Listening to the Philippines:
Monthly Phone Survey

When the panel began in November, 41% of households were cutting meals or eating less because they could not afford enough food. That share fell through the winter, to about 19 percent by March. The decline then stalled and partly reversed. By Round 8 food insecurity stood at 21%, a drop of 20 points from the first round but above the March low. The data suggest a recovery that is real and unfinished.

A national average hides who carries the burden. Switch the chart to income quintile, using each household's baseline welfare rank, and a gradient appears. The poorest fifth began above 55 percent and ended near a quarter. The richest fifth began below 30 percent and ended in the high teens. The poorest carried more food insecurity in every round, close to twice the rate in the early rounds and roughly half again by Round 8. The gap narrowed as both fell, but it never closed.

The same divide runs across geography. Broken out by region, Metro Manila and the rest of Luzon began near a third of households, while the Visayas and Mindanao began above half and, despite the steepest declines, stayed near a quarter through Round 8.

The recovery reached every household. It did not close the distance between them.

Exposure to shocks follows the same arc. In the first round, 35% of households reported a recent shock, most often a lost job, an illness, a storm, or a price spike. That share fell to 17% by Round 8, with the same winter dip and spring rebound. Food stress and shocks move together, because a shock that cuts a household's income is also what pushes it to cut meals.

The panel began tracking financial accounts at Round 5. From the first measurement, about half of households already held a mobile-money account. The share was 49% at Round 5 and rose to 55% by Round 8. Mobile money is the one part of the financial system that reached most households quickly.

Formal banking did not follow. A bank account barely moved, from about an eighth of households to a sixth across the same rounds. It was 12% at Round 5 and 17% at Round 8. Households did not move from cash to banks. They moved from cash to the phone, because a mobile wallet needs only a SIM and a sari-sari store, not a branch and a minimum balance.

The leap in access went to the phone, while the bank stayed out of reach.

The shift is not even. Switch the chart to income quintile, ranked on baseline welfare, and the gradient is plain. The richest fifth climbs above 60 percent by Round 8, while the poorest fifth stays below 50. Mobile money widened access to the financial system, and it carried the income gradient with it.

Recovery reached food and shocks. It did not reach the terms of work. In the first round, 82% of employed Filipinos worked without a written contract. By Round 8 the share was 77%. Across eight rounds it never left the mid-seventies to low eighties. The data suggest that contract-free work is not a phase of the downturn but a standing feature of the labor market.

The burden is heavier in the countryside. Switch the chart to urban and rural. Rural workers ran several points above urban workers in most rounds, because farm and informal work rarely come with a written agreement. Neither line trended down.

The economy recovered. The contract did not arrive.

The survey asks the transfer questions only in a preloaded subset of households, about one in six of the panel, so these shares describe the households asked rather than all households. It began measuring them consistently at Round 3, in January, the month families receive holiday money from relatives at home and abroad. Among these households, 39% reported receiving money through a transfer service that month. The share then settled near a quarter, at 25% by Round 8. The Christmas inflow is a spike on a standing base, not a one-time event.

The inflow looks different by place. Switch the chart to urban and rural. City households saw the larger spike at the January peak, while rural households received transfers more steadily through the spring, so by Round 8 the rural share sat above the urban one. The channel reaches both, on different rhythms.

A transfer is a family tie, paid monthly.

The panel began asking about the Middle East crisis at Round 6, after the fighting disrupted shipping and oil. The answer was nearly unanimous. 94% of households said they were at least somewhat concerned, and the share held near that level through Round 8 at 91%. Few external events in the panel reached so many households so quickly.

Concern was not abstract. 92% of households reported a moderate-to-severe impact on their own finances, because a distant conflict reaches a Filipino household through the price of fuel and goods before anything else.

A war an ocean away arrived at the pump and the market stall.

The worry crossed every income group. Switch the chart to income quintile and the lines sit close together, all well above 85 percent. A price shock from abroad does not sort households by wealth the way a job loss does, because it reaches the whole market at once.

Every chapter so far hides a second story inside the income distribution. Take food security. The poorest fifth of households began the panel above 55 percent food-insecure and ended near a quarter, at 25%. The richest fifth ended at 17%. Both improved, and the poorest never closed the distance to the richest.

The same ladder shapes the gains, not only the losses. Switch the chart to mobile money by quintile. The richest fifth held accounts at 63%, the poorest fifth at 47%. A new technology widened access and reproduced the old gradient, because the households with phones, identity documents, and steady cash adopt first.

Recovery reached every group. It reached the top first.

Geography traces the same line. The poorest regions, in the Visayas and Mindanao, carried the highest food insecurity throughout, while Metro Manila and Luzon sat below. Across the panel one pattern repeats. The averages improved while the distances held, so a household near the bottom gained real relief and kept the same relative position.

The health questions ran in only two rounds, March and June, so the panel offers a before and after rather than a trend. In March, 61% of people who sought care paid out of pocket for the consultation. By June the share had fallen to 44%, a drop of 16 points. Few households sought care in any single round, so the change rests on a small base and reads as suggestive rather than a firm movement. Out-of-pocket payment eased, and it still reached more than two in five.

Who pays out of pocket runs against intuition. Switch the chart to income quintile. The richest fifth was the most likely to pay from its own pocket, the poorest the least, because better-off households use private care they pay for directly, while poorer households lean on public facilities or go without. A low out-of-pocket rate at the bottom can mark unmet need, not better protection.

Coverage on paper is not the same as care without a bill.

Life satisfaction is the panel's broadest measure of how households feel. It held near 2.8 out of five through the first five rounds. Then it slipped, to 2.7 by Round 8. The decline is small, and it lines up with the rounds when the Middle East crisis dominated the news.

The same turn shows in how households judged their own finances. The share saying their economic situation had worsened sat in the teens for months, near 18%, then jumped to 30% at Round 6 before easing to 19%. The mood did not drift, it reacted, because the price of fuel and food moved at the same time.

The mood did not drift. It reacted.

The dip was not confined to one group. Switch the chart to income quintile and every line bends down together around Round 6. A shock that arrives through prices reaches the mood of richer and poorer households alike, because they buy in the same market.