programs
158
Table 8. Adaptive Strategies of Street Homeless Respondents

Name Gender, Place of Reason for Year/s Institutions Feeding Place of Job & minimum Specific
Age origin being in in the Encountered programs sleep, hang income per day plan to
the street street out leave
streets
―Andrew M, 43, Iligan Wanted to 3 MPD, JFC Paco UN Avenue Scavenges 10 to Expects
Balmes‖ Separate City, find better San Sebastian Luneta 40 pesos, Salt housing
d Cabanatu job Church farming in program by
an (goes Ermita province 1000 to government,
home Methodist 2000 pesos, or go back
occasion rebag to
ally) Cabanatuan
to start
business
―Ian Berna‖ M, 49, Cagayan Better job in 10 MPD, Seldom Luneta Fortune telling none
Separate Manila PAGCOR, frequents feeding 130 to 570 pesos,
d Student programs sells toys
organizations
―Jojo M, 33, Paco Better job in 25 MPD, RAC+ Lacson, Ermita, Paco Sells hopia, none
Furtado‖ Married Manila Immaculate, Escolta rebag, sells
Paco Church, cigarettes
KKK
―Jericho M, 31, Samar, Ran away 25 MPD, RAC, Ermita Kalaw Rebag - 200 to Get work
Azul‖ Married San from home Adamson, TUP (volunteer) Plaza 400 pesos, from Ermita
Has 3 Andres for food Salamanca scavenges 50 to Church
wives & Bukid, Cubao 200 pesos
4 Manila
children (goes
home
occasion
ally)
―Jobert M, 38, Cebu Wanted to 6 RAC, Boys Paco Luneta Scavenges, sells go back
Ramirez‖ Married find better Town Marikina, picnic mats 20 to home to
Has 2 job Mary‘s Home 80 pesos, Rebag - Cebu
children for Boys 200 to 400 pesos
Paranaque
―Jordan M, 21, Cagayan Left by 12 MPD, RAC, Paco (volunteer) Outside San Scavenges 50 to Rent a
Crisanto‖ Married Valley parent in GMA Network Sebastian 100 pesos, Rebag house
Has 2 Luneta – Church - 200 to 400
children grew up in pesos
the streets
―Jet Rigor‖ M, 20, Masbate Wanted to 3 JFC, RAC, none mentioned Luneta Servant, not paid Go back
159
Single find better month MMDA JFC home

job s (w/
shelter
)
―Mark M, 28, Mindanao Victim of 3 DSWD- none JFC None Go back
Valdez‖ Single illegal month Legarda, JFC home
recruiter s (w/
shelter
)
―Soren M, 34, Surigao Victim of 15 JFC (before) Outside Sold blood at Go back
Juan‖ Single illegal (w/ (before) Paco Recto mall PGH 1000 pesos, home
recruiter shelter RAC, MPD KKK (streets) scavenges – 50 to
) Intramuros 150 pesos, rebag
Calvary - 200 to 400
Methodist San pesos
Sebastian
Church
Ermita
(volunteer)
―Titong M, 35, Quiapo House 19 MPD none Gwapotel by Sells watches 250 none
Akbar‖ Separate burned the MMDA, to 300 pesos
d down in Ermita Park
Baseco
―Ana Torres‖ F, 23, Cebu Wanted to 8 None Paco, San Lawton Scavenges - 80 none
Married find parent Sebastian, KKK pesos
―Gloria Misa‖ F, 27, Bicol Ran 1 MPD, RAC, Paco Baclaran, Scavenges - 30 Go back
Separate away— Boys Town- Quiapo pesos, washes home to
d conflict with Marikina clothes - 20 to 50 relatives in
parent pesos Makati
―Mira de F, 30, Masbate House 10 RAC Methodist only Salamanca Vending when none
Alas‖ Married burned Park, UN there is capital of *job as
Has 5 down Avenue 100 pesos, priority
children Pedicab driver
(husband) - 300
pesos
―Maria Ona‖ F, 50, Novaliche Ran 30 MPD, RAC Paco Luneta Scavenges - 40 to none
Married s away— Novaliches 50 pesos *job as
conflict with (goes home priority
parent occasionally)
―Myra F, 27, Pandaca Ran 1.5 None Paco Intramuros Begs - 50 to 150 rent a house
Lopez‖ Married n, Manila away— Intramuros pesos (for
conflict with sleeping)
160
parent
―Sarah F, 40, Bicol Ran 27 MPD, RAC, San Sebastian Quiapo Rebag - 200 to none
Robles‖ Married away— DSWD- Church, 400 pesos, Sells *job as
abused by Bulacan Paco hopia - 50 pesos, priority
aunt sells picnic mats –
20 to 100 pesos
―Vina F, 22, Bicol, Seeking for 7 MPD, GMA Paco Luneta Begs Go back
Samar‖ Married Laguna treatment in month Network occasionally – 50 home after
Manila s to 100, Dispatcher being
(husband) treated
―Jonalyn F, 20, Leyte, House 8 MPD, RAC, Ermita Church Ermita Begs - 30 to 50 none
Serna‖ Married Manila burned Boys Town- Plaza Dilao pesos
Has 3 down Marikina
children
―Lea Reyes‖ F, 38, Mindoro, Wanted to 6 MPD, RAC, Paco Luneta Scavenges, sells Leave
Married Cebu find better Boys Town- picnic mats, rebag husband, go
Has 2 job Marikina, - 200 to 400 back home
children Mary‘s Home pesos with children
for Boys
Paranaque
―Mona F, 48, Las Pinas Ran 31 RAC Methodist only Plaza Vendor when none
Realta‖ Separate (goes away— Salamanca, there is capital
d home family UN Avenue
Has occasion conflict
5children ally)
―Arnold H/B-Gay, San Ran away 20 MPD, RAC Baywalk Ermita Supervises aunt‘s none
Araullo‖ 36, Andres before but Luneta Recto store 50 to 100
Single; Bukid, frequents Methodist Escolta pesos, sells picnic
had Manila streets for Paco (volunteer) mats 20 to 100
estrange (lives with jobs Sikh Temple pesos
d wife & relatives)
son
―Ana Rico‖ H/B- Makati Ran 3 RAC , Boys Paco Lawton Scavenges 50 none
Bisexual, away— Town- KKK Paco Cubao pesos
24, conflict/ Marikina Oroquieta *stay in the
Married wanted San Sebastian streets
Has 1 freedom Church because of
child from friends
parents
―Aries H/B-Gay, San Jose Ran 26 MPD, RAC All feeding Lawton Choir/ lector none
Bormata‖ 45, del away— programs: Paco, FEU grounds volunteer with
Single Monte, conflict/ KKK, San allowance *stay in the
161
Bulacan wanted Sebastian streets

freedom Church, Ermita, because of
from Methodist, work
parents Oroquieta,
Lawton
―Bojo‖ H/B-Gay, Samar House 10 RAC, MPD, KKK Luneta Rebag - 200 to none
34, Lives with burned Barangay RVM Plaza Dilao 400 pesos,
Single family in down; Boys Town- Luneta Baseco scavenges – 50 to
Baseco Frequents Marikina Delfan 150 pesos, Sold
streets for Oroquieta kidney for 35,000
job pesos
―Ephraim‖ H/B-Gay, Cagayan Ran 2 Park Guards Paco Luneta Water refilling none
23, In a Valley, away— Plaza Dilao station; choir/
relations Bulacan conflict/ lector volunteer
hip (mother) wanted
freedom
from
parents
―Francis H/B-Gay, Mindanao Victim of 12 RAC KKK Escolta Rebag - 200 to none
Morales‖ 34, , came illegal (volunteer) Quiapo Baseco 400 pesos, sells
Single back to recruiter Luneta (goes on bead accessories Get a job as
Manila rented home - 400 to 500 a cook
due to with family pesos
peace during
conflict weekends
only)
―Lawrence‖ H/B- Manila Ran 2 REMAR, RAC Paco Cubao Rebag – 200 to Get a job
Bisexual, away— Lawton Luneta 400 pesos,
22, In a conflict/ Calvary Plaza Dilao scavenges - 50
relations wanted Quiapo pesos, volunteer
hip freedom Oroquieta with allowance
from KKK
parents Intramuros
―Jeremiah H/B-Gay, Las Pinas Ran 3 None Paco Lawton Scavenges - 50 Get a job
Cortez‖ 22, In a away— month KKK Luneta to 100 pesos
relations conflict with s Intramuros
hip relative/
wanted
freedom
―Janus H/B-Gay, Samar Victim of 15 RAC, MPD Ermita Luneta Scavenges - 150 Go back
Alberto‖ 30, illegal San Sebastian Binondo pesos home
Single recruiter Church Lawton through
162
Immaculate government
KKK program
Paco
―Nila Letran‖ H/B- Manila Grew up in 30 RAC, Boys Paco Plaza Sells cigarettes none
Lesbian, the streets Town- KKK Salamanca and candies,
37, Marikina Ermita UN Avenue scavenges 50 *expecting
Married Methodist+ (near MPD pesos, begs – 50 house
Lacson PS-5) to 150 pesos provided by
Binondo government
in Cavite
163
are organized by religious organizations and are held in church compounds. They are
provided with decent food and, at times, other material necessities such as water for
taking baths and washing clothes, hygienic products, clothes, and groceries. Moreover,
with the regularity of feeding programs, homeless people prioritize them in their daily
routines. Though such programs allow them to survive and allocate their money for other
purposes, homeless people have come to depend on them. As elaborated in the
succeeding chapter, this dependency becomes a contention for government welfare
agencies which aim for long-term policies rather than short-term reliefs provided by
religious organizations.
As an effect of following the schedule of feeding programs in order to eat,
homeless people become highly mobile as they move from one church to another.
However, such mobility is dependent on gender. While majority of males and
homosexuals and bisexuals attend more than three feeding programs, females have a
varied level of mobility. This difference is caused by some women who cannot traverse
wider spaces because of the presence of children. Majority of female respondents in this
study, however, have a high level of mobility because most of them have no children
living with them. As part of their strategy, children were left at home or put in welfare
institutions.
Work Strategies. Homeless people engage in street-based jobs such as scavenging,
vending, working in factories and farms, and begging. Others do volunteer work in
164
feeding programs and obtain monetary allowance from them. These work strategies are
not necessarily gender-based; hence, everyone can engage in them. However, the
money they earn is dependent on the level of perseverance and hard work they put in.
As such, work strategies of homeless people may vary. According to gender, Table 3
shows the work strategies they undertake. It can be seen that scavenging, vending,
begging and repacking fertilizers are all undertaken by male, female and homosexual
and bisexual respondents. However, males and homosexual and bisexuals engage in
more job strategies than female respondents. Female respondents are limited to jobs
such as washing laundry, while male and gay, lesbian and bisexual respondents can
engage in heavy labor such as farming and driving pedicabs.
Table 9. Work Strategies of Street Homeless Respondents According to Gender
Work Strategies Male Female Homosexual/

Bisexual
Scavenging   
Vending   
Begging   
Re-packing fertilizers   
Volunteering (w/ allowance)  - 
Singing in choirs - - 
Washing laundry -  -
Driving pedicabs  - -
Fortune telling  - -
Water refilling - - 
Farming in provinces  - 
TOTAL 8 5 8
165
Also, the money that the homeless people earn is used for many purposes. Figure 1
shows an estimate of how homeless people use their earnings. Majority would use their
earnings for food consisting of rice and a viand, which costs between 5 to 25 pesos,
especially when there are no scheduled feeding programs. Few would use such for
hygienic purposes which range from 5 to 20 pesos. Most, however, would wait for
feeding programs which allow them to access water.
Figure 7. Use of Earnings of Street Homeless Respondents (in Percentages)

166
26 percent of respondents use their earnings as starting capital for selling toys, candies,
cigarettes and picnic mats. Interestingly, 18 percent would also give their earnings to
their homed family for their education and household expenses. Others would use the
money to go back to their provinces and visit their families. 5 percent would use it to buy
alcohol for drinking with friends. These are mostly male respondents. Because of these
reasons, homeless people view work strategies in the streets not only as ways of
surviving but also as sources of income for their families. This shows that most street
homeless are still in contact with their homed relatives and have the option to go back
home. Nevertheless, they stay in the streets as it offers them opportunities for earning
money.
Negotiated Spaces. Contrary to common notion, the spatial distribution of homeless
people is not random as they tend to stay in areas most favourable to their survival
(Schor, Artes & Bomfim 2003: 593). Certain areas in Manila fit the requirements of
homeless people, with the abundance of churches, commercial areas and business
establishments. These spaces are fit for obtaining food, work and safe places for
sleeping. Moreover, since feeding programs have fixed schedules, homeless people
base their routines and pathways on them. For example, when there is a feeding
program in one church the next day, they would be sleeping near the area or outside the
church‘s compound after attending the scheduled feeding program for the day. If there is
time, they scavenge and find other work opportunities in the area while waiting. In
167
Manila, the spaces where the homeless are often found can be seen in the map found in
Chapter 2 (Figure 2).
The homeless go to feeding programs in groups. They traverse the inner
residential streets instead of main highways. For them, these streets are safe from local
authorities and shorter in distance. When asked how far one feeding location is from
another, they would explain how near it is. Navigating the streets with other homeless
people also help them know the cognitive distance from one place to another.
Homeless people occupy spaces that are negotiated as well as limited by local
authorities. Local authorities use displacement methods in order to hide the homeless
from public view. They resort to rescue operations or raids in specific areas so that the
homeless will not occupy such areas. They even bring the homeless as far as Marikina
so that they will ―learn the lesson‖ of not staying in certain areas. Because of such, the
threat of arrest is a constant concern among the street homeless. Yet they go back
because they see the streets as their main and only possible source of livelihood.
Institutions as Forms of Support and Constraint. Different institutions relate with
homeless people on a regular basis. These are mainly government institutions and
religious organizations which the homeless encounter in their daily life. These institutions
serve as a factor—in terms of support and constraint— that shape the homeless‘
routines and mobility. Figure __ shows how the homeless view and identify institutions
according to their daily routines. It also illustrates their relationship with institutions:
168
straight lines mean direct and frequent association, while dotted lines indicate weak and
occasional interactions.
As forms of assistance, several institutions were identified by the homeless to
have helped them. Homeless people recognize having frequent interactions with
religious organizations which organize regular feeding programs. These are the San
Sebastian Church, Ermita Church, Jesus Reigns Ministry, United Central Methodist
Church, among others. On the other hand, several non-government institutions have
been approached occasionally by the homeless for help. These were St. Mary‘s Home
for Boys in Parañaque and Remar International in Cubao as well as the social arm of
television networks like the GMA Network.
Conversely, the Reception Action Center (RAC) of Manila and the Manila Police
District (MPD) were identified as forms of constraints. Most homeless people feel that
these government institutions disrupt their daily routine by detaining them in the shelter
and police stations. Moreover, they have negative assessments on RAC and MPD.
Homeless people complain about the following: (1) little or no food given to them, (2) the
lack of sanitation inside the shelter, (3) abusive staff, (4) corrupt policemen ―extorting‖
money from them, (5) inadequate facilities, among others.

169
Figure 8. Perceptions of Street Homeless Respondents on Institutions Encountered
ASSISTANCE CONSTRAINT
Religious
Organizations with Reception and Action
Feeding Programs Center (RAC)
Street
Other Institutions
(minimal) Homeless
-REMAR International in Manila Manila Police District
-St. Mary’s Home for (MPD)
Boys
-Marikina Boys Town
Media
-GMA Network
DSWD, JFC
Found in the middle of the diagram, the Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD) and the Jose Fabella Center (JFC) are seen as both assistance and constraint
by the homeless. As a form of assistance, the street homeless have approached DSWD
and JFC for their Balik Probinsya Program, which allow them to go back to their
hometowns. However, as it happens, most homeless return to the city due to the lack of
job opportunities in their provinces. As a form of constraint, some homeless complain
about the long wait it takes for them to go back home. For others, shelter life means
being devoid of the freedom that the streets offer. Some escape the JFC shelter
because they do not want to simply be provided with basic needs and be told what to do
170
inside an institution. The presence of dotted lines, however, represent that these
institutions only have infrequent interactions with the homeless.
In summary, institutions encountered by the homeless are perceived to be forms
of support or constraint to their daily routines. State institutions have also been of
assistance to the street homeless, but are minimal and sometimes ineffective. Religious
organizations, on the other hand, are seen as main support entities for the homeless as
they provide material, logistical and emotional assistance. Local state institutions such
as RAC and MPD have received negative assessments from the homeless. Being
repeatedly detained and arrested by these institutions have only led to the homeless‘
lack of willingness to receive interventions from them. As such, these institutions have
been ascribed as disruptions to their daily subsistence routines.
Social Networks. The extent of social networks of the street homeless is dependent in
the level of subsistence strategies they can utilize. Peer networks are characterized by a
high level of reciprocal exchange and pakikisama, which work to maintain order and
harmony with a heterogeneous group such as the street homeless in Manila. The
homeless also engage in intimate street relationships, groups and alternative families for
several benefits: (1) expanded access to resources through ―pooling of resources‖ and
division of labor, and (2) protection from, and minimization of, risks and vulnerabilities in
the streets. However, they are compelled maintain good relations with them; otherwise,
they face threats to life and other risks from these very groups. Homed networks, on the
171
other hand, consist of religious organizations and homed families and relatives.
Homeless people build close relationships with organizers of feeding programs because
they aspire to become volunteers for purposes of expanding their access to material
resources. Homed families and relatives, on the other hand, serve as push and pull
factors to their homeless state. As a push factor, homeless people see the streets as an
escape to the conflicts they have with their families at home. As a pull factor, other
homeless people utilize street-based jobs as main sources of income to provide for their
homed families. Bridging peer and homed networks, gay homeless respondents are able
to increase their chances to get off the streets. However, those who get off still come
back to the streets to ―give back‖ to their peers.
Attempts to Get Out of the Streets. Most street homeless made attempts to get off the
streets. However, after going back to their homed life, they return to the streets because
of several reasons. For male homeless respondents, the lack of work opportunities in
rural areas pushes them back to the cities. Female homeless respondents, on the other
hand, return to the streets because of unresolved family conflicts at home. Though
homosexual and bisexual homeless respondents have claimed that they have gotten out
of their homeless state, they continually use the streets to meet their financial needs and
support their families. On the other hand, some claim that they return to the streets in
order to ―give back‖ to their homeless peers. Though they have moved on with their
172
lives, they assert that they miss the street life and the connections that they have
established with other homeless people.
Nevertheless, these reasons show how homeless people have several
opportunities to leave the streets but have chosen to stay or go back due to the relative
perception of better material and emotional conditions in the streets. The survival
strategies they have adapted to during their stay in the streets have become embedded
in their consciousness. These enable them to see the streets, and being homeless, as a
possible way of life.
Chapter Summary
This chapter has discussed how adaptive strategies are shaped by factors such
as institutional relationships and social networks. Acquiring and creating such strategies
under these enabling and constraining contexts enabled the homeless to have a
different view of the world. Such views have changed their goals to become more
attuned to meeting short-term needs rather than planning for the future. As Rowe and
Wolche states, adaptive strategies and meeting daily needs block long-term efforts to
escape their homeless condition (1990). Looking at the table summary (Table 2),
respondents, especially those who have been in the streets for a long time, do not have
any specific plans of getting out. Most of their plans concern working in the streets,
rather than getting out of it. This could mean that they have gotten adjusted to the
173
streets that it has become their way of life. In this sense, while adaptive strategies are
enabling for the homeless to survive, they somehow limit their goals of getting out in the
future.
CHAPTER 6
THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF HOMELESSNESS:

PERCEPTIONS OF STREET HOMELESS AND WELFARE INSTITUTIONS
IN MANILA
According to Spector and Kitsuse (2001), a social problem is constructed by how
actors perceive a certain social condition which they claim as ―unwanted, unjust,
immoral, and thus about which something should be done‖. This chapter focuses on how
homelessness is constructed as a social issue by the street homeless, government
welfare institutions and religious organizations through their perceptions and
corresponding responses on the issue. At the level of the street homeless, their views on
street life provide deeper understanding of why they prefer to stay on the streets. On the
other hand, government institutions and religious organizations encountered by the
homeless also have their contribution in shaping the issue of homelessness. Such
constructions provide insight as to why welfare interventions are perceived to be either
lacking or ineffective by homeless people and welfare providers themselves.
Street Homeless:
Perceptions of Street Life
Living on the streets changes the way the homeless view the world. For most of
them, homelessness has become a temporary escape from the problems in their homed
life. There are also those who have already accepted homelessness as part of their
identity, and thus have constructed new value systems based on the adaptive strategies
174
175
they have formed. Lastly, their views on government institutions and religious
organizations shape how they respond to and create relationships with them.
Streets as Escape. The earlier chapters elaborated on why the homeless are on the
streets. Though they have the opportunity to go home, staying on the streets has
become a preferred option for them. Homeless men, who were forced to take to the
streets due to lack of job opportunities in their localities, see the streets as a place where
they can earn money. Majority of the women, on the other hand, see the streets as an
escape from their personal problems at home. Domestic arguments, physical and sexual
abuse, parental neglect, lack of acceptance and autonomy pushed the homeless to the
streets. When they go back home, unresolved familial issues pulled them back to the
streets. For them, the streets have become an escape from their problems. Gloria Misa,
who has been repeatedly asked to go back home by siblings, tells them:
“Sabi ko, kahit ako na tumanda sa kalye, mababait naman

ang tao. May bahay nga pero kuwago naman ang
nakatira9. „Di bale na lang.” (I told [them] that even if I get
old on the streets, (at least) the people here are kinder.
Even though you have a home, but if those who live there
are like owls, it‘s not worth it.)
Homeless people also find happiness in some aspects of street life. Street relationships
and a sense of community kept them from leaving the streets and to choose it over living
9
This reference to owls came from a Filipino idiom which talks about people who don‟t know how to get
along.
176
with their families. Myra Lopez, who ran away because of frequent conflicts with her
parents, explicitly states:
“Nu‟ng nakikita ko ang tatay ko, sabi niya, „Myra, umuwi ka

na sa bahay natin.” Sabi ko, „Bakit ako uuwi? Masaya ako
rito sa kalye eh‟.” (When I still get to see my father, he
keeps telling me, ‗Myra, go home to our house already.‘ I
told him, ‗Why should I, I am happy here on the streets‘.)
The sense of freedom away from home is another aspect of street life that the homeless
prefers. Without the authority of parents and elders, they can do whatever they want on
the streets. Moreover, their alternative families on the street acknowledge that they have
no right to control the lives of their wards and would only goes as far as giving them
advice. As such, street homeless have full autonomy on the streets and far from a strong
authoritarian mode present in familial relations (Abad 2004). According to Lawrence,
who ran away and lived in the streets for two years:
“Masarap kasi di ba? Siyempre, una...wala ako sa pamilya

ko eh. I can do whatever I want to do. Who cares, gusto
kong gawin „to eh. Wala kang pakialam. Nanay ba kita,
tatay ba kita? Gusto kong gawin „to eh, wala kang
pakialam.” (It‘s a good feeling because, first off, I am not
with my family. I can do whatever I want. Who cares what I
want to do? it‘s none of anyone‘s business. Are you my
mother, are you my father? I want to do this, it‘s none of
your business.)
Even the homeless who were able to get out of the streets and have more mainstream
jobs still miss the street life. This is usually attributed to the bonds they have formed with
177
their peers, with whom they experienced hardships and little joys with. Ephraim, who
stayed on the streets for two years attests:
“...masarap na mahirap, na enjoy, na hindi mo ma-explain

talaga. „Yung tipong „pag „andun ka na sa job mo, parang
hahanap-hanapin mo pa rin. „Yun. Nasa kalye na nga
kami...hahanapin mo ba „yung tatambay ka?” (...it feels
good, difficult yet enjoyable. You really can‘t explain it.
Even when you already have a job, you miss it. Back then,
we were all on the streets...so we don‘t miss hanging out.)
Despite being happy and having freedom on the streets, the homeless also regret their
choices whenever they look back on how they got there. Since most homeless people
have homed relatives, they recount with sadness how they cannot go home because of
unresolved disputes. According to Jordan Crisanto, who claimed that his mother left him
in Luneta Park when he was young, he was very different then from what he is now:
“Ako, hindi talaga ako tambay. May bahay talaga ako sa

Marikina. Nagkagalit lang kami ng tatay ko. Alam mo ba
ang buhay ko dati ay hindi ganito? Konting dumi ko nga
lang sa katawan, pinapagalitan na ako ng tatay ko.” (I am
not really a bum. I have a house in Marikina. My father and
I just had a disagreement. My life before isn‘t like this.
[Whenever I had] some dirt on my body, my father would
scold me.)
Myra, who claims she is happier on the streets than in their own home, also has her
regrets. Having ran away when she met her husband at an early age, getting married
early and not heeding her father‘s advice had been her main regret:
178
“Parang nagsisi nga ako. Sabi ko, bakit ganito ang buhay
ko? Parang ano ba ako, parang nagsisi talaga ako sa sarili
ko na nag-asawa ako agad. Sana sinunod ko na lang
„yung bilin sa akin ng tatay ko.” (I really regret what I did. I
ask myself, why is my life like this? I really regret marrying
at a young age. I should have followed the advice of my
father.)
Homeless people have mixed feelings about street life. Nonetheless, even if they regret
being pushed into the streets for personal reasons and they feel undeserving of their
homeless situation, they still find aspects of it that make their stay justifiable. As a means
of coping and making things bearable, the social networks they formed while on the
streets become their major justifications for staying there.
Acceptance of Identity as Homeless. Homeless people who had been on the streets for
many years have accepted their identities as yagit. For some however, they feel a sense
of ambivalence that they sometimes refer to being homeless in the third person, as
―others‖ and ―them‖. This does not apply only to the new homeless who are often in
denial of their homeless situation. Even those who had been who had been on the
streets for a long time talk like they do not belong to the group. However, they are aware
of the fact that the ―others‖ whom they acknowledge as friends and peers are yagit.
While doing so, they would also mention that they are part of the group who have ―little‖
or ―almost nothing in life‖. This ambivalence can be seen in Lawrence‘s statement when
asked what the people attending the feeding programs are called:
179
“Tawag namin? Young ones. Actually, simula ng maglayas

ako, ganu‟n na rin talaga „yung commonly na tawag.
Young ones na talaga. Ewan ko. Pero sabi nila „yun daw
talaga „yung tawag eh... All over, term na sa amin. Sa mga
taong ito na uma-attend ng feeding [programs], tawag na
talaga sa kanila is young one.... Alam mo „yun? „Yung
tawag lang talaga sa aming mga homeless, ganun „yung
tawag.” (What are we called? Young ones. Actually, since I
ran away, that is what we are commonly called. Young
ones. I don‘t know, but they say that‘s the name.., what
everyone calls us. The people here who attend the feeding
[programs], they are called young ones...You know, the
term for us homeless? That is what they call us.)
Despite this ambivalence, the feeding programs serve as a defining ground for the
homeless identity. Feeding programs organized by religious groups are known to cater
to the yagit. As such, seeking help and attending such programs translate into
acceptance of the homeless identity. This can be seen in how others were hesitant to
attend feeding programs because it would mean the total acceptance of their homeless
identity.
Going deeper, this denial of homeless identity is connected with how they
perceive homed people look at them. They feel that given their homeless appearance,
homed people think less of them. This lowers their self-esteem, and erodes their dignity.
According to Aries, a gay homeless who has been in the streets for twenty six years:
“Kasi nga ang taong mahirap o ang taong lansangan eh

mga taong sensitibo. Na iyong nakabihis ka ng konti tapos
sila‟y marungis, at madaing ka lang eh, sensitive yan eh.
Sabihin pinandidirihan mo sila. Ganun sila. Naranasan
namin „yan. Kumbaga, bigyan natin sila ng puwang.
Bigyan natin sila ng dahilan kung paano sila nabubuhay sa
180
mundo. Bigyan din natin sila ng importansya at huwag

natin silang hayaang umasa na lang sa mga ganitong
klaseng institusyon.” (The poor or street people [are]
sensitive. If you‘re dressed up nicely while they look dirty,
and if you flinch just a bit, they become sensitive. They‘ll
think you are repulsed by them. They‘re like that. We
experienced that. In other words, let‘s give them a place.
Let‘s give them a reason why they should still live in this
world. Let‘s give them value and not let them just depend
on these types of institutions.)
Another aspect of their hesitation to accept the homeless identity is the corresponding
action of being labelled as criminals (Snow, Baker & Anderson 1989). Most homeless
people are against committing petty crimes. This is why they resort to begging if they
can‘t find work. However, non-homeless people berate them and tell them to look for
work instead. This is why they respond, oftentimes angrily, to such. As Jordan remarks:
“Sasabihin, „damulag ka, anlaki-laki ng katawan‟.

Kasalanan ba naming ganito ang buhay namin? Ang sabi
nga masama nga magnakaw. Anong gusto nyo magnakaw
kami?” (They would say, ‗you‘re a big person with a big
body‘. Is it our fault that our lives turned out like this? Isn‘t it
wrong to steal? Would you have us steal instead?‖
The angry response of most homeless comes from the frustration of being caught in the
middle, where asking for help through begging is disapproved and committing crime is
against their moral conscience. According to Lawrence, a gay homeless who found
street life difficult for the two years he lived in it:
―...manghingi ka, mamasamain ka pa. Magnakaw ka

masama ka pa rin so parang wala, wala kang pupuntahan.
181
Kasi hindi mo alam kung saan ka ba talaga lulugar eh.

Nanghingi ka naman ng maayos, sabihin nila laki-laki ng
katawan mo, ganyan-ganyan-ganyan...Ang hirap ng hindi
mo alam kung saan ka tatayo dun sa lugar na yun.” (...you
try to ask for something, they‘ll think badly of you. [On the
other hand,] if you steal, they‘ll think you‘re bad also,. So
you really don‘t know where to place yourself. When you
ask for help in a proper manner, they will say that you have
a big body, like this and that and that....You really don‘t
know where you stand.)
Most homeless people do not want to resort to petty crimes. They affirm that they
have morals. They admit, however, that it crosses their minds, especially when they are
hungry. Stealing and pick pocketing are options they thought of risking. This results
when institutional constraints increase and survival options decrease for the homeless
(Rosenthal 1994). Again, Lawrence shares:
“Oo, hindi talaga maiwasan „yun. Minsan nga „yung

walang-wala na ko nate-tempt na ako, na kahit small
amount lang, kupitin ko kaya to para magkaron lang ng
laman sikmura ko.” (You really can‘t prevent yourself from
thinking about it. There are times when I am tempted to
pilfer even just only a small amount so I would have
something to fill my stomach with.)
Even if they thought about of commiting petty crimes, majority of the homeless
respondents do not actually engage in such activities. They believe it is morally wrong to
do so. What is more, it ruins their camaraderie with other homeless peers. As Aries
says:
182
“Sa kalsada hindi ka naman dapat matakot eh. Basta

marunong kang makisama, hindi ka maaano. Kung
marunong kang makipag-usap sa kapwa mo, mabubuhay
ka. Huwag ka lang manloko, huwag ka lang magnakaw.
Kumbaga, iyon lang ang ipinagmamalaki ko. Umangat,
bumaba, bumagsak, mawalan, nagkaroon, walang
sumigaw sa akin sa gitna ng kalsadang magnanakaw.
Dahil iyon lang lagi sinasabi sa akin ng nanay ko noon. Na
makulong ka na sa taga, makipag-away, sa drugs, „wag ka
lang makulong dahil sa pagnanakaw. Pero awa naman ng
Diyos, hindi naman ako nakulong dahil sa pagnanakaw.”
(On the streets, you don‘t have to be afraid, As long as you
know how to get along with others, nothing will happen to
you. If you know how to relate well with your peers, you‘ll
live. Just don‘t deceive anyone. Don‘t steal. That is what I
am proud of. Whether I get to the top, bottom, or whether I
fall down, lose, gain, nobody can yell at me in the middle of
the street that I have stolen. That is what my mother often
told me before. That even if I get jailed for stabbing
somebody, for fighting or for using drugs, as long as I don‘t
get jailed for stealing, [it‘s okay]. Fortunately, through
God‘s mercy, I haven‘t been jailed for stealing.)
Most homeless people feel that they are not to blame for their situation. They attribute
their situation to social and economic constraints that hinder them from improving their
lives. They cite the lack of opportunity to enter a stable, mainstream job and the label
that accompanies being a street person among the reasons why they are in their current
condition.
Reciprocity versus Trust. Homeless people build social networks that are significant to
their survival. These networks are characterized by reciprocity and trust. Reciprocity is
more common in personal relationships, while trust is embedded in their relationship with
strangers (Torche Garcia 2004). As such, reciprocal exchange characterizes their peer
183
networks while trust can be seen in the homeless‘ relationship with homed networks,
including the strangers who occasionally give them alms.
Peer networks of homeless people are characterized with a high level of
reciprocity. Most homeless people tap into these connections, knowing that exchanges
have to be made in the future. This can be seen in how they value utang na loob
(gratitude) in the context of alternative families, wherein the old homeless adopt new
ones to their groups and treat them like kin. In the same manner, their agitated reaction
when debt of gratitude is not returned and considered meaningless shows that reciprocal
exchange is sacred for the street homeless.
Reciprocity can also be seen in the material exchanges made by homeless
people with each other. Such is the case of thirty-three year old Jojo Furtado, who grew
up in the streets of Manila and chose to stay there despite having graduated from high
school and the opportunity to get a college degree. Though he initially claimed that he
prefers the streets because of the friends he built, he actually utilizes his peer networks
to augment his means of earning money. Connected with a homed friend from Binondo
who gives him scraps of hopia, Jojo repacks them and asks homeless peers to sell them
and give him a share of their earnings if possible. Jojo sees this as a form of assisting
other homeless to make money even though he asks for a share of the earnings. On the
other hand, his homeless peers see this as a form of goodwill from Jojo such that they
give him a share of their earnings when they can. If they don‘t have enough earnings to
share, they feel embarrassed and tell him they‘ll do better next time. They also believe
that they owe him for helping them.

184
Jojo also looks after their general welfare and protects them from other groups
who bully them. This illustrates how reciprocity becomes an exchange of gifts where
―gifts demand reciprocation and declining a gift implies an affront‖ (Torche Garcia and
Valenzuela 2004).
Though Torche Garcia claims that personal relationships are generally
characterized by reciprocity, there also exists a certain level of trust in the homeless‘
peer networks. However, this is limited only to intimate networks such as partners,
spouses and close friends. Outside of this circle, most homeless people do not rely on
trust due to experiences of being deceived. Peers have taken their money and
belongings while they were asleep. Some homeless people, mostly males, are even
hesitant to join groups because they feel it might get them into trouble more than help
them survive the streets. Such trouble is caused by homeless groups which are said to
be in conflict with one another. The hesitation of joining groups come from the fear that
one might be bullied by the opposite group. As Andrew Balmes, 43, who had been in the
streets for three years, says:
“Wala naman ako maituring dito na kaibigan. Eh kasi ano,

kanya kanya eh. Iba man sila, iba man „yung ano. Mga
maraming, ano ba, kalaban sila.” (I don‘t treat anyone as a
friend. It‘s because, here, everyone‘s on his/her own. This
one is a different [group]. That [group] is different. [These
groups] are enemies with each other.)
On the other hand, the street dwellers in Manila have a high level of social trust
for their homed networks. Having a general view of humanity as ―fair, helpful and
185
trustworthy‖ (Flanagan 2005: 149), street dwellers depend on strangers and other
people whom they have no personal relationships with. Qualifying this further, street
dwellers see their relationships with homed networks and strangers as not bound by
reciprocal exchange. Homed networks such as feeding organizers and homed
individuals do not ask for anything in return and are guided by their ideals. As such, they
work for the street homeless‘ behalf. They receive food and clothes every week, obtain
groceries during Christmas and expect more ―blessings‖ to come in the future. Such
reliance of trust on the factor of time makes it as part of the experience of homeless
people. Trust, then, becomes a ―learned capacity through continuous socialization into
specific cultural milieus‖ (Sztompka 1999).
Functional over Emotional Relationships. Though the homeless find partners, have
children and develop friendships among homeless peers on the streets, the foundation
of such relationships is more functional than emotional. Such functions are characterized
by their need for protection, to develop opportunities to earn money and to make their
street strategies more effective.
Homeless women are often married or in a relationship. It is in through this that
they protect themselves and reduce their high level of vulnerability, as the streets
present risks of being raped, harassed or violently treated. Homeless males, on the
other hand, use their networks to expand possible work opportunities. They also enter
into relationships with groups as a form of protection. Unfortunately, these also lead
them to develop street habits such as drinking alcohol and getting involved in petty
186
crimes. Gays, lesbians and bisexuals use their relationship to develop their work
strategies. Though they spend time on community leisure, they use this to further
expand their networks both with their homeless and homed peers. They also stay in
groups as this protects them from being harassed by the male homeless.
Assessment of Street Homeless on Government Institutions. In the previous chapter, the
general perceptions of the homeless about institutions being both forms of constraint
and support in their daily routines have been discussed. Most homeless perceive
government entities such as the RAC, MPD and JFC as limiting and constraining. On the
other hand, religious groups such as the organizers of feeding programs are deemed
supportive and necessary to their survival.
The homeless perceive government institutions to be disruptive of their paths
whenever they are apprehended in rescue operations and detained inside prisons and
shelters for a certain period of time. Homeless people feel that they were not meant to
live in shelters which direct their daily activities as they have gotten used to being free in
the streets. Moreover, they find that they are wasting their time while waiting to be
brought back to their provinces. For Aries, staying in shelters was something he and
other homeless people are not used to. He attested that he cannot live in a shelter who
simply provides food and asks them to do nothing else. As Aries says:
―Tapos sasabihin nilang maghintay kayo at iuuwi namin

kayo sa pamilya niyo. No need! Kaya naming umuwi sa
pamilya namin ng wala kayo! „Di ba? Kasi hindi niyo alam
kung ano ‟yong problema namin eh! Sinasabi niyo may
187
problema kami., Oo may problema kami! Pero ang totoong

problema namin hindi ninyo alam. Ngayon kung gusto niyo
solusyunan ang problema namin, iisa lang ang dapat
niyong gawin, bigyan niyo kami ng trabaho para wala kami
sa kalsada and that‟s all. „Di ba?” ([In the shelter), they tell
us to wait because they will take us back to our families.
There is no need for that. We can go home to our families
without their help. It‘s because they don‘t understand what
our problem is! They tell us we have problems. Yes, we do
have problems! But they don‘t know our real problems. If
they want to provide solutions to our problems, there is
only one thing they can do. Give us jobs so we can get off
the streets, that‘s all. Right?)
As expressed by Aries, such resistance is an indication of the street homeless‘ lack of
interest in ―ineffective‖ shelter services. Shelters only physically constrain homeless
people, but no systematic changes were made in terms of socialization, culture or
behaviour (Bogard et al. 1999; Gerstel et al. 1996; Hopper 1990; Snow et a. 1994).
Moreover, Aries‘ statement regarding how they can go home to their own provinces
suggests that government services might actually be addressing the homelessness
issue wrongly. Instead of Balik Probinsya services, it is actually work opportunities that
want, according to Aries. they believe that having a permanent source of income is
enough to help them to stay off the streets. It is also important that such jobs do not
discriminate or marginalize them because they are homeless.
Street Homeless‘ Assessment on Feeding Programs and Religious Organizations. While
the homeless usually avoid government institutions, they are relatively accepting and
more positive when religious organizations are discussed. According to them, the food is
188
more satisfying and the church staffers are more pleasant and sympathetic. As Soren
Juan, 34, who is now staying at JFC but used to live in the streets for fifteen years,
recounts his experience:
“Sumama lang ako sa kasama ko, sama ka sa akin para

makakain tayo. Sabi ko, saan? Sa Quezon City, sa
Alvarez. Ang layo! „Yun nga, nagpapakain doon „yung pari.
Mabait talaga iyong pari. Bibigyan kayo ng damit,
sasabihin „maligo kayo mga anak‟.” (I just went with my
companion. He told me to go with him so we can eat. I
asked him, where? He said, in Quezon City, in Alvarez. It‘s
a bit far, but the priest fed us there. He was really kind. He
gives you food and tells you to take a bath.)
With the feeding programs, the homeless feel a sense of belonging as church organizers
treat them as family members. Some homeless people also become close with the
feeding program organizers. They approach them in times of emotional and financial
needs. Because the organizers indulge them, they are able to relate well with them.
Organizers also extend their support to the homeless outside the feeding programs.
They would visit them in prison and provide them with food when they are caught by the
police or by RAC. At times, they would ask the police and RAC to let the homeless go,
as they are members of their religious organization. This is verified by Elmer Formilleza,
organizer of the feeding program in the United Central Methodist Church:
“Nakikiusap lang kami...nakikiusap kami na itong taong ito

ay uma-attend ng feeding program. Kasi sa amin, meron
din kaming tinatawag na kooperatiba. May kooperatiba rin
kami para sa kanila... Ngayon, may mga kaibigan kami na
mga members ng kooperatiba. Ngayon, kapag member
sila, masasabi namin sa kanila na member po namin ito ng
189
kooperatiba, so pinapayagan sila. Kasi ang hinuhuli

madalas yung walang identification, mga palaboy. (We just
appeal to them (i.e., the police)...We tell them that this
person attends our feeding program. In our organization,
we have a cooperative. We also have a cooperative for
them. We have friends who are members of the
cooperative. Now if they are members, we can tell the RAC
or police so they will let them go. Those who are caught
are usually those who don‘t have identification; those who
are vagrants.)
There are times, however, that homeless people would disobey rules set by the
organizers. Some male homeless would attend feeding programs in a drunken state;
others would smoke inside the church. There are times when the homeless would get
into fights during feeding programs. A more common case is when homeless people get
unruly in queuing for food. Because of these, their peers blame the closure of some
feeding programs to the unruly behavior of certain homeless people. As Sarah says:
“Tapos ang ayaw ko naman sa mga tao na ito, kaya

nawawala ang feeding hindi sila marunong makaintindi.
Kapag sinabing maghintay, hindi, nagtutulakan pa talaga.
Nag-aagawan sa pagkain. Akala mo mga gutom. Kaya
minsan ayaw akong pumila ng asawa ko dahil baka
maitulak ako. Nawawala kasi dahil sa mga ugali ng mga
iyan. Minsan na puwede sila doon sa may Bumbay,
nawala daw „yung mga kaldero. Ang dami daw nawala
doon. Minsan nawala daw „yung Bumbay pero ibinalik na
naman. Kawawa naman daw. Pinapakain na naman sila
uli. Nawalaan nga raw sila, pero kahit sila nawalaan,
pakakainin pa nila uli.” (What I don‘t like about (some
homeless) is that they don‘t know how to listen. That was
why some feeding programs closed down. When told to
wait, they don‘t listen. Instead, they push each other and
even fight over food. You‘d think they are dead hungry.
That‘s why at times my husband doesn‘t want me to fall in
line because I might be shoved by them. [Feeding
190
programs] close down because of the behavior of these

people. There was even a time when they were fed by the
Indian [temple], cooking pots went missing. It was said a
lot of things went missing so the Indian [feeding program]
shut down. But they brought it back again later because
they pitied the homeless people. Now they are feeding
people again. Even if they lose some of their stuff, they still
feed [these people].)
However, organizers are able to manage such behavior. At times, they would send the
unruly homeless out of the church and not give them food. Generally, they would talk to
the homeless and tell them to be more grateful for the food, which are ―blessings from
God‖.
For the homeless, strict rules imposed by the organizers to maintain the order of
feeding programs are ―just right‖. Some even tell their unruly peers to behave. Because
of this, the homeless tend to act more disciplined before religious organizations than in
government institutions.
In general, feeding programs provide access to the basic and social needs of
homeless people. However, issues of dependency come up when the long term impact
of feeding programs are talked about. Even the homeless acknowledge that their peers
have become dependent on feeding programs. As Aries assesses:
“Tama lang sa loob ng isang linggo. Kung gagawin mong

straight na isang linggo araw-araw, tama lang sa loob ng
isang linggo para makapagsimula ang isang taong wala.
Tama lang para maka-survive siya sa kanyang pagkain sa
araw-araw habang nag-uumpisa sa kanyang buhay...Para
makapag-umpisa siya ng wala siyang ginagastos sa
pagkain. Tama lang din para sa isang matanda na wala
nang pinagkukunan ng kanyang pagkain sa araw-araw at
191
wala ng pamilyang inuuwian. Para sa matatanda. Tama

lang din para sa mga batang lansangan na hindi na
inaaruga at hindi na inaasikaso ng magulang para sa
kanilang pagkain kaya ang bata‟y napipilitang maglayas.
Pero hindi na tama kapag sumobra pa sa isang beses.”
([Availing of feeding program} once a week or everyday
for one week straight is just right. It will allow the person
who has nothing to live on while trying to make a good
start in life...At least, he would not have to spend for food.
It is also just right for the elderly who have no means of
obtaining food and who has no family to go home to. It is
also just right for the street children who are not being
taken cared of, ignored by their parents and who are
forced to run away from home. But it is not right if one go
[to feeding programs] beyond that.)
This statement was based on his observation of homeless people depending on feeding
programs for a long time. According to him, some homeless individuals do not find work
anymore as they have become lazy and allocate their expenses to bad habits such as
drinking and taking drugs and solvent. He also noted that old homeless people do not go
home to their families since there is available food in the streets. Aries and the other
homeless agree that there should be some ―depth‖ included in feeding programs. This
―depth‖ is a suggestion for feeding programs not only to provide food and spiritual
activities for the homeless, but also ingrain in them that such programs are only
temporary reliefs and not long-term solutions. Organizers should also educate the street
homeless that too much dependency on feeding programs would eventually rob them of
the will to get off the streets. However, Aries feels that this is not provided by organizers
of feeding programs.
192
Street Homeless‘ Perceived Solutions on Homelessness. Majority of homeless people
perceive provision of stable jobs as a solution to homelessness. They believe that
having jobs will enable them to afford rent. They also hope that the government will
provide them with houses. However, some have negative experiences of being in
relocation sites. Nila Letran, a 37-year old lesbian homeless who grew up in the streets,
prefers to be given a job instead of a house:
“Kung bibigyan kami ng shelter o bahay, trabaho. Kasi

iyong ginagawa nila sa amin, halimbawa iyong ano ng
gobyerno ngayon, dadalhin nga kami sa Cavite. Sa
malayo. Eh hala, hindi kami makakalabas sa institusyon na
iyon. Du‟n lang kami. May bahay naman kami, may
trabaho, kaya lang hindi ka makakalabas doon. Hindi
kamukha nu‟ng kapag „andito ka aanu-ano ka.” (If we‘ll be
given a shelter or a house, [I‘ll still opt to be given] a job.
It‘s because what the government is doing, like what
they‘re doing now, is to bring us to Cavite which is so
far.But we can‘t get out of that institution. We have to stay
there. Though we have a house and a job, we can‘t go out.
It‘s not like when we‘re here [in the streets], we can go
about freely.)
From this, it can be deduced that homeless people are also amenable to government
assistance. However, such interventions should also be able to provide them with a
more humane way of living than the streets. Government housing services such as
resettlement areas have been perceived only as means of getting the homeless out of
the city streets and into far away areas. For most homeless, government services are
viewed as ineffective to be limiting of their freedom. Unless government welfare policies
are able to provide decent homes and stable livelihood opportunities which will improve
193
the quality of their lives, homeless people will always prefer the streets and live through
the adaptive strategies which enabled them to survive for so long.
Government Institutions and Religious Organizations:

Perceptions on Street Homelessness
Government institutions and support organizations also have their own
constructions of the homeless and the homelessness issue. Their perceptions of the
homeless play a significant role in understanding the way they treat them. As formal and
informal welfare providers, they also have their own perceptions of solutions for
homelessness outside the policies and within the limitations of their respective
institutions. However, conflicts ensue within and among welfare providers as they
struggle to deal with the homelessness issue.
Reception and Action Center (RAC)
RAC Views on Homelessness and Its Causes. As the local shelter of Manila, RAC has
been dealing with street children and adult vagrants since 1991. Based on their
encounters with vagrants, RAC classifies the homeless as those who migrated from the
provinces to look for jobs in the city but have the misfortune of not obtaining one.
According to Acting Director Edna Gunao:
“Iyong mga homeless, mga tao na galing sa iba‟t ibang

lugar katulad ng, halimbawa sa mga provinces, na
lumuluwas dito at nakikipagsapalaran. At nagkataon, wala
silang trabaho, hindi pinalad, eh „di walang bahay. Wala
194
silang pambayad.” (Homeless people are those who came

from different areas, like, for example, from the provinces,
who went here and tried their luck. However, they weren‘t
able to find a job, and as such, they can‘t afford to have
homes as they don‘t have money to pay [rent].)
Knowing this situation, the personnel of government institutions have mixed emotions
when dealing with the homeless. Though they feel emotionally satisfied in helping their
clients, there are times when they get irritated with them as well, especially with those
who have been admitted repeatedly. In RAC, Director Gunao said that she is both
fulfilled and exasperated with the homeless:
“Ano „yan eh, mixed emotions. Masaya ka sa buhay mo,

masaya ako. At least, meron sa mga nakakausap namin
na maaaring merong nagiging maganda ang result at hindi
na bumabalik dito. Meron naman na minsan kapag „andito
ulit iyong client, first time, second time, third time na nare-
rescue, nadadala dito, siyempre „andoon na iyong minsan
maiinis ka na kasi hindi naging effective. Hindi sinunod
iyong counselling mo o iyong serbisyo na ibinigay mo.” ([I
have] mixed emotions. Somehow, I am happy. At least, we
have cases wherein results were successful and the
homeless don‘t come back anymore. However, there are
also cases wherein the clients have been rescued and
brought here the first time, second time, third time... Of
course you can‘t help but be irritated because your advice
was not followed, and the service you gave them was not
effective.)
RAC Responses on the Homeless‘ Coping Strategies and Perceived Solutions.
Government entities base their perceptions on their dealings with the homeless in
shelters and during rescue operations. RAC, which claims to have good intentions for
the homeless, see them as unappreciative as they continually refuse government

195
interventions. According to Director Gunao, the street homeless prefer the streets
instead of homes, making interventions difficult to implement:
“Dapat talaga merong ano ang gobyerno, na merong

malayong isang lugar, tapos ang lahat ng mga homeless
na madadampot, mare-rescue, ilalagay sa isang lugar at
bibigyan sila ng means of livelihood. Ayaw nila „yun! Kasi
ang gusto nila magagawa nila ang gusto nila. Andiyan
„yung vending o kaya magpalimos sa mga anak habang
sila nagtitinda. Kasi iyong mga nanay nagtitinda ng
cigarette yan o kaya candy, prutas, pero ang anak
nandyan, nag-iikot din, nagpupunas ng ano sa kalye. Hindi
rin totally talagang merong result. Kasi hanggang „andiyan
iyong kahirapan, plus iyong talagang walang effect na
services.” (The government should have an area far away
[from the city] where all the homeless who will be
apprehended and rescued will be placed there given their
means of livelihood. But they don‘t like that! What they
want is freedom to do what they want. They want to sell on
the streets, while their children beg. The mothers would
sell cigarette or candy, fruits, while their children go around
wiping anything on the streets. (Our efforts) have not had a
totally good result. Until now, poverty persists and social
services are not very effective.)
Because of the perception among RAC‘s personnel that most homeless resist RAC‘s
assistance, RAC employs alternative methods that aim to instil fear of arrest among the
homeless. These methods consist of telling the homeless person that they will be
charged in court if they were apprehended for the third time, and advising them during
counselling sessions to roam instead in places other than Manila:
“Kasi kung titingnan mo ang Manila talaga ay, dito sila

attracted... Kung adult naman nire-release na namin.
„Andun na iyong sinasabi namin na dapat hindi na sila
mag-istambay sa Manila. Kung gusto niyo mag-istambay
196
doon na kayo sa, kung kayo‟y Pasay, doon na kayo sa

Pasay.” (If you analyze it, the homeless are attracted to
Manila...If the (homeless) are adults, we release them. We
also tell them that they shouldn‘t loiter here in Manila. If
they want to loiter around, say, if they are from Pasay, they
should hang around in Pasay.)
Moreover, they are confident that the rescue operations they conduct will ensure that the
homeless will move out of the spaces where they are visible to the public. As Director
Gunao adds:
“Kasi, lumilipat na sila sa ibang lugar kapag alam na nilang

may huli. Kasi, one week kaming merong operation kaya
dapat hindi ka na mahuhuli, uuwi ka na kung saan kang
lugar.” (The homeless usually move to other places when
they know there are rescue operations. We conduct a
whole week operations so if [the homeless] do not want to
get caught, they have to go back to their hometowns.)
At times, RAC brings the homeless to Marikina Boys Town. This is another method they
use so that the homeless will be discouraged from going back to Manila. However,
homeless people are able to return to the city through begging money for transportation
or walking. When asked how ineffective this approach is, Director Gunao defends that
this discourages the homeless from occupying the same public spaces where they got
caught. For RAC and the local government of Manila, it is important that the homeless
stay invisible from the main streets. This method utilized by RAC is called displacement,
where the homeless are discouraged to occupy spaces which are usually populated.
Most urban cities employ this method, where they keep out the homeless in prime
197
spaces such as sites of recreational, residential and commercial activities (Snow and
Anderson 1993).
Looking at the long term, Director Gunao believes that settlements are answers
to the problem of homelessness in Manila. According to her:
“Kasi iyong ang pinoproblema eh. ‟Di ba homeless nga

eh? Para hindi na sila makitang nasa kalye, dapat meron
kang settlement na pwede mong i-house sila doon...Tapos
ang lahat ng mga homeless na madadampot, mare-
rescue, ilalagay sa isang lugar at bibigyan sila ng means of
livelihood.” (Having no place to stay is the problem. That‘s
why they are homeless, right? For them not to be seen on
the streets, they should have settlements where they can
be housed... That all the homeless which will be
apprehended, rescued, will be put in a far place and given
means of livelihood.)
Such a suggestion seems to come from RAC‘s long-time practice of removing and
displacing homeless people from public spaces. For RAC, removal of the homeless from
the city will help solve homelessness in Manila. However, relocation solutions by the
government have not often worked in the past. As such, it is important that livelihood and
infrastructure services are completely satisfied for homeless people to live in relocation
sites and stay off the streets.
Manila Police District (MPD)
MPD Views on Homelessness and Its Causes. The Manila Police District admits to
feeling compassionate when it comes to dealing with the homeless because they know
their actual situation. However, because the law has to be enforced, the Police have no
198
choice but to apprehend those who violate it. According to PO1 James Paul Cruz of the
Anti-Crime Unit of Station 5 in Ermita:
“Iyang mga taong yan na natutulog sa kalsada, biktima ng

illegal recruiter at galing sa probinsya para maghanap ng
trabaho dito sa Maynila pero walang makita. Kawawa ang
mga yan. Kaso, dahil may batas, kailangan ipatupad, „di
ba? Kaya madalas, nababagansya sila.” (Those people
who sleep in the streets, they are victims of illegal
recruiters. They came from the province to look for jobs
here in Manila but found none. They are a pitiful lot. But
because there is law, it should be enforced, right? That is
why they are often apprehended for vagrancy.)
From 2008 until present, Mayor Lim has increased the anti-criminality campaign which
ushered police officers to pre-empt crime in the city. This means that crime is prevented
by the presence of police officers in the streets. This accompanies questioning of
suspicious characters who are seen loitering in the streets. In relation to homelessness,
this means increased arrest of those sleeping or loitering in the streets regardless of
whether they have committed petty crimes or not. As PO2 Cris Ocampo explains the
process of questioning suspicious characters:
―Kapag wala silang business dito, iniimbitahan namin sa

police station para du‟n tanungin at i-verify...‟Pag walang
official business dito, „pag hindi ka naman nagtatrabaho
dito at wala kang maipakitang ID, du‟n ka kakasuhan ng
vagrancy. Minsan kasi, sila yung mga nang-i-i-snatch,
nandurukot, „yung mga gumagawa ng petty crimes. Iyon
ang pine-prevent namin.‖ (When they don‘t have an official
business here [in the city], we invite them to the police
station to ask and verify their identity...When they don‘t
have an official business here, when they don‘t work here
and cannot show an ID, they will be charged with
199
vagrancy. Sometimes, they are the ones who rob,

pilfer...who commit petty crimes. That is what we are
tasked to prevent.)
In dealing with the homeless, however, they use discretion in enforcing laws. Being torn
between enforcing the law and knowing the actual situation of homeless people, they
compensate by using the law which imposes lesser penalties. Between the Vagrancy
Law and the City Ordinance on Vagrancy, they enforce the latter more commonly than
the former. This is because they often apprehend the homeless who are sleeping in the
streets and public places. They call them ―normal‖ because they have not committed
crimes. AS SPO3 Ernesto Peralta explains:
―18 years old pataas...‟yan ang mga kinakasuhan ng

vagrancy. Mas ipinapatupad ang City Ordinance. Kasi
kapag hindi naman siya „yung kuwan...Makikita mo sa
personality ng tao na hindi naman siya „yung tipo na
gagawa ng masama e. Kapag medyo okay-okay naman
talaga...‟yung City Ordinance. Mas mataas kasi „yung
penalty sa Vagrancy Law. Mas mataas „yung multa,
kulong, ganyan...Tanggalin mo „yung Article 202 [Vagrancy
Law], merong City Ordinance naman. Sa ibang siyudad,
walang ganyan. Ang ginagamit ay Article 202 ng Revised
Penal Code. Para sa normal na tao, ginagamit „yung City
Ordinance para madali makalabas...” (Those who are 18
years old and above are the ones charged with vagrancy.
City Ordinance is used more [than the Vagrancy Law]. It‘s
because when one is...You‘ll see that if the person does
not seem to be the personality type to commit crime, if he
looks okay...the (we use) the City Ordinance to charge the
person with. The Vagrancy Law has higher penalties. It
requires bigger fines and longer time in prison...Even if you
remove Article 202 [Vagrancy Law], there is the City
Ordinance. In other cities, it does not exist. They only use
Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code. For normal people,
200
we use the City Ordinance so they can get out of jail

easily...)
MPD Responses on the Homeless‘ Coping Strategies and Perceived Solutions. Officers
from MPD are aware of the adaptive strategies that the homeless use, particularly that of
attending feeding programs and working on the streets. Their view of feeding programs
is generally negative, as they feel that the homeless have come to depend on them.
PO2 Ocampo says:
“Feeding programs? Ah oo, „yung mga yan, alam na alam

ang oras, araw kung saan meron. Pero sa tingin naming
mali. Bibigyan mo sila ng pagkain, tapos sasabihin nila,
„Bakit maghahanapbuhay pa kami e mamayang alas
kwatro may pila na sa ganyan, Bukas, meron na sa ganito.
Minsan may mga spiritual ano pa yan, sayawan, kantahan,
ganyan...Pero ang habol lang talaga nila dun, makakain.”
(Feeding programs? Oh yes, they [street homeless] know
very well the time and day when these are held. But we
think it is wrong. You will give them food, then they will say,
‗Why should we still look for work when there is a feeding
queue later at four here. Tomorrow, there is another there.
[Feeding programs] even have spiritual
[activities]...dancing, singing, l...but what the homeless are
really after is just to be able to eat.)
The MPD officers believe that the solution for the problem of homelessness is to provide
them with jobs. According to them, giving them homes is not enough. As SPO3 Peralta
says:
“Marami d‟yan walang bahay, walang makain, walang

matulugan, „yung pinakamahirap sa mahirap...Pero kahit
bigyan mo ng bahay, parang hinahanap-hanap pa din nila
201
ang kalsada.” (Majority of them don‘t have homes, have no

food to eat, no areas to sleep. [They are] the poorest of the
poor...But even if you give them homes, it seems like they
still want to live on the streets.)
However, as law enforcers, they feel that policies should change regarding the
homeless. Familiar with law enforcement, police officers have a suggestion with regard
to the Vagrancy Law. Recently, a proposition to remove this law was raised by Senator
Escudero. Police officers, however, have their own suggestion based on their
experiences in dealing with the homeless and enforcing the law. PO1 Cruz explains:
“Hindi dapat tanggalin ang vagrancy, dapat palawigin ang

Vagrancy Law kasi masdyadong broad. May vagrants na
natutulog sa kalye, wala naman palang bahay, walang
matulugan. May vagrant na namamalimos... Dapat i-revise
ang law. „Yung mga vagrants, dapat i-separate sa issue ng
mga prostitutes. „Yung mga mendicants, dapat i-separate o
gumawa ng organisasyon. Palawigin pa „yun kasi ang
sinasabi nila sa vagrancy, those found loitering, vagrancy
ka na. Ibig sabihin, „pag nakatulala ka sa langit, vagrancy
ka na? Panahon pa ng Kastila kasi „yun. „Yung vagrancy
na „yan, para sa mga indio. „Yung mga mahilig maghihiga
dyan, „di ba? Pero kelangan i-execute „yung batas e,
kailangang ipatupad.” (Vagrancy Law should not be
removed; instead, it should be made more comprehensive
because [the definition] is too broad. There are vagrants
who sleep on the streets and do not have homes. There
are vagrants who beg...the law should be revised. [Laws
for] vagrants should be separated from [laws dealing with]
prostitutes. As for the mendicants, they should also be
governed by a separate law, or an organization should be
created for them. They should make the law more
comprehensive. [In this law], those found loitering are
already considered vagrants. So even if you‘re just looking
at the sky, you‘re already a vagrant? This law was created
during the Spanish period. Vagrancy was for the indio,
202
those who like to lie down anywhere, right? But, [despite all
these gaps], the law has to be executed and enforced.)
Such revisions in the laws on vagrancy would mean a big difference on the lives of the
street homeless. Most homeless respondents have been charged with vagrancy a
number of times. As such, they have experienced being arrested and have been marked
as criminals despite being innocent. Making the law more comprehensive would
probably lessen the criminal stigma and give them a chance to be recognized as worthy
of welfare services. Moreover, for the law enforcers, this would unburden them of
apprehending homeless people whose only crime is to sleep in the streets because they
have no homes.
DSWD, Jose Fabella Center (JFC)

and the MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit (MMDA-SDCU)
Views on Homelessness and Its Causes. National welfare government institutions such
as DSWD, JFC and MMDA-SDCU have their own encounters with homeless people not
only in Manila but in the whole of Metro Manila. However, their observations are similar
to that of the local institutions in Manila. For MMDA-SDCU Director Amante Salvador,
homeless people cannot go back to their hometowns because they lost their money for
trying their luck in the city:
“Yung mga homeless ay karamihan mga adult eh, mga

teenagers. Makikita mo iyong mga edad. Mag-interview ka
ng most of them, ito iyong mga galing sa probinsya,
pumunta dito makipagsapalaran then nawalan ng pera.
Mga sad stories talaga lahat eh. Nagkahiyaan nang
203
bumalik, talagang natutulog na lang diyan kung saan-saan.

So until sa katagalan siguro kaya naglalaboy na iyong iba.
Basta ganyan halos pare-parehas eh, naubusan ng pera
wala na hindi na makabalik sa probinsya.” (Homeless
people are mostly adults and teenagers. You will see the
age. We interview most of them and find that they came
from the provinces. They went here [in the cities] and tried
their luck but lost their money. These are all sad stories.
Then they already find it shameful to go back, so they
sleep anywhere on the streets. Over time, some became
mendicants. It‘s like that. They all have the same story:
they lost their money and cannot go back to their home
provinces.)
JFC Director Benjie Barbosa sees homeless people as those who make the streets their
homes. Their livelihood—scavenging, begging, among others—causes them to sleep on
the streets. In the long run, they develop personal bonds on the streets which make it
more difficult for them to leave. As he explains:
―‘Yung mga nagpapalimos, mendicants, nangangalakal sa

kalye, „yan ang mga karaniwang na-re-rescue...Kaya lang,
ginagawa nilang bahay ang streets. Natutulog sa sidewalk,
ganu‟n ang sistema... Streets provide them with livelihood,
nakakakita ng kaibigan, asawa...dyan pa nga sila
dumadami e...” (Those who beg, who are considered
mendicants, and who scavenge on the streets are the
ones usually rescued...However, they make the streets
their homes. They sleep on the sidewalks. That becomes
their system...The streets provide them with livelihood. It is
also where they meet friends, partners...It even becomes
the pace where they [have children]...‖
What is more, JFC Director Barbosa admits that there are technically no actual
homeless people. This statement came from the cases of clients that JFC has handled,
wherein most usually have homes or relatives in distant areas. If there were homeless
204
people, the closest terminology Director Barbosa attributes to them is strandees, or
victims of illegal recruitment. Because of this, other DSWD institutions pattern their
services to the homeless after cases such as those addressing mental illness, physical
and sexual abuse, and issues involving children, minors and elders.
Responses on the Homeless‘ Coping Strategies and Perceived Solutions. Government
institutions such as the JFC and MMDA-SDCU view homeless people differently. For
MMDA-SDCU, coping strategies of the street homeless causes them to be ―eyesores‖.
They tend to beg, sleep and occupy major public places in Metro Manila. Moreover, they
endanger other people because of their behaviour. While their main duty is to conduct
rescue operations, MMDA-SDCU believes that the job is mainly a responsibility of the
DSWD and local governments. However, they see the need to assist these institutions.
As MMDA-SDCU Director Salvador says:
“Actually, trabaho ng DSWD ito supposed to be... Kaya

lang makikita nating parang wala ring magawa even the
local [government]. Supposed to be, may mga kanya-
kanyang department ang Social Welfare and commitment
pero makikita mo ang daming namamalimos sa daan, ang
daming natutulog sa ilalim ng mga tulay, sa itaas ng
overpass, sa underpasses, sa sidewalks, sa waiting shed.
Aminin nating talagang eyesore „yan „tsaka they cause
danger (not only) to themselves but to other people using
the sidewalks. And most of the time dahil ang number one
problem ng Metro Manila is traffic, they also impede the
flow of traffic. Dahil lalo kapag diyan sila namamalimos sa
daan, nakikita mo naman dati.” (Actually, this is supposed
to be the job of DSWD. However, local governments also
can‘t do anything about the issue. There‘s supposed to be
different departments of Social Welfare [addressing the
205
issue], but you‘ll see a lot of people begging in the streets,

sleeping under the bridge, atop the overpass, in
underpasses, sidewalks, waiting sheds. We have to admit
that they are eyesores and that they also cause danger to
other people using the sidewalks. Most of the time, they
also impede the flow of traffic in Metro Manila, especially
when you see them beg.)
JFC, tasked with admitting rescued homeless in the shelter, observe that most homeless
people refuse government services. This is because the homeless have high
expectations of shelters. For example, the main complaint of the homeless in JFC is that
they are mixed with other kinds of people such as those who are mentally ill. In
response, JFC Director Benjie Barbosa says:
“Ay akala nila rito, pagdating nila dito ay heaven. Maganda

„yung tulugan, masarap „yung pagkain, maganda „yung
mga kasama. Kasi may mga nire-refer dito pagkatapos ng
isang araw, naku magpapa-discharge na ako. Bakit? Kasi
mga kasama ko rito mga sira ulo. Eh hindi mo naman
maiwasan „yon kasi, nasa isang compound ka lang. Pero
hindi naman kayo magkatabi sa pagtulog. Hindi naman.
Pero siyempre kapag nakipag-mingle ka d‟yan, halu-halo
na „yan. Hindi naman pupwedeng hihiwalay-hiwalayin pa
„yan..O dito „yung mga psychotic, du‟n kayo sa dulo dahil
mga ganu‟n kayo. Hindi naman pu-pwede. Eh ayun, kasi
part ng rehabilitation nila „yun na magsama-sama...” (They
think that when they arrive here, it would be heaven. They
would have a good place to sleep, delicious food to eat,
good company… There are those who were referred here
who after one day, asked to be discharged. Why? They
say, ‗my companions here are all crazy.‘ You really can‘t
prevent that because you are just in one compound. But
you don‘t get to sleep beside them anyway. It‘s not like
that. Of course, if they mingle, it is really a mixed group. It‘s
not possible to separate them. Can you tell the psychotics
206
‗stay on that end because you are psychotics?‘ That‘s not

possible. It‘s part of rehabilitation that they stay together…)
Despite such refusal from the street homeless, welfare institutions continue to provide
immediate relief and temporary shelters without accounting for the long-term solution to
the homelessness problem. As such, failing to solve this issue leads to the existence of
the habitual homeless, or clients who have been repeatedly rescued. However, this
seems to have become an accepted fact. Knowing that the homeless will return to the
streets once rescued, the MMDA-SDCU admits that they are only addressing the short-
term aspect of taking people out of the streets. Though rescue operations are tiring and
deemed ineffective, MMDA Social Welfare Director Amante Salvador motivates his unit
by saying that they will lose their jobs if the homeless do not exist anymore:
“Kasi trabaho nga nila. So sabi ko huwag kayong

magsawa. Kapag wala sila, wala na rin kayong trabaho,
wala na kayong suweldo. So hindi dapat sila magsawa.
Basta ang labanan diyan, pikon talo.” (It‘s their job. So I tell
them not to get tired of it [because if the homeless] are not
there, they won‘t have jobs, they won‘t have salaries. So
they shouldn‘t get tired. It‘s actually very simple: when you
get frustrated, you lose.)
On the other hand, JFC Director Barbosa believes that possible solutions to the issue of
homelessness are housing and job provisions. As he says:
“Housing at saka jobs. Ang tao naman kapag may jobs,

kapag may bahay naman „yan hindi „yan pupunta sa
streets. „Di ba? „Tsaka hindi „yan dadami. Kung may
trabaho „yan, hindi „yan dadami. Eh kaya naman tayo
dumadami, wala tayong trabaho eh....” (Housing and jobs.
207
When people have jobs and homes, they won‘t go to the

streets, right? The presence of homeless people in the
streets won‘t increase if they have jobs. [The number of
homeless people] increase because we don‘t have enough
jobs [to offer]...‖
Perhaps in consideration of such, the DSWD and JFC started to work on organizing
livelihood programs for clients who can open their own small businesses when they go
back to their provinces to date. One respondent already obtained a baking certificate,
one of the livelihood programs offered by JFC. Having obtained a certificate, he intends
to use this when he goes back home to Mindanao. However, livelihood programs are
only available to those who sought assistance and shelter from the national government
such as DSWD.
Organizers of Feeding Programs
Views on Homelessness and Its Causes. Feeding program organizers have more
interaction with the street homeless than government institutions. However, religious
organizations treat feeding programs as part of their apostolic mission and not as long-
term solutions to the issue of homelessness. They believe that they support the
homeless through short-term relief while waiting for the long-term solutions which are yet
to be implemented by the government. Despite recognizing the many causes of
homelessness—lack of jobs, family problems, illegal recruitment, houses have been
burned, among others--,organizers believe that the common problem of those who
208
attend their programs is the lack of homes. As such, they suggest that shelters and
institutions be set up specifically for the street homeless. Sister Rafer, organizer of the
San Sebastian Church feeding program, observes that government institutions,
especially in Manila, do not have welfare services addressing the needs of the street
homeless. As she says:
“Sa parokya naman walang place na i-ano sila. Parang

DSWD. Pero ang ano naman nila du‟n is sa mga kuwan
eh, iyong mga ina-adopt nila, iyong mga ina-abort, iyong
mga walang mga nanay, magulang, iyon naman ang
inaano nila eh. Pero iba din ang kaso nito eh. Dapat dito
sa kanila may isang ganyan din na mga katulad halimbawa
meron du‟n na lugar na pagdadalhan sa kanila. Magkaroon
ng livelihood para maturuan sila kung papaano ang dapat
nilang gawin.” (In our parish, we don‘t have a place to
[shelter] them. Like DSWD, they admit those who want to
have their children aborted, those who don‘t have mothers
or parents. These are the ones they cater to. But the case
of the homeless is also different. The homeless should
also have a place where they can be sheltered. They
should also be given livelihood training where they can be
taught skills which they can use to live on.)
This observation could be attributed to how government institutions have failed to claim
homelessness—or the existence of people without actual homes—as a welfare problem.
With the lack of a definition as to who and what constitute the homeless, specific
services addressing such need do not exist as well. As such, most homeless people
approach feeding programs because government welfare institutions are lacking in
services which can cater to their needs.

209
Responses on the Homeless‘ Coping Strategies and Perceived Solutions. While
government institutions deal with the homeless in an impersonal manner, religious
organizations look at the homeless more humanely. They treat them as friends and
members of their religious communities, adhering to their faith as guide in dealing with
them. According to Sister Fanny Rafer, organizer of the feeding program in San
Sebastian Church:
“Ang ano naman namin, kapag kay Lord ka, „di ba wala
naman pinipili si Lord? Pantay-pantay. Walang mayaman,
mahirap... Ang nagugutom „di ba pakakainin?.Kasi
siyempre ikaw din ang bumaba sa kanila. Hindi lang sila
ang... bumaba ka rin sa kanila. Anuhin mo rin ang
kalooban nila para maging malapit sila sa iyo. Kasi kapag
hindi ka marunong bumaba sa kanila, wala rin. Parang
nagrerebelde rin sila sa buhay nila, „di ba? Kasi nga iyong
mga ganyan parang hindi na rin ano „di ba?Parang minsan
hindi na nila alam, malayo sila sa magulang nila, sa lahat
na ng kamag-anakan nila. Parang tinatakwil na rin sila ng
mga kamag-anakan nila dahil nga doon sa buhay nila.
Kaya mahirap, mahirap. Parang ang haba ng dadaanan
mo sa kanila. Kaya lang, kami natututo rin kami kung
paano din sila mapalapit.” (For us, if you‘re [working] for
the Lord, you don‘t chose [who to serve] because the Lord
doesn‘t choose either? Everyone are equal in His eyes.
There is no rich or poor. You need to feed the hungry...
You should also be the one to go to them. They shouldn‘t
be the only one to [seek for help]. You should also seek
them. Get their trust so that they will get close to you. If
you don‘t know how to sympathize with them, it‘s useless.
They are already rebelling against life, right? These
people, sometimes they don‘t even know they are
distancing themselves from their parents and from all their
relatives. Their relatives also have forsaken them because
of the life they chose. That is why it‘s difficult, really difficult
to work with them. You have to go a long way [to earn their
trust]. But we have learned how to draw them to us.)
210
Because of this, most homeless prefer attending feeding programs and seeking help
from the organizers themselves rather than approaching government institutions.
However, feeding organizers also have complaints with the attitudes of homeless
people. These complaints stem from their being rowdy during feeding programs.
According to Sister Rafer:
“Noong unang-una namin silang na-meet, hirap din, ah.

Ang titigas ng ulo. Mga pasaway, nanggugulo, maingay,
hindi nakikinig. Kahit anong saway mo, wala lang.
Mahihirapan ka rin. Hindi ka makapag-concentrate sa mga
prayers dahil andun nag-iingay, may nag-aaway-away.
Pero sa unti-unti na, sa katagalan, naano na rin sila, hindi
na sila magulo, behave na sila.” (When we met the
homeless for the first time, it was difficult. They were very
stubborn. They were obstinate, rowdy, loud, [and] they do
not listen [to us]. All forms of reproach were useless. It was
difficult to concentrate while praying because they were
very noisy. There were also those who were fighting. But
little by little, after a while, they weren‘t rowdy anymore.
They become more behaved.)
Organizers have reported the same experience wherein the homeless would be difficult
to restrain at first. Over time, however, the street homeless would listen more and
respect them. Such change in behavior was due to the attribution of the feeding
programs as made ―possible through the grace of God‖ and the organizers telling them
that the programs can only run as long as they behave. Some homeless people believe
this and tell their peers to respect the rules of the feeding programs else all of them
would end up going hungry for a day or so if they shut down. As noted in previous
211
chapters, feeding programs occur almost every day. Losing one feeding program would
shift the daily routines of the homeless as they mainly depend on them for food.
The feeding programs supported by religious organizations have been criticized
by government institutions for encouraging dependency and dole-outs among the
homeless. Sister Rafer justifies that such dependency is not true. She attests that
homeless people also try to earn money in order to survive. As she says:
“Iyon na nga, minsan ang daming nagku-complain. Pero

sabi naman namin, parang sanay na rin sila sa buhay nila.
Parang sanay na sila ganoon na kung saan may feeding
program talagang pumupunta sila. Pero naghahanap-
buhay naman sila. Kapag walang feeding program
halimbawa, ilang linggo kaming wala, nabubuhay naman
sila. So ibig sabihin, kumikita din sila, sa mga
nagbabasura, yun mga sa nagbebenta ng plastik plastik,
kumikita sila.” (Sometimes, many complain [about the
feeding programs]. But it‘s like they [homeless people] are
used with their kind of life such as attending feeding
programs. But they still find work. When there is no feeding
program, for example, like when we don‘t have programs
for weeks, they survive. So it means that they also earn
through scavenging, through selling plastic [bottles]. They
still earn.)
Moreover, feeding programs acknowledge their limitations and attest that they can only
provide short-term reliefs. They also contend that it is up to the government to provide
long-term solutions. According to Sister Rafer:
“...dapat gumawa ng aksyon ang gobyerno natin tungkol

doon sa kanila eh. Kasi kung simbahan, hindi din magawa
ng simbahan yun di ba? Tulung-tulong maaari.” (―...the
government should do something about them. If it‘s only
the church, the church can‘t do much about it too, right?
212
We should collaborate with each other as much as

possible.)
However, issues arise when a collaboration between government institutions and
religious organizations is brought up. Government institutions, such as city welfare
officers oppose this idea because they think that this would only address the short-term
problem and encourage dependency. Moreover, RAC officials are not aware that such
feeding programs exist, even if they are in the same locality and religious organizers
have approached them to release their homeless ―members‖.
An summary of the actors‘ constructions on the issue of homelessness can be
seen in Table 1. It presents their perceptions on the causes of homelessness, coping
strategies of homeless people, and perceived solutions to the homeless problem.
Conflicts Among Institutions

on the Issue of Homelessness
Though they are catering to a common group, institutions have issues with each
other concerning how homelessness should be dealt with. Aside from their differing
perceptions on the street homeless, conflicts related to the implementation of
interventions also ensue within and among national and local government institutions.
Moreover, debates arise between government and civic organizations in the issue of
dependency for feeding programs given by religious groups.

213
Table 10. Actors' Constructions on the Issue of Homelessnesss
Actor Views on Causes of Views/ Responses on Homeless’ Perceived Solutions to

Homelessness Coping Strategies Homelessness
Street Homeless -Lack of jobs in “Streets serve as forms of escape & -Provide jobs or livelihood
provinces freedom from home-based problems.” opportunities
-Family problems at
home Response: -Make available
-Accidents (i.e. house -Stay in the streets because of affordable homes
burned down, etc.) available adaptive strategies &
personal relationships with homeless
peers
Views on Institutions:
-RAC as constraint to daily routines;
shelter & staff treat homeless badly
-MPD as constraint to daily routines;
they ―extort ― fines from homeless
people
-Organizers of feeding programs as
assistance & important in adaptive
strategy
Reception and Action Center -Lack of jobs in “Homeless avoid shelter services & -Put up settlements in
(RAC) provinces; no money to prefer the streets where they can do distant areas & provide
afford homes in the city what they want.” rescued homeless people
with livelihood
Response:
-Displacement of homeless people
from public spaces in Manila
Complaints from other Institutions:

-Ineffective services & interventions
because RAC easily lets homeless go
back to the streets
214
-Head official of RAC is not a social

worker but an appointee of the mayor;
lack of experience means welfare
policies are not effectively
implemented
Manila Police District (MPD) -Lack of jobs in “Homeless prefer the streets because -Update & make
provinces; no money to of available street-based work Vagrancy Law more
afford homes in the city opportunities. Though they are not comprehensive, which
likely to commit crimes, they are still separates penalties on
apprehended because of the laws on vagrants, prostitutes and
vagrancy.” even mendicants
Response:
-Enforce laws on vagrancy. City
Ordinance on Vagrancy is applied to
homeless people because it has minor
penalties.

-None mentioned.
DSWD, Jose Fabella Center -No such thing as “Homeless refuse shelters because of -Provide livelihood
(JFC) ―homeless‖; high expectations on services. They opportunities
circumstances pushed also don‟t like the limited freedom
people with homes to inside the shelter.” -Continue implementing
take the streets Balik Probinsya Program
Response
-Mendicants -Continue providing shelter services to
rescued homeless

-Balik Probinsya Program seems
ineffective because homeless people
215
go back to the cities
MMDA Street Dweller Care -Lack of jobs in “Homeless are eyesores in public -Provide livelihood
Unit (MMDA-SDCU) provinces; no money to places because they beg & sleep in opportunities
afford homes in the city the streets. They also tend to
endanger other people using
sidewalks & cause traffic.”
Response:
-Continue rescue operations even if
homeless keep returning to the streets

-No MOA with DSWD-JFC regarding
their role during rescue operations
-No social welfare officer in the
MMDA-SDCU
Organizers of Feeding -Lack of jobs in “Feeding programs do not promote -Provide short-term relief
Programs/ Religious provinces; no money to dependency because the homeless while waiting for long-term
Institutions afford homes in the city find ways to earn money for government solutions
-Family problems at themselves.” such as livelihood and
home housing services
-Accident-related Response
events (i.e. house -Continue providing short term relief
burned down, etc.) such as feeding programs to the street
homeless
-No government
institution particularly Complaints from other Institutions:
catering to the -Feeding programs are dole-outs &
homeless group encourage dependency
216
The local shelter, RAC, garnered the most complaints from other local and
national institutions. According to most police officers interviewed from MPD, RAC has a
tendency to release easily the homeless people that they rescue and apprehend. One
police officer even said that RAC apprehends homeless people ―just for show‖ because
they provide no real intervention to them. Moreover, the Balik Probinsya Program—
which was perceived to be a project of RAC instead of DSWD—is not effective. After
being escorted back to their hometowns, most homeless people tend to come back to
the city because of the lack of opportunities for earning money and the unresolved family
conflicts at home. Another complaint against RAC is the quality of its staff. According to
one welfare official in a national institution, the head of RAC is not a social worker but a
political appointee. According to this official, the Local Government Code indicates that
the head of the social welfare office does not necessarily need to be a social worker.
Because of this, the system suffers with the lack of professional and experienced social
worker.
This issue on having no professional social workers on board extends to the
MMDA as well. Under former Chairman Bayani Fernando, the Street Dweller Care Unit
was formed to rid the cities of vagrants. However, they do not provide necessary
interventions because of the lack of experienced social workers in their unit. What is
more, the creation of the unit is independent of DSWD, which is the national welfare
institution of the Philippine Government. Because of these, local government units in
Metro Manila complain about the presence of MMDA-SDCU in the field of welfare.
Despite these, however, MMDA continues to become involved in the rescue of vagrants,
217
mendicants and street families, whom they bring to JFC. JFC has a more positive
relationship with the latter because they provide transportation for rescue operations and
respond to emergency situations in the shelter. However, a memorandum of agreement
is yet to be signed between MMDA and JFC. With the MOA, MMDA‘s roles will be made
more official in relation to the issue of homelessness.
There are also several issues that emerge whenever services provided by
government welfare systems and religious institutions are compared. Government
institutions contend that feeding programs by churches are merely dole outs. At times,
they point to it as one of the factors which deter the finding of a long term solution to the
issue of homelessness. However, one welfare official at the national level said that these
feeding programs are actually doing the government a favor because the latter generally
suffers from critical shortage of funds and facilities to provide better services to the
homeless. Religious institutions, on the other hand, believe that they are giving
immediate relief to the street homeless. They are aware that they are only providing
short-term measures and that these have limitations. Aside from these, they are
optimistic that the government will be able to address the long term. In the meantime,
they continue to hold feeding programs for those who have nothing to eat. Some,
nonetheless, have started to incorporate livelihood programs by partnering with private
companies. They recognize that giving job opportunities to homeless people, especially
those who prove themselves worthy through commitment to volunteering responsibilities
in feeding programs, can be a possible solution to the issue.

218
Habitual Homelessness:
Institutionalization of Homelessness
As a Result of Interactions
Between Actors
The different constructions of homelessness result to diverse kinds of
relationships and interactions among actors. While the street homeless exist
harmoniously with religious organizations, they treat government institutions with
aversion and hostility. Where short term reliefs from religious groups are more
acceptable to the street homeless, long term interventions from government institutions,
on the other hand, are perceived to be unfavourable. This dynamics resulted to a more
problematic issue: habitual homelessness, wherein homelessness has become
institutionalized and accepted as a way of life.
Religious organizations have been viewed by the street homeless as forms of
support and essential in their daily routines. Characterized by the regularity of food and
other material reliefs they offer, these programs are prioritized in the routines of the
homeless. Aside from this, organizers and the street homeless have a more positive and
intimate relationship. The street homeless feel a sense of belonging when attending
feeding programs and do not feel threatened by the church staff. On the other hand,
government institutions such as RAC and MPD are seen as constraints. For the
homeless, these institutions disrupt their daily subsistence routine. Such break has been
experienced by the homeless more than once, as both sides enter into a cyclical pattern
of capture and release. As presented in the last chapters, RAC and MPD use social
219
control strategies such as containment, displacement and exclusion (Snow and Mulcahy:
2001). By containment, the mobility and spatial range of the homeless are restricted by
local authorities because the directive of the city government is to keep them hidden
from the public eye. This is done through ―stricter enforcement of ordinances‖ such as
begging, public intoxication and disruption of public peace, and doing random I.D.
checks and questioning the homeless people. By displacement, the homeless are
removed from spaces they frequently occupy. RAC admits to bringing the homeless they
rescue to Marikina Boystown to discourage them from roaming the streets of Manila.
The main purpose of conducting rescue operations is also to move the homeless out of
places where they would be seen by the public.
However, such modes of control are not effective in getting the homeless off the
streets. Though most experience fear of arrest when seeing local authorities, they see
them more as impediments than as threats to their daily routines. The cycle of being
caught and getting out easily is treated as part of the homeless life. When such
happens, the homeless usually concede to the authorities because they know they can
go back to the streets after. Those who have been on the streets for a long time have
become less afraid of authorities and have even accepted being caught by them. Such
acceptance can be seen in experiences such as what is recounted by Aries:
“Sasabihin nila, ikaw na naman? Kumbaga sila na ang

magsasawa sa iyo. Kaya nga nu‟ng mga time namin nu‟ng
year na nasa 1998 hanggang 1999 „yun, may mga grupo
talaga kami na dito sa may parte ng Lawton. Mga
nakahiga kami, makikita namin iyong nambabagansiya
parating na. „O bangon na kayo diyan, bangon na!‟ Kami
na, sinasalubong na namin sila. Sasakay na kami du‟n sa
220
sasakyan! Para hindi na lang kami hulihin! Kumbaga sila

na iyong naiinis, „Uy baba, baba!‟ „‟Di ba babagansyahin
niyo kami?‟ „Hindi na, hindi na.‟ Sila na iyong nagsasawa
sa amin.“ (They will ask us, it‘s you again? It‘s like they‘re
the ones who are getting tired of you. In 1998 until 1999,
we had groups in one part of Lawton. We would sleep
together and when we will see those who are in charge of
those who are coming for us. [We will say] ‗Wake up, wake
up!‘ We would already go to them and get into their
vehicles so they don‘t need to apprehend us. They would
be the ones who would get annoyed and tell us ‗Hey get
off, get off!‘ We would ask, ‗Aren‘t you going to apprehend
us for vagrancy?‘ ‗No not anymore.‘ They‘re the ones who
get tired of us already.)
Despite the stubbornness of the homeless people, the MMDA-SDCU personnel motivate
their people not to get frustrated because their jobs and salaries depend on the
existence of homeless people. As Director Salvador describes the dynamics between a
homeless person and their staff:
„Eh „di hulihin n‟yo „ko, tutal papakawalan rin naman ako
bukas,” sabi nung isa. Sabi naman nito, “Eh huhulihin
talaga kita, dahil kapag wala kaming huli baka wala na rin
kaming trabaho.” (Some would tell us, ‘go ahead and
apprehend me, you‘ll let go of me tomorrow anyway‘ [The
MMDA-SDCU personnel] would then counter by saying, ‗I
will definitely apprehend you because if we don‘t have
rescue operations, we won‘t have jobs‘.)
This happens to other government institutions such as RAC and MPD as well. When
asked why they accept this cyclical process which does not really address the problem
of homelessness and, in fact, encourages habitual homelessness, they would agree and
221
say it was part of their jobs. Moreover, they think that the homeless will be discouraged
at the very least to avoid public streets.
In general, most welfare institutions admit that homelessness has become a
complex structural problem. Homelessness is a cycle that even exceeds generations
and time. This is based on the observation of social workers, where street children grow
up in the streets and eventually have families. For RAC, homelessness has become a
cycle:
“Katulad ng nag-start ako dito ng 1991 na pagpasok ko

dito meron akong isang client, nanay lang siya. Iyong anak
niya kinukuha niya dito, kasi street children siya. Ngayon
bumalik ako ngayon dito, apo na niya. Ibig sabihin nu‟n,
iyong dating client ko na nagkaasawa, nasa street, meron
siyang anak, nu‟ng kumuha, lola. O anong sabi ko sa
kanya? Talaga namang ganoon lang siguro. Kung ano ang
nakita, nakalakihan sa magulang, what do you expect
pagdating ng panahon? Eh „di siyempre iyong kanyang
apo, siyempre street child...Cycle na lang „yan.
Nakakagulat eh, hanggang ngayon „andito ka pa rin?
Sasabihin hindi, iyong apo ko „andoon. Pero anong
ginagawa, nagbe-beg rin! Kaya ganoon, cycle na lang.”
(When I started here in 1991, I had a client who was only a
mother. She was picking up her child who was a street
child here. When I came back, she is already fetching her
grandchild. That means my old client had a partner, was
on the streets, had a child, and is now here picking up a
kid as a grandmother. What did I tell her? Maybe that‘s
how it is. Given what you see in your parents when you
were growing up, what would you expect in the future? Of
course her grandchild will become a street child...It‘s just a
cycle. I was just surprised that until now, she is still here.
She will say no, my grandchild is just there. But what is she
doing? Begging, too! So that‘s how it is, just a cycle.)
222
Homelessness has been accepted by the street homeless and the institutions they
encounter as a fact of life. Ineffective interventions by the government, coupled with the
dependence of homeless people in feeding programs, have created homeless people
who continuously come back to the streets and devise adaptive strategies for survival.
Chapter Summary
Identifying constructions of actors, namely the street homeless, national and local
government institutions, and organizers of feeding programs, is a means of
understanding their treatment and response to the issue of homelessness. As can be
seen, actors have conflicting constructions when dealing with homelessness.
Recognizing these conflicts in actors‘ constructions could provide insights as to why
homelessness continues to persist despite the efforts undertaken by several institutions
to address it.
Homeless people primarily see the streets as their means of escape from
problems concerning their homed lives. Once in the streets, they develop a sense of
freedom from home-based problems and obtain belongingness and acceptance with
their homeless peers. These reasons enable them to cope with the hardships of the
street life. Such hardships include having to accept a homeless identity, which is
characterized by being marginalized and labelled as criminals by government institutions
and homed people. This further lowers their dignity and self-esteem.
As a way of coping, they depend on their street networks. These networks, which
include peer and homed networks, are characterized by reciprocity and trust,
223
respectively. Reciprocity enables social order in the homeless group, making them
respect values of utang na loob (gratitude) and pakikisama (knowing how to get along).
The trust that they attribute to homed networks, particularly organizers of feeding
programs and strangers, seemingly create dependency out of the homeless because
they feel secure that their homed networks will always be there to help them. Such trust
also partly explains why homeless people rely more on religious organizations who
provide feeding programs than on government welfare institutions. They see them as
forms of assistance, as well as sources of emotional support. Moreover, homeless
people feel that religious organizations treat them more humanely by being considered
as members or equals rather than as clients10. In turn, the street homeless accord them
with the same courtesy and respect by listening to organizers and behaving properly in
feeding programs.
On the other hand, the homeless perceive interventions by government
institutions more as hindrances to their daily routines rather than as assistance to their
current state. They feel that they are not made for the sheltered life, which only restricts
their freedom. They also feel that institutions do not actually listen to their issues and
only impose programs which do not address their concerns.
Looking at the homeless‘ construction, the opposing perceptions they have
between government institutions and religious organizations, as well as between homed
life and street life, show why they prefer to stay homeless. The streets offer them a
10
“Client” is the term government welfare institutions call the people they provide assistance to.
Government institutions such as DSWD, JFC and RAC use this term.
224
choice to escape the problems of their homed life. Likewise, religious organizations
provide them means of survival as well as acceptance regardless of their state.
Government institutions, on the other hand, have differing views on the
homeless. In the local level, RAC and MPD have frequent encounters with the street
homeless in Manila. Though both have a similar view on the cause of homelessness,
they have different responses on the coping strategies of the street homeless. For RAC,
the homeless refuse government services because of their preference for the freedom
given by the streets. In turn, they respond to this by displacing the homeless from public
spaces in Manila. Likewise, their perceived solution to the problem is to put up
settlements in distant areas with livelihood for rescued homeless people. On the other
hand, MPD understands how homeless people need to stay in the streets for their
livelihood; however, they have to enforce laws on vagrancy. To compensate, MPD only
applies the City Ordinance on Vagrancy so that the penalties are not as grave as the
Vagrancy Law. As such, their suggestion consists of updating and making the Vagrancy
Law more comprehensive. They propose that penalties be separated for vagrants,
prostitutes and even mendicants.
At the national level, DSWD-JFC and MMDA-SDCU also have their own views.
DSWD-JFC, which is the local shelter in Metro Manila, believes that there is no such
thing such as ―homeless people‖. Most people in the streets have houses; however,
circumstances such as lack of employment opportunities in home provinces and family
problems have pushed them to take the streets. Most of their clients are earning a living
in the streets through begging, scavenging and vending. As such, most homeless refuse
225
shelters because of high expectations of services. Another reason is the limited freedom
that the shelter has compared to the streets. However, JFC continues to provide shelter
to rescued homeless people. One of solutions they think would solve the problem is to
provide livelihood opportunities. Moreover, they believe that continuing the Balik
Probinsya Program is a start in addressing the issue. The MMDA-SDCU, which serves
as the rescue team of the JFC, have similar views of the homeless: people migrate to
the cities because of the lack of employment opportunities in their hometowns. Though
understanding of the homeless‘ inability to afford homes, they view them as ―eyesores‖
especially in public places where they beg and sleep. Homeless people are also seen to
endanger other people and cause traffic in the main streets of Metro Manila. In
response, they continue rescue operations even if the homeless keep returning to the
streets. They also believe that a solution could be the provision of employment so that
people will not depend on the streets to survive.
Organizers of feeding programs, particularly groups belonging to religious
institutions, have been more lenient with the homeless. As part of their apostolic mission,
organizers open their doors to all kinds of people, especially the poorest of the poor.
They understand that homeless people came to the streets for various reasons: lack of
jobs in the provinces, family conflicts, accident-related events where their houses burned
down, among others. However, they observe that there are no government institutions
particularly catering to the homeless group. As a response, they offer feeding programs
as short-term reliefs to starving homeless people. They have, however, been accused of
providing dole-outs and encouraging dependency by government institutions. In defense

226
to this, they attest that they do not promote dependency because homeless people still
work and find ways to earn money. As such, they continue giving out feeding programs
to the street homeless. They believe that the main solution still lies with the government
providing livelihood and housing services.
Though government and religious institutions have similar views in terms of the
causes of homelessness, they are conflicting in relation to how the problem should be
dealt with. RAC has received complaints about its ineffective delivery of services, where
they simply let the clients go without proper intervention. Moreover, the head official of
RAC is not a social worker but an appointee of Manila Mayor Lim. For critics, this may
mean a lack of experience on effective welfare systems. Similarly, the Balik Probinsya
Program of DSWD-JFC has been criticized to be unsuccessful as homeless people go
back to the cities after being sent home to the provinces. MMDA-SDCU has also
received complaints on the lack of social welfare officers within their unit, making them
not credible in conducting rescue operations for the homeless people. What is more,
without a memorandum of agreement with DSWD-JFC, their role in the welfare arena is
not legitimate. Government institutions, in general, are viewed by religious organizations
as lacking in programs and policies for the street homeless group. They attest that while
services are offered to vulnerable groups such as abused women, disabled persons and
indigent elders, homeless people are not included. This is perhaps why the street
homeless approach religious organizations more than government institutions for
assistance. Because of this, however, religious institutions have been greatly criticized
by government institutions for giving out dole-outs and encouraging dependency. They
227
believe that they are providing short-term relief while waiting for the government to offer
long-term solutions to the problem of homelessness.
As of current, homeless people and state entities are in a cyclical process of
capture-and-release. This process is described more formally as the occurrence of
habitual homelessness. The presence of such a term implies the ineffective measures
conducted by the local welfare institutions, which are mostly displacement of homeless
people. These measures serve to minimize and hide the homeless from public view and
discourage them from staying in the streets of Manila. On the other hand, religious
organizations view the homeless as needing basic assistance. Aside from this, they treat
the homeless as family members, friends and members of their church. Comparing
these constructions, it is imperative that the homeless will adhere more to religious
organizations than on government institutions which marginalize them.
Such conflicting constructions and responses among homeless people, state
entities and religious institutions make interventions more difficult to implement. With the
lack of access to possible long term solutions which could be provided by state entities,
the homeless are pushed towards depending on religious organizations whose feeding
programs offer only short-term relief. Thus, in this dynamics, homelessness becomes
institutionalized as a way of life.

CHAPTER 7
HOMELESSNESS AS A WAY OF LIFE:

ANALYSIS, CONCLUSION
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
As presented in the previous chapters, the issue of street homelessness is
shaped by the continuous interactions of homeless people, government institutions,
religious organizations, the local police within the spatial environment and structural
constraints provided by the governing policies and laws on homelessness. Such
structures, social actions and perceptions of institutions and actors have created a
context where the street homeless are both limited and empowered.
According to Giddens, structure is both a ―constraining and enabling‖ factor
which influences the agency and social actions. In turn, social actions create and re-
create the structure. In this study, the street homeless are able to form adaptive
strategies as responses to the marginalizing constraints imposed by institutions and
structural factors. Forming these adaptive strategies, which are shaped by enabling and
constraining factors, empower the homeless to survive the streets. In the long run, the
dynamics that exist between these factors institutionalize the state of homelessness as a
way of life leading to their persistent marginalization.
Marginalization of the
Street Homeless:
Constraining Factors
228
229
Structural conditions. Several structural factors push individuals to find themselves in the
streets, but two main conditions appear to be common in the experiences of most
homeless people. Economic conditions such as extreme poverty coupled with the lack of
jobs and livelihood, push people to move into the cities to look for opportunities only to
find themselves on the streets. This is most common among male homeless. In the
same manner, issues concerning the family as institution serve as another push factor
for homelessness. Parental neglect, experience of physical and sexual abuse and other
familial conflicts cause individuals to run away and escape their homed situation. This is
the case for most female homeless.
Once on the streets, individuals are faced with several constraints that
marginalize them from finding decent jobs and obtaining better lives. At the individual
level, their socio-demographic background namely educational attainment and gender
already narrow their life chances. Low educational attainment of the street homeless
constrain them from pursuing higher paying jobs and, compel them to resort to street-
based jobs. Because most respondents have reached only grade school and/or high
school, they have to take two or more street jobs in order to earn more.
Aside from educational attainment, gender is also a limiting factor. More men
were able to reach high school as compared to majority of women who only reached
grade school. In a formal economy, men should have more opportunities for work than
women. However, available work in the streets usually offers hard labor. As such, men
have more work opportunities that provide higher income such as salt and rice farming,
repacking fertilizers and driving pedicabs. They are able to earn 300 to 2,000 pesos for
230
these jobs. Women, on the other hand are limited to scavenging, vending and begging.
At times, they are able to work as cooks in canteens and are able to join their husbands
in repacking fertilizers. Most of the time, however, they depend on their husbands for
additional income. Nevertheless, these activities only allow them to earn 100 to 400
pesos. Homosexuals and bisexuals have a more distributed strategy of earning money,
as they can enter all types of work. More than their socio-demographic background,
having a homeless identity makes it more difficult for street individuals to find jobs. They
are more likely to be accused by co-workers and employers as petty thieves and
criminals that keeping stable jobs is difficult.
Laws criminalizing the homeless. At the institutional level, the street homeless are
further marginalized by state policies and welfare interventions. State laws classify
homeless people as vagrants, whereby they are criminalized by policies such as the
Anti-Vagrancy Law and the Manila City Ordinance on Vagrancy. Without the right to
privately occupy public spheres, homeless people are arrested from their sleeping
places because of their suspicious appearance. For the local government, apprehending
vagrants, including homeless people who sleep in public places, are preventive
measures to keep local residents safe from criminal activities. However, for the street
homeless, such events further categorize them as criminals and exclude them from
society.
Likewise, welfare interventions by the national and local government pose
problems as well. The lack of specific welfare policies addressing the homeless group
231
renders inefficient measures which tend to marginalize rather than help the homeless.
They are apprehended and forcibly displaced because their visibility poses a threat to
the cleanliness of the city. One such example is that of bringing the street homeless to
other cities such as Marikina to discourage them from sleeping in the streets of Manila.
Keeping them in shelters is also problematic. The lack of trained social workers among
shelter staff who are accused of committing abuse and maltreatment of clients, and
limited facilities such as a decent shelter and proper food make the homeless feel less
dignified. Such situations make it more difficult for the homeless to accept interventions
from the government, which only criminalize them through state policies and marginalize
them with the lack of specific interventions suited to their conditions.
Leaving their homed environment, individuals who have taken to the streets and
assumed a homeless identity find themselves vulnerable to these individual and
institutional factors which constrain them from living decent lives.
Lack of definition for the street homeless group. Though street homelessness exists, this
issue has not been recognized by the local academe and national and local state welfare
institutions. For the local academe, ―homelessness‖ refers to persons living in informal
settlements. In the same manner, state welfare agencies also define homelessness as
such and do not recognize the street homeless. As a consequence, the street homeless
are marginalized from interventions by welfare agencies, stigmatized as able-bodied
individuals who are lazy and dependent on feeding programs, and criminalized by state
laws.
232
As discussed in Chapter 3, the street homeless, as a distinctly vulnerable group,
cannot be located within existing national and local welfare policies and programs. The
focus of welfare agencies such as DSWD is mostly on disadvantaged youth and women
who have been abused physically and sexually, or have committed criminal acts. Only
one welfare institution, the Jose Fabella Center (JFC), provides assistance to ―vagrants‖,
―stranded persons‖ and ―beggars‖. Though these terms are addressing specific issues of
individuals, they were all found in the streets and are, in actuality, the street homeless.
However, JFC welfare officers believe that there are no street homeless because every
individual has a home. As such, their interventions include transportation assistance
through the Balik Probinsya program. However, individuals who have benefitted from
this program tend to go back to the cities, get apprehended and find themselves in the
JFC shelter once again. Such individuals are described by the DSWD-NCR to be
―repeatedly rescued clients‖ (DSWD-NCR 2010), where clients who have been admitted
to the shelter and have been given necessary interventions return to the streets, are
apprehended and provided assistance in the shelter again. In homeless literature, this is
called the ―habitual homelessness‖ (Aoki 2006), or those who ―cannot slip out of
homelessness‖.
From this, it can be seen that there is a need to provide a definition for the street
homeless group. Terms such as ―vagrants‖, ―stranded persons‖ and ―beggars‖, though
specific, do not encapsulate living conditions of individuals and only tend to criminalize
them for loitering in the streets. Moreover, welfare officers who recognize them as
―repeatedly rescued clients‖ have failed to see what is already obvious. First, by saying
233
that individuals are repeatedly rescued, this means that interventions provided by
institutions are not effective. Second, instead of merely providing transportation
assistance, welfare institutions should recognize the life paths of these individuals. They
should look at the life history and the movements of these individuals and acknowledge
that they have an institutionalized lifestyle which cannot be simply treated with current
interventions. Redefining them as street homeless would help in encapsulating the
issues and needs of these individuals, as well as prevent them from being criminalized
and marginalized by the state and the society as a whole.
Adaptive Strategies as Response

to Marginalization:
Enabling Factors
Though state institutions, policies and structures limit life chances for the street
homeless, they have paved the way for strategies to be formed. Strategies are seen as
enabling factors which empower homeless people to have certain choices despite given
constraints. The presence of religious entities which provide feeding programs and safe
and dignified spaces for the homeless counters the marginalizing treatment of state
institutions. Also, the social networks that homeless people create enable them to
expand their access to resources and increase their life chances n the streets.
Socialization to the homeless way of life. Individuals who end up in the streets due to
economic and social conditions are socialized to the street life by homeless people who
234
have been in the streets for a long time. In differential association, Sutherland (1947)
offers a process of how criminal behavior is learned. While being street homeless is not
criminal in nature, it is considered to be a deviant way of life. Homeless behavior is
learned in interaction with other persons through communication. Homeless people who
have been long in the streets approach the individual and ask them about how they
ended up in the streets. Eventually, they adopt the newly homeless to their group and
socialize them into the ways of the street. They become closely bonded with each other
and act as an alternative family unit in the streets. This follows Sutherland‘s next
process, where the principal part of learning deviant behavior happens within intimate
personal groups. Learning involves techniques of committing deviant acts as well as the
―motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes‖ (Ibid., 169). The newly homeless
experiences a sense of belonging among homeless peers and a feeling of freedom away
from home and from social problems which pushed them to the streets. Aside from
these, the newly homeless are exposed to the life of having a homeless identity: eating
in feeding programs, sleeping in the streets, scavenging and doing street-based jobs
and being arrested by the police. Their use of space and manner of living as homeless
as a whole are often contested. In this manner, the newly homeless are more exposed
to homeless individuals whose definitions of what is legal are ―favorable to the violation
of legal codes‖ (Ibid.). While homelessness is not, by nature, a criminal act, it is
criminalized by city ordinances and national laws on vagrancy. Because of these laws,
they are apprehended and treated as criminals. Amongst themselves, they feel
marginalized for having a homeless identity. This, however, brings them closer to each
235
other as they find ways to support those who were apprehended for vagrancy. They
accord sympathy and protection to one another and develop other values which create a
communal bond among them. In the long run, the newly street homeless are able to
accept their homeless identity despite the marginalization they experience from state
agencies. They are able to form and create their own survival strategies, making life in
the streets enduring for them. What‘s more, the longer they stay in the streets and the
more intense their experiences are of living a homeless life, the more dependent on the
streets for survival they become. However, because they have no resources in moving
out of homelessness and do not want to go back to their old homed lives, they continue
to remain in their current state as street homeless. This completes the homeless cycle
and accounts for the persistence of the problem (see Appendix D). Sutherland‘s
differential association proves to be insightful in understanding how individuals are
socialized to the way of life in the streets.
Gender shapes survival strategies. Based on the experiences of the street homeless,
gender plays a crucial role in shaping their survival strategies. In fact, gender accounts
for certain differences in the adaptive strategies of homeless people. While most
literature discuss the experiences of male and female homeless, this research included
homosexual and bisexual homeless based on the homeless population in the field.
Male homeless have a higher level of mobility than females, regardless of
whether they have a street partner or not. They can go to several feeding programs
despite the distance of their locations from one another. They can also engage in two to
236
three work strategies to meet their everyday needs. These work strategies may be
scavenging, vending, farming in provinces, and repacking fertilizers. Some drive
pedicabs and do other kinds of jobs such as fortune telling. In terms of social networks,
their peer connections are strong as they tend to belong to established street groups
from which they could obtain additional street knowledge and resources as well as
protection. However, these groups are infamous street gangs marked by the police as
having petty criminals and ex-convicts for members. Despite this, the homeless who do
not actually commit criminal acts depend on these groups. Male homeless‘ connections
to homed networks such as feeding program organizers and welfare officers are very
weak. Though they accept food and assistance from feeding programs, they are
embarrassed to seek for help from these institutions. What‘s more, they generally have a
negative perception of state institutions. As such, the male homeless are very much
dependent on street groups and street-based resources for their survival.
Being the most vulnerable among the homeless groups, females join groups and
acquire street partners in order to protect themselves from street risks such as physical
and sexual attacks. In return for the protection, street strategies of females are geared
towards contributing resources to the group rather than for themselves. Females ask for
extra food and clothing from feeding program organizers and other homed networks
such as eatery owners, as they are more closely bonded with them unlike that of the
male homeless. Their work strategies are characterized by stationary street-based jobs,
which entail less movement as some have young children with them on the streets.
Those who have capital sell cigarettes and candies in parks, while others engage more
237
frequently in begging. Others would offer to wash the clothes of their homeless peers in
feeding program venues in exchange for money. When dealing with institutions,
homeless females are closer to feeding program organizers than government
institutions. Their encounters with state institutions such as RAC and DSWD are through
‗rescue operations‘, or for the homeless, ‗huli‟ (arrest). Some females are afraid that they
might be separated from their young children. As such, they take precautions by staying
in safe areas with other homeless groups where authorities are less likely to apprehend
the sleeping homeless.
Homosexual and bisexual street homeless are characterized to be the most
diligent in terms of forming their own survival strategies. Their strategies are highly
similar to the male homeless such as the high mobility they have in terms of food and
work strategies. However, it is their networks, especially those of the gay homeless,
which are considered to be their strongest asset as they are able to form established
groups and bridge peer and homed networks. Most of them have connections with
homed homosexuals who are well-off and can recommend them to jobs. Some have
utilized this network and have gotten off the streets, but tend to come back to give back
to their old homeless peers. They are the ―graduates‖ of homelessness. There are also
those who have been in and out of the streets, or the transitory type. Lastly, there are
still those who have remained permanently in the streets for years. While the
homosexual and bisexual homeless have the opportunity of established social networks,
some still stay and depend on the streets. However, of the three genders, it is the
238
homosexual and bisexual homeless who have an extensive range of experience of the
homelessness cycle: being homeless, getting off the streets and vice versa.
Feeding programs as spaces for dignity. While the state uses displacement measures to
remove or hide the homeless and offer ineffective welfare interventions, religious
organizations welcomed the homeless and provided them spaces for dignity. Such
spaces enable the homeless to become decent individuals and form communities of
their own and with homed people. These safe spaces take place in feeding programs
held in churches, where they are provided food, clothes, water for washing clothes and
taking baths, and spaces to sleep. Allowing the homeless to conduct their private affairs
outside the streets, even if for a limited time, counts a lot. Religious organizations also
treat the homeless as family members, friends and as part of their church. Their
relationship extends outside of feeding programs, which include negotiating with RAC
and MPD to let go of their street homeless attendees when apprehended. Because of
these, the issue of attending feeding programs as a sign of accepting a homeless
identity becomes unimportant for the street homeless themselves. Having found a
community which does not marginalize them, the homeless are more hopeful despite the
difficulties of street life.
Perhaps what is most significant to note when feeding programs are discussed is
the regularity and number of providers and how they shape the adaptive strategies of the
homeless. Manila is home to several churches which have weekly feeding programs as
their apostolate mission. Because of the decent food they provide, homeless people are
239
enthused to attend, if possible, every feeding program regularly. From Tuesday to
Sunday, homeless people depend on feeding programs for their food regardless of the
long hours of spiritual service. As such, feeding programs are prioritized and become the
basis of their daily routines. Feeding programs are important for the street homeless so
they won‘t go hungry. Trusting that feeding programs will be running for a long time, it
becomes their source of food security.
This way, since their food is partly addressed by feeding programs, they are able
to earn money and take control of their expenses. Informal ways of earning money in the
streets are present, such as scavenging, vending, begging and working in farms and
factories. Some are able to earn to provide for their homed families, start a small
business, or go back to their hometowns to visit their families. Thus, their notion of job
security is tied to working on the streets.
Spaces of contestation, negotiation and transitoriness. Because they have no houses,
the street homeless and their use of space are often contested whenever they utilize
public spheres for their private purposes. Contestations of space often lead to the arrest
of the street homeless perceived as vagrants and suspicious-looking persons. However,
the street homeless are able to manage this by negotiating their use of space. The street
homeless would ask for permission mostly from security guards of business
establishments and commercial areas if they could sleep while they are closed. Security
guards would agree with the condition that the homeless have to leave before the store
opens. While the homeless find it difficult to sleep late and get up early in the morning,
240
they are amenable to the arrangement as these areas are safest not only from the police
but also from thieves and street gangs. Aside from this, other street homeless would find
safe spaces like parks and inner streets where local authorities would less likely pass by
and apprehend.
While the homeless can contest their right of space, their high level of mobility
makes it a non-issue.
Social networks, trust and reciprocity. Homeless people create bonds on the streets as
part of their adaptive strategies. Social networks allow them to secure material and
knowledge resources, which is, in their situation, scarce. Building social capital also
allows them to be empowered by being able to expand their access to such resources.
As such, the more networks homeless people have, the more they have access to
resources.
Homeless people have two forms of networks: peer and homed networks. While
peer networks include partners, spouses and close friends, homed networks, on the
other hand, are religious organizers of feeding programs, homed family and strangers
whom they ask and receive help from. On the streets where resources are scarce,
homeless people build groups in order to increase their access to resources. Homeless
people find street partners and adopt new homeless into their group, which enable for
division of labor and more resources to be shared. As such, groups are created more out
of functional rather than emotional purposes. Inter-group relationships exist as well.
Hints of dominant and weak groups exist among the homeless, where the former is said
241
to bully and terrorize weaker groups. As such, homeless people tend to create inter-
group networks out of protection. In return, even if it disrupts their daily routines, they are
compelled to get along with them. Peer networks are also governed by reciprocal
exchange, where gratitude is an important value. Ingratitude or the lack of utang na loob
is a major violation for the homeless, thus causing conflicts and breakage and lessening
of networks. In total, reciprocal exchange creates order out of the seemingly chaotic
relationships between homeless individuals.
Homed networks, on the other hand, consist of organizers of feeding programs
and strangers who provide assistance to the homeless. Such networks do not ask for
anything in return; because of this, homeless people trust them more than their
homeless peers. With church organizers, some homeless people pursue to become
volunteers because it provides them additional benefits: more share in the food, ability to
choose clothing and obtain allowance. Becoming volunteers increases their access to
resources. Strangers, on the other hand, help homeless people occasionally by giving
them alms.
Dynamics of Constraining and Enabling:

Institutionalization of Homelessness
as a Way of Life
Given the dynamics of constraining and enabling factors in surviving their
everyday life, the yagit or street homeless have institutionalized homelessness as their
way of life. Their daily activities which used to be mere survival strategies before have
242
already become their way of living. What is more, other stakeholders have contributed to
the issue of homelessness through their established perceptions and responses to the
street homeless. Discourses between the street homeless and those they encounter
daily, namely the feeding program organizers, the local police, RAC, DSWD, JFC, and
the MMDA, have shaped the street homelessness issue.
Going beyond survival strategies, the homeless have formed their own notions of
street life. More specifically, they have obtained a system of values and experiences that
define their choices and ways of acting (Habermas 1984). Their definition of security is
different. Food security is dependent on feeding programs. Job security means
scavenging, begging, working in farms and factories, and other available work found in
the streets. Secure spaces for sleep do not entail a house but a location which is safe
from rescue operations and police raids. These notions of security are brought about by
the resources available and accessible to them on the streets. Moreover, the street
homeless also have a high degree of trust on their homed networks. This is evident in
how they put their faith on religious organizations and support institutions which they
think will always be there to provide them with food and basic needs. However, such
trust prevents them from getting off the streets as they rely on these institutions for their
future survival. As one homeless said:
“Hanggang may yagit, hindi mawawala ang feeding.” (As

long as there are homeless people, feeding [programs] will
continue to exist.)
243
In this respect, the presence of adaptive strategies and street life notions assumes that
the homeless are active agents, who desire a degree of predictability in their lives
(Giddens 1984).
Looking at the bigger picture, however, such adaptive strategies become barriers
to escaping the streets (Rosenthal 1994: 120). Though they allow daily survival, the
subsistence strategies they pursue are still limited and shaped by what is available to
them. Feeding programs may meet their basic needs, but they only create dependency
for homeless people to remain in the streets and provide short term relief to the
homeless. There are limited chances of escaping into mainstream society where there
are stable jobs which will help them afford decent homes. Because of this, the streets
become their safety net as it provides them with the food and job security they could
afford with their status. Their perception of future plans are also shaped by the context of
the street: rather than planning to leave the streets and obtain shelter, they need to fulfill
short term goals such as obtaining food and earning money through street-based jobs.
In the long run, they accept this situation, making homelessness their way of life.
Conclusion
This study was premised on the concept of choice. Do the street homeless have
a choice? Were they forced to live in the streets, or did they choose to do so?
These questions guided the study which explored how the street homeless in
Manila survived and experienced everyday life. Without the confines of a home, their
stories promise alternative ways of living and different constructions of looking at the
244
world. As presented in the previous chapters, the way homeless people live are shaped
by the dynamics between constraints and enabling elements of institutional relations,
space and social networks. In the end, the most important question is still being asked:
Are the street homeless empowered? The answer seems to be: yes, but they are still
limited. Their empowerment rests in their ability to create adaptive strategies as a form
of response, or rather, rebellion, to the constraints which continually marginalize them.
Even if street life is difficult, they find happiness and a sense of community in the
relationships and groups they have formed. They also have the choice to go back home,
but preferred to live in the streets and earn for their homed families. However, they are
still limited in several aspects. In the eyes of institutions and homed individuals, they are
still outcasts and criminals. Their everyday lives are continually threatened with arrest,
physical attacks and other forms of marginalization, making them feel unworthy to live.
They will always be looked down upon, unless someone allows them to live a life they
truly deserve.
Recommendations
Solutions to street homelessness go beyond providing housing and
transportation assistance back to their homes and provinces. In this study, causes of
homelessness, as well as its persistence, are deeply rooted in the structural level and
have long-term repercussions in the individual. To elaborate, lack of job opportunities in
rural areas and domestic conflicts push people to the streets. It continues to persist
245
because of poor governance, lack of apt policies and knowledge in properly addressing
the street homeless problem. Because of these, the street homeless are socially
excluded as well as marginalized by state institutions and civil society as a whole.
Providing appropriate solutions are less costly than not addressing the problem at all.
The following are recommendations derived from this study:
Inclusion of the street homeless group in welfare policies. As shown in the chapter on
welfare institutions and policies, the street homeless are difficult to locate because they
are considered as vagrants. Moreover, because they are able-bodied, welfare
institutions do not prioritize them and inadvertently marginalize them from welfare
services. But if the street homeless are recognized as ―a different disadvantaged group
who are able-bodied and live in the streets but are in need of decent food, shelter, and
livelihood‖, then issues of homelessness will be properly addressed. Measures such as
giving them shelter without long-term interventions, apprehending as well as displacing
them are ineffective and only results to habitual homelessness. It also results to their
distrust in government entities, making them hesitant to obtain assistance from them.
In crafting welfare policies for the homeless, it is thus important to define who the
street homeless are as it is a major step in providing more effective interventions for
them. A profile of the homeless population should be put together to identify specific
groups and needs. In line with this, the quality of personnel, services and intervention
should be more specific in order to effectively address homelessness as well as habitual
homelessness. More importantly, livelihood opportunities should also be provided so that

246
homeless people will not depend on street-based jobs such as begging and scavenging.
More importantly, these employment opportunities should be able to match or exceed
income and job security the homeless obtain from street-based jobs; otherwise, these
initiatives would not be able to tear homeless people away from the streets. Existing
programs such as the Balik Probinsya or transportation assistance and shelter reliefs
should also be re-evaluated and refined in order to prevent habitual homelessness. Most
importantly, welfare policies should be crafted with the hopes of enabling the street
homeless to uplift their dignity and obtain self-respect.
Collaboration among the state institutions and religious organizations. The study
revealed that while state entities push homeless people away, religious organizations
welcome them. Such dynamics could be transformed into a form of collaboration. State
entities should identify feeding programs conducted by religious organizations and
coordinate with them. State entities could tap religious organizations to promote
government projects for the homeless because most street people attend feeding
programs. For example, they could announce how to avail of the Balik Probinsya
Program, as it has been found that some homeless want to go back home to their
provinces but have no knowledge on how to approach government institutions. Aside
from using religious organizations for information dissemination, state entities could form
partnerships with churches. While feeding programs provide food, government entities
could introduce livelihood workshops. Moreover, institutions could learn from each other
how to best approach homeless people for the effective delivery of services. For
247
instance, DSWD-JFC and RAC could learn from organizers of feeding programs how to
treat the homeless so that the latter will listen to them. Organizers could, in turn, seek
assistance from DSWD and JFC on how to provide livelihood opportunities for the
homeless. In this way, both institutions could address the short- and long-term
effectively.
Structural solutions. At the national level, social development should be prioritized in the
rural areas so that individuals do not need to migrate to main cities. Such development
includes increasing infrastructures, job opportunities and improving the quality of life. If
poverty could be reduced, family conflicts and the number of runaways are hoped to be
lessened as well. These factors serve as push and pull elements in the homelessness
issue. If they could be addressed, then homelessness could hopefully be prevented.
Another matter to consider is strengthening family ties. Most homeless,
especially the female group, run away from home due to family conflicts. Family
counselling and workshops enforcing family values in communities are possible options
to address this.
Also, reviewing and updating several laws and policies in relation to
homelessness may bring about changes in the everyday dynamics between the street
homeless and institutions. As suggested by the MPD, the Vagrancy Law should be
reviewed and revised. Definitions, as well as corresponding penalties, should be clarified
and re-examined. Differences between vagrants, prostitutes, mendicants and the street
248
homeless should be determined. In this way, the labelling of homeless people as
criminals might be reduced.
Lastly, welfare structural systems within the government could be enhanced if
there is more centralization of authority. This means that the national and local welfare
agencies should have more collaboration aside from networking and human resource
development. As the main welfare agency in the country, DSWD should have authority
over local welfare structures. Such an authority could be minimal. For instance, DSWD
should have the right to evaluate welfare programs done by local agencies so that
overall welfare goals could be achieved.
More studies on street homelessness. Literature on homelessness abroad abound while
studies are absent in the local level. Studies on street homelessness in the Philippines
should be undertaken for several reasons.
First, the condition of street homelessness in the Philippines is remotely different
from the street homeless abroad, particularly in terms of dynamics and institutional
interactions. In other countries, homeless people are used to depending on shelters and
the government to provide them assistance as well as housing needs. In the Philippines,
or at least in Manila, homeless people view government welfare institutions as
constraints and heavily depend on religious institutions. What is more, many of them see
jobs as immediate concerns rather than having houses. As such, researching on the
street homeless will provide information not only for the level of crafting policies but also
in creating new theories within the academe as well.

249
Second, definitions of homelessness should be clarified. In the local literature,
homeless people are considered as informal settlers. Because of this, people who are
depending on the streets for a living are out of the picture. Refining this definition will
reduce marginalization of services to the street homeless.
In general, raising awareness on the issues and conditions of the street
homeless might help steer priorities on certain policies and provide better welfare
options for the group.

250
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY DATA COLLECTION SCHEME

DATA SETS AND SOURCES
Research Data Set Data Source Data Collection

Question/ Topic Technique
Adaptive Strategies  Everyday routine  Homeless  Key informant

of Homeless including people interviews
People schedules for  Officials and  Participant
sources of food, staff of state observation
money or work institutions such  Mapping
 Location/ areas as the local
of concentration government,
for sleeping or local police,
hanging out DSWD, and
 Leisure activities MMDA
 Perceptions,  Ministers and
opinions and volunteers of
sentiments of religious
actors on organizations
subsistence  NGOs
strategies  Residents in the
area where
interactions of
homeless
people and
institutions take
place
Interactions with  Relationship of  Homeless  Key informant

Institutions homeless people people interviews
with state and  Officials and  Participant
non-state staff of state observation
organizations institutions such  Secondary data
 Kinds of as the local analysis
interactions government,
taking place; local police,
whether as threat DSWD, and
or assistance to MMDA
251
homeless people  Ministers and

 Evaluation of volunteers of
local policies and religious
community organizations
programs for the  NGOs
homeless  Residents in the
 Statistics on the area where
composition of interactions of
the homeless homeless
population people and
institutions take
place
Spatial Location  Concentration of  Homeless  Key informant

homeless people interviews
population in  Officials and  Participant
specific areas staff of state observation
(for sleeping, institutions such  Mapping
hanging out, etc.) as the local
 Mapping of government,
subsistence local police,
pathways DSWD, and
MMDA
 Ministers and
volunteers of
religious
organizations
 NGOs
 Residents in the
area where
interactions of
homeless
people and
institutions take
place
Extent of Networks  Networks for  Homeless  Key informant

obtaining people interviews
knowledge of  Life histories
street resources  Participant
(eg. knowing observation
when the
252
schedules of
feeding programs
are secure
spaces to rest,
earn money, etc.)
253
APPENDIX B
Interview Guide for Homeless People
Date of Interview: ____________________ Time: __________________

Interview Location: ___________________________________________
Name of Key Informant: _______________________________________

Sex: _______________________ Age: ____________________________
Religion: ___________________ Civil Status: ______________________
Nationality/ Ethnicity: _________________ Place of Origin: ___________
Educational Attainment: ________________________________________
Previous Occupation: __________________________________________________
Background
1) Maari mo bang isalaysay kung paano ka napunta at tumira sa lansangan? (Can you
please explain how you came to live in the streets?)
2) Gaano ka na katagal na tumitira sa lansangan? (How long have you been living in
the streets?)
3) Bakit hanggang ngayon nanatili ka pa rin sa lansangan? (How come you‘re still living
in the streets until now?)
4) Sa tingin mo, makakaalis ka pa ba sa kalagayang ito? Paano? (Do you think you can
still get out of your current condition? How?)
Survival
1) Saan at paano ka nakakakain sa pang-araw-araw? Ito ba ang pinagkukunan mo ng

pagkain palagi o may ibang paraan ka pa? (Where and how do you obtain food? Is
this where and how you obtain food often, or do you have other ways of obtaining
food?)
2) Gaano ka kadalas nakakakain sa isang araw? (How often do you eat in a day?)
3) Saan ka natutulog? Saan ka tumatambay? (Where do you sleep? Where do you
hang out?)
4) May napagkukunan ka ba ng salapi o panggastos? Paano? Ano ang mga
pinagkakagastusan mo sa pang-araw-araw? (Do you have means of obtaining
money? How? What are your daily expenses?)
254
Extent of Social Networks
1) May mga kaibigan ka ba na katulad mo? Sinu-sino sila? Paano kayo naging
magkaibigan? Ano ang naidudulot nila sa iyo at sa iyong pagtira sa lansangan? (Do
you have friends among your homeless peers? Who are they? How did you become
friends? What benefit do they bring you as a homeless person?)
2) May mga kaaway ka ba na katulad mo? Sinu-sino sila? Paano kayo naging
magkaaway? (Do you have enemies among your homeless peers? Who are they?
How did they become your enemies?)
3) Bukod sa mga walang tirahan na kakilala mo, sinu-sino pa ang ibang kakilala mo?
Paano kayo nagkakilala? Ano ang naididulot nila sa iyo at sa pagtira mo sa
lansangan? (Aside from your homeless peers, who else do you know? How did you
become associates? What benefit do they bring you as a homeless person?)
Relationships with Institutions
State-based Services
1) Meron bang naitutulong ang gobyerno sa inyo? Kung meron, anu-ano ang mga ito?
(Does the government provide you with assistance? If so, what kinds of assistance?)
2) Gaano kayo kadalas na lumalapit sa gobyerno upang humingi ng tulong? (How often
do you go to the government to ask for help?)
3) Nagkakaroon ba ng problema kapag nakikisalamuha kayo sa gobyerno? Anong
klaseng problema? (Do you have problems when dealing with the government?
What kinds of problems are these?)
4) Kung nagkakaproblema ka sa gobyerno, may ginagawa ka bang paraan upang
malutas ito? Anu-ano ang mga ito? (If the government is a problem, do you find ways
on how to solve this? What kind of ways?)
5) Sa pangkalahatan, ano ang masasabi mo sa tulong (o kawalan ng tulong) na
ibinibigay ng gobyerno? Nakakatulong ba sila o mas problema ang idinudulot nila?
(In general, how do you perceive the government? Are they able to provide you with
assistance or problems?)
Non-state Services
1) Bukod sa gobyerno, may iba ka pa bang napagkukunan ng tulong? Sinu-sino ang
mga ito? (Aside from the government, do you have other ways of obtaining help?
Who are they?)
2) For religious institutions:
a. Nagbibigay ba ng tulong ang simbahan? Maari mo bang ilista kung sinu-sino
ang mga institusyong ito? (Does the Church/ religious organizations provide
assistance? Can you please enumerate these institutions you are obtaining
assistance from?)
b. Anong klaseng tulong ang ibinibigay nila? (What kinds of assistance?)
255
c. Meron ba silang isinasagawang programa o pakain/ feeding sessions? (Do

they have programs or feeding sessions?)
d. Gaano ka kadalas pumupunta sa mga programa o pakain na ito? (How often
do you go to these programs or feeding sessions?)
e. Nagkakaroon ba ng problema tuwing makakasalamuha mo ang mga
institusyong ito? Anong klaseng problema ito? (Are you having problems
when dealing with these institutions? What kinds of problems?)
f. Sa pangkalahatan, ano ang masasabi mo sa tulong na ibinibigay ng mga
simbahan o institusyong ito? (In general, how do you perceive the kind of
assistance you receive from religious institutions?)
3) For non-government organizations:
a. May mga non-government organizations o NGO ba ang tumutulong sa iyo?
Sinu-sino ang mga ito? (Are there non-government organizations or NGOs
who provide you with assistance? Who are they?)
b. Paano nila kayo natutulungan? (How do they provide assistance?)
c. Nagkakaroon ba ng problema tuwing makakasalamuha mo ang mga ito?
Anu-ano ang mga ito? (Are you having problems when dealing with NGOs?
What kinds of problems?)
d. Sa pangkalahatan, ano ang masasabi mo sa tulong na ibinibigay ng mga
NGOs? (In general, how do you perceive the assistance provided by NGOs?)
4) Sa pangkalahatan, ano ang masasabi mo sa tulong na ibinibigay ng mga simbahan
at NGOs? Kung ikukumpara mo ang gobyerno at ang simbahan/NGOs, sino ang
mas nakakatulong sa iyo? (In general, how do you perceive the help obtained from
religious organizations and NGOs? Which provides more assistance, the
government or religious organizations and NGOs?)
Spatial Location
1) Saang mga lugar ka madalas tumatambay? (In which places do you usually hang
around?)
2) Bakit dito ka madalas manatili? (Why do you often stay in these places?)
3) Marami rin bang katulad mo ang nananatili sa ganitong mg lugar? Bakit? (Do others
hang around in the same area that you do? Why?)
4) Sa pagkuha ng pagkain o paghahanap ng mapagkakakitaan, may ruta ka bang
sinusunod? Bakit ganito ang ruta mo? (In obtaining food or money, do you follow a
certain survival route? Why did you design your route like this?)
5) May mga ruta din ba na sinusunod ang iba? (Do others follow survival routes?)
256
APPENDIX C
Interview Guide for Representatives of Institutions Related to Homelessness

(State and Non-state Institutions)
Date of Interview: ____________________ Time: __________________

Interview Location: ___________________________________________
Name of Key Informant: _______________________________________

Sex: _______________________ Age: ____________________________
Religion: ___________________ Civil Status: ______________________
Nationality: _________________ Place of Origin: ___________
Educational Attainment: ________________________________________
Background
1) What is your position in this institution? What are you tasked to do?
2) Kindly elaborate on the program with regard to:
a. History of the program and how it was developed
b. Program goals and objectives
c. Accomplishments and perceived impact of the program
d. Problems that the program encountered and how they were addressed
e. Future endeavors hoped to be achieved by the program
Relationship with Homeless People
1) How do you call the homeless people (i.e. street dwellers, street nomads, yagit,
vagrants)? Why do you call them as such? Do you differentiate them from other
groups (i.e. beggars, ‗psychotics‘)?
2) How many homeless people do you serve?
3) Do you have an estimate of the total number of homeless people in the area?
4) How do you perceive the homeless people in general? Do you see them as a social
problem?
5) What do you think is/are the cause/s of homelessness?
6) How is your relationship with homeless people? Are you able to establish certain ties
with them?
7) Do you think that they have become dependent on the program? Why or why not?
257
8) Do you think that the program will address the problem of homelessness in the long
run? Why or why not?
9) Are you aware of other service providers for the homeless?
10) How do you compare this program with that of other institutions?
258
APPENDIX D
Process of Becoming Homeless
Pushed to the streets

-economic reasons, family conflicts
Denial of Homeless Condition

-immediate goal is to get off the streets
Socialization to the Homeless Life

-meet homeless peers, attend feeding programs,
develop survival strategies, experience police arrest
Returns home
-find that factors which pushed them to the streets are
still unresolved
Go back to the streets & assume homeless identity

259
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Aoki, Hideo. (2006). Japan‟s Underclass: Day Labourers and the Homeless. Melbourne:
Trans Pacific Press.
Aoki, Hideo. (2008). Street homeless as an urban minority: a case of Metro Manila. In
Koichi Hasegawa and Naoki Yoshihara (eds.), Globalization, Minorities and Civil
Society: Perspectives from Asian and Western Cities. Melbourne: Trans Pacific
Press.
Arce, Wilfredo F. (2001). Systematic Qualitative Data Research. Quezon City: Office of
Research and Publications.
Berger, Peter and Thomas Luckmann. (1996). The Social Construction of Reality: A
Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.
Bhagwati, Jagdish (2004). In Defense of Globalization. Oxford, New York: Oxford

University Press.
Caplow, Theodore, Bahr, Howard and David Sternberg. Homelessness. In David L. Sills,
(ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 6. New York: Free
Press, 1968.
Chossudovsky, Michel. (2003). The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order.
Ontario: Global Outlook.
Cooper, Mary Anderson. (1987) The Role of Religious and Nonprofit Organizations in
Combating Homelessness. In Richard D. Bingham, Roy E. Green and Sammis B.
White (eds.), The Homeless in Contemporary Society. California: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Fischer, Claude S. et al. (1977). Networks and places. New York: Free Press.
Fischer, Claude. (1982). To Dwell among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Giddens, Anthony. (1979). Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and
Contradictions in Social Analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Giddens, Anthony. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of a Theory of

Stucturation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
260
Gittell, R. and Vidal, A. (1998). Community Organizing: Building Social Capital as a

Development Strategy. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Glasser, Irene. (1994). Homelessness in Global Perspective. New York: Maxwell

Macmillan International.
Goodall, B. (1987). The Penguin Dictionary of Human Geography. Harmondsworth,

Middlesex: Penguin.
Gugler, J. and Gilbert, A. (1992). Cities, Poverty and Development. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Habermas, Jürgen. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action. Boston, MA: Beacon
Press.
Harper, Douglas. (1982). Good Company: A Tramp Life. USA: Paradigm Publishers.
Hombs, Mary Ellen and Mitch Snyder. (1986). Homelessness in America. Washington,
D.C.: Community for Creative Non-violence.
Hopper, Kim and Jill Hamberg. (1984). The Making of America‟s Homeless. New York:
Community Service Society.
Jahiel, Rene I. (1987). The Situation of Homelessness. In Richard D. Bingham, Roy E.

Green and Sammis B. White (eds.), The Homeless in Contemporary Society.
California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Keyes, William. (1974). Manila Scavengers: the Struggle for Urban Survival. IPC Poverty
Research Series No.1. Quezon City: Institute of Philippine Culture.
Laberge, Daniele and Shirley Roy. (2004). Continuity of Identity and Survival. In
Vivianne Chatel and Marc-Henry Soulet (eds.), Coping and Pulling Through:
Action Processes in Vulnerable Situations. England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Molina-Jackson, Edna. (2008). Homeless not Hopeless: The Survival Networks of

Latinos and African American Men. University Press of America.
Omoto, Allen M. (2005). Processes of Community Change and Social Action. USA:
Lawrence Elbaum Associates.
Patton, Michael Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. California:

Sage Publications.
Phillipson, Chris, Graham Allan, and David Morgan. (eds.). (2004). Social Networks and
Social Exclusion: Sociological and Social Policy Perspectives. England: Ashgate.
261
Racelis, Mary. (2004). Civil Society and the Poor: Toward A Social Minimum for Human
Security. In S. Wun‘Gaeo (ed.) Human Security Now: Strengthening Policy
Networks in Southeast Asia. Bangkok: Center for Social Development Studies.
Ritzer, George. (2005). Encyclopedia of Social Theory. California: Sage Publications,

Inc.
Rosenthal, Rob. (1994). Homeless In Paradise: A Map of the Terrain. Philadelpia:

Temple University Press.
Spector, Malcolm and John Kitsuse. (2001). Constructing Social Problems. New Jersey:
Transaction Publishers.
Sutherland, Edwin. (1947). Principles of Criminology. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.
Turner, Victor. (1969). ―Liminality and Communitas,‖ in The Ritual Process: Structure
and Anti-Structure. Chicago: Aldine Publications, Inc.
Wolch, J. and M. Dear. (1993). Malign Neglect: Homelessness in an American city. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks,
California: Sage.
Journal Articles
Abad, Ricardo G. (2005). ―Social Capital in the Philippines: Results from a National
Survey.‖ Philippine Sociological Review 53: 7-63.
Aoki, Hideo. (2008). ―Globalization and the Street Homeless in Metro Manila.‖ Philippine
Studies 56 (1): 69-76.
Conley, Clark Dalton. (1996). ―Getting It Together: Social and Institutional Obstacles to
Getting off the Streets.‖ Sociological Forum 11: 25-40.
Eckenrode, John. (1983). ―The Mobilization of Social Supports: Some Individual

Constraints.‖ American Journal of Community Psychology 11(5): 509-528
Ennet, Susan T., Susan Bailey and E. Belle Federman. (1999). ―Social Network
Characteristics Associated with Risky Behaviors among Runaway and Homeless
Youth.‖ Journal of Health and Social Behavior 40: 63-79.
262
Golledge, Reginald. (ed.) (1999). Wayfinding Behavior: Cognitive Mapping and Other
Spatial Processes. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Granovetter, Mark. (1973). ―The Strength of Weak Ties.‖ American Journal of Sociology
78 (6):1360-1380.
McCarthy, Bill and John Hagan. (1992). ―Mean Streets: The Theoretical Significance of
Situational Delinquency Among Homeless Youths.‖ The American Journal of
Sociology 98: 597-627.
Phelan, Jo, Bruce G. Link, Robert E. Moore and Ann Stueve. (1977). ―The Stigma of
Homelessness: The Impact of the Label ―Homeless‖ on Attitudes Toward Poor
Persons.‖ Social Psychology Quarterly 60: 323-337.
Putnam, Robert. (1996). ―The Strange Disappearance of Civic America.‖ The American
Prospect 24:34-48.
Rowe, Stacy and Jennifer Wolch. (1990). ―Social Networks in Time and Space:
Homeless Women in Skid Row, Los Angeles.‖ Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 80(2): 184-220.
Schor, S. M., Artes, Rinaldo, and Bomfim V.C. (2003). ―Determinants of Spatial
Distribution of Street People in the City of Sao Paulo.‖ Urban Affairs Review
38(4): 592-602.
Snow, David A. and Michael Mulcahy. (2001) ―Space, Politics, and the Survival
Strategies of the Homeless.‖ American Behavioral Scientist 45(1): 149-169.
Susser, I. (1996).―The Construction of Poverty and Homelessness in the US Cities.‖

Annual Review of Anthropology 25: 411-435.
Tickamyer, Ann R. (2000). ―Space Matters! Spatial Inequality in Future Sociology.‖

Contemporary Sociology 29(6): 805-813.
Reports
DSWD-NCR. (2010). ―Out of the center and into the streets: how repeatedly rescued
clients of Jose Fabella Center find their way back to the streets‖. Unpublished
report.
Karaos, Anna Marie and Junefe G. Payot. (2006). ―The homes promises couldn‘t build,‖
in Civil Society Monitoring of the Medium Term Philippine Development Plan:
Assessment of the Two Years (2004-06). Manila: The Caucus of Development
NGO Networks, pp. 67-87.
263
World Development Report 2000 (2000). Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Theses/ Dissertations
Ferrer, Gregory Vincent Omila. (2003) The Demographics, Lifestyle Patterns and
Expressed Needs of the Street Dwellers in the City of Manila. Thesis. University
of the Philippines.
Websites
Andrade, Jeannette. ―MPD effects revamp; new station chiefs, support units heads
named‖. Philippine Daily Inquirer. 16 November 2010, available at
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/metro/view/20101116-303641/MPD-
effects-revamp-new-station-chiefs-support-units-heads-named
Araneta, Sandy. ―Anti-crime drives held in Malate, Tondo‖. Philippine Star. 7 November
2010, available at http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=627718.
Associated Press. ―Manila Police raid red-light districts‖. Los Angeles Times. 5 April
1988, available at http://articles.latimes.com/1988-04-05/news/mn-695_1_red-
light-district
Brown, Kristen. (1999). ―Outlawing Homelessness,‖ found in

http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/106/brown.html at 18 August 2011.
Coronel, Sheila. ―At the Kitchen of Divine Mercy,‖ Feast and Famine, IReport Issue No.
1. Retrieved 8 May 2008 from http://pcij.org/i-report/1/soup-kitchen.html
Delfin, Claire Sy. ―New homeless families welcome another uncertain year,‖
GMANews.TV. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/74759/New-homeless-families-welcome-another-
uncertain-year
Department of Social Welfare and Development. (2007). ―Jose Fabella Center Get
150,000 Donations from Cyma Restaurant.‖ Retrieved 12 March 2010 from
http://www.ncr.dswd.gov.ph/articledetails.php?id=208
Department of Social Welfare and Development. (2010). About Us. Accessed on 4

March 2011 at http://www.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/about-us
264
Department of Social Welfare and Development. (2010). ―DSWD gives disaster victims
new homes, safer communities‖ Accessed on 4 March 2011 at
http://www.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/component/content/article/1-latest-news/2077-
dswd-gives-disaster-victims-new-homes-safer-communities
GMA Public Affairs. (2008). I-Witness: Biyaheng Sikmura. GMANews.TV. 18 September

2008, available at http://www.gmanews.tv/story/121192.
Manila City. ―Department of Social Welfare‖. Accessed on 4 March 2011 at

http://www.manilacityph.com/socialservices.html
Maragay, Fel. ―Baywalk is a hot election issue.‖ Manila Standard Today. 1 February
2010, available at
http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/insideOpinion.htm?f=2010/february/1/felma
ragay.isx&d=2010/february/1
Metropolitan Manila Development Authority. (2009). ―MMDA Street Dweller Care Unit
Rescues 200 Vagrants in QC.‖ Retrieved 12 March 2010 from
http://www.mmda.gov.ph/news.htm#dec1609b
Ramos-Araneta, Macon. ―Lim padlocks LA Cafe for good‖. Manila Standard Today. 23
June 2010, available at
http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/insideMetro.htm?f=2010/june/23/metro1.isx
&d=2010/june/23
Revised Penal Code of the Philippines. An Act Revising the Penal Code and other Penal
Laws. Retrieved 25 March 2008 from
http://www.chanrobles.com/revisedpenalcodeofthephilippinesbook2.htm
Social networks. Retrieved 20 March 2010 from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network
Sy, Marvin. ―Senate okays bill decriminalizing vagrancy‖. Philippine Star. 17 March 2011,
available at http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=666979.
Tan, Kimberly Jane T. ―Escudero reiterates call for decriminalization of vagrancy‖.

GMANews.TV. 7 January 2011, available at
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/209998/nation/escudero-reiterates-call-for-
decriminalization-of-vagrancy.

Homelessness As A Way of Life: Survival Strategies of The Street Homeless in Manila, Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Homelessness As A Way of Life: Survival Strategies of The Street Homeless in Manila, Philippines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Homelessness As A Way of Life: Survival Strategies of The Street Homeless in Manila, Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the thesis about?

What is the thesis about?

What are the acknowledgements for?

What are the acknowledgements for?

HOMELESSNESS AS A WAY OF LIFE: SURVIVAL STRATEGIES

OF THE STREET HOMELESS IN MANILA

The Faculty of the Graduate School

Ateneo de Manila University

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts in Sociology