15.2 Community Organizing Participatory Action Research (COPAR): Pre-Entry, Site Selection, and Entry Phase

15.2 Community Organizing Participatory Action Research (COPAR): Pre-Entry, Site Selection, and Entry Phase

Board Exam Orientation: COPAR is the paramount community practice methodology tested on the Philippine Social Worker Licensure Examination. Examinees are routinely tested on the sequential phases of COPAR, the multi-factor criteria for selecting community project sites, protocols for formal and customary courtesy calls, managing political neutrality amidst local elite rivalries, and the strict professional imperative of avoiding premature material promises during initial community assemblies.

---

1. Philosophy, Principles, and Characteristics of COPAR

Community Organizing Participatory Action Research (COPAR) is a distinct, indigenous-grounded social work methodology that evolved in the Philippines during the 1970s and 1980s. Pioneered through rural community health and peasant organizing initiatives (such as the Community-Based Health Programs / CBHP under the Maryknoll missioners and progressive health professionals) and popularized in social work education, COPAR integrates social conscientization, participatory research, community organizing, and collective action into an unbroken, cyclic process.

Definitive Formulation of COPAR

COPAR is defined as:

"A continuous, sustained, and educative process of mobilizing people to facilitate self-reliance, collective decision-making, and structural transformation. In COPAR, community members are not passive beneficiaries or research subjects, but active co-investigators, leaders, and decision-makers who investigate their socioeconomic reality and take organized action to resolve their problems."

Core Characteristics of COPAR

1. People-Centered and Democratic: The community is the primary subject, actor, and beneficiary of the organizing process. Power resides in the collective assembly of residents (kapangyarihan sa mamamayan).
2. Participatory Action Research as an Emancipatory Instrument: Research is not an extractive academic exercise (hindi pangongolekta ng datos para sa tesis ng tagalabas). It is a process wherein ordinary people collect, tabulate, analyze, and own the data describing their poverty, transforming information into a catalyst for critical consciousness.
3. Action-Reflection-Action Cycle (ARAS / Kilos-Loob-Gawa-Suri): Community organizing progresses through continuous cycles of collective action, followed by deep collective reflection and critical analysis, leading to higher, more strategic levels of action.
4. Formation of Democratic People's Organizations (POs): The ultimate organizational goal is establishing a self-reliant, registered, community-led People's Organization capable of sustaining advocacy, managing local resources, and demanding structural reforms long after the external social worker phases out.

Comparative Matrix: COPAR vs. Traditional Top-Down Community Development

---

2. Overview of the Six Sequential Phases of COPAR

While COPAR is dynamic and non-linear in practice, it is systematically taught and tested across six distinct sequential phases:

Phase 1: Pre-Entry Phase
  │ (Institutional preparation, preliminary social investigation [PSI], site selection criteria)
  ▼
Phase 2: Entry Phase
  │ (Courtesy calls, customary protocol, general assembly, rapport building, avoiding promises)
  ▼
Phase 3: Community Integration & Social Investigation Phase
  │ (Pakikipamuhay, participatory action research [PAR], PRA tools, validation assembly)
  ▼
Phase 4: Core Group Formation & Organization Building Phase
  │ (Identifying organic leaders, core group formation, capability building, leadership training)
  ▼
Phase 5: Community Mobilization & Collective Action Phase
  │ (Action-reflection-action, resource mobilization, negotiation, campaigns, alliance building)
  ▼
Phase 6: Participatory Evaluation, Consolidation & Phase-Out Phase
  │ (Participatory monitoring and evaluation, organizational registration, phase-out plan, turnover)

---

3. The Pre-Entry Phase: Preparation and Site Selection

The Pre-Entry Phase encompasses all preliminary activities conducted by the organizing agency and social workers before physically setting foot in the target community.

Step 1: Institutional Preparation and Internal Alignment

Before field deployment, the agency clarifies its operational mandate, allocates travel and immersion budgets, establishes supervisory lines, and conducts team-building and values-clarification sessions for social workers. Organizers must reflect on their personal biases, class prejudices, and commitment to human rights.

Step 2: Preliminary Social Investigation (PSI)

The social worker conducts a secondary data review of potential project areas without conducting invasive field interviews. Sources include:

• Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS) data from municipal planning offices;
• Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) census and poverty incidence reports;
• Municipal Health Office (MHO) epidemiological records, infant mortality rates, and malnutrition data;
• Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUP) and hazard vulnerability maps from local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Offices (LDRRMO);
• DSWD Listahanan / National Household Targeting System (NHTS-PR) poverty registries.

Step 3: Multi-Factor Site Selection Criteria

The PRC Board of Social Workers heavily tests the specific, standardized criteria used to select a COPAR site. An organizing site must satisfy six indispensable requirements:

1. Depressed Socioeconomic Status / High Poverty Incidence: The area must belong to the poorest segment of the municipality (e.g., 4th to 6th class municipalities, geographically isolated and disadvantaged areas [GIDAs], or impoverished urban informal settlements) characterized by low household incomes, lack of potable water, inadequate sanitation, and poor access to basic social services.
2. Geographic Accessibility and Logistical Feasibility: The community must be physically accessible by public transport or standard local means (e.g., habal-habal, motorized banca, walking trails) during most of the year. While depressed, the site must not be so utterly unreachable that sustained regular community integration (pakikipamuhay) becomes logistically impossible.
3. Relative Peace, Order, and Security: The security environment must permit civilian community organizing without placing the lives of social workers and community residents in immediate, severe mortal danger. While poverty often coexists with political tensions, active warzones with unmanaged artillery shelling or violent armed combat are unsuitable for developmental community organizing.
4. Community Openness, Receptivity, and Readiness: Key community stakeholders, informal groups, and residents demonstrate an initial openness to welcome the organizers and engage in collective dialogue. An area characterized by violent clan feuds (rido) where residents actively threaten outsiders may require peacebuilding before developmental organizing.
5. Absence of Overlapping or Conflicting Programs: The community should not be saturated by rival NGOs or donor agencies implementing conflicting, intensive community organizing or large-scale unconditional dole-outs. Overlapping programs create community confusion, divide neighborhoods, and breed cynicism or "dole-out fatigue."
6. Potential for Developing Indigenous / Organic Leadership: The community should have residents who exhibit natural concern for collective welfare and have not been totally co-opted by traditional partisan political patrons.

Pre-Entry Site Selection Scoring Guide

Ocular Visits / Preliminary Reconnaissance

Before final confirmation of the site, the social work team conducts an ocular visit (preliminary physical reconnaissance):

• Purpose: To visually verify secondary data, inspect physical terrain, observe housing conditions and water sources, and sense the general social climate.
• Protocol: Conducted discreetly without making formal commitments, gathering crowd gatherings, or writing intrusive notes on clipboards in public spaces. The worker introduces themselves as a visitor exploring potential social development partnerships.

---

4. The Entry Phase: Protocols, Courtesy Calls, and Initial Rapport

The Entry Phase begins the moment the social worker enters the physical boundaries of the community. Its primary objectives are establishing formal and informal legitimacy, demystifying the organizer's presence, cultivating trust, and introducing the COPAR philosophy.

Protocol 1: Formal Courtesy Calls on Statutory Authorities

The social worker must strictly adhere to administrative protocols under the Local Government Code of 1991 (RA 7160):

1. Municipal Level: Paying a courtesy visit to the Municipal Mayor and Municipal Social Welfare and Development Officer (MSWDO) to present agency credentials and letters of introduction.
2. Barangay Level: Visiting the Punong Barangay (Barangay Captain) and members of the Sangguniang Barangay. The worker presents official agency credentials, explains the educational and developmental nature of COPAR, and requests permission to integrate into the barangay.
3. Barangay Frontliners: Meeting the Barangay Secretary, Barangay Health Workers (BHWs), Barangay Nutrition Scholars (BNS), and members of the Lupong Tagapamayapa.

Protocol 2: Customary and Informal Leadership Protocols

Securing clearance from elected politicians is necessary, but wholly insufficient for genuine community organizing. In many Philippine communities, formal officials are viewed with suspicion or are tied to political dynasties. The worker must observe customary protocol:

• Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs/IPs): Under the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act of 1997 (RA 8371), the social worker must seek formal audience with the Council of Elders, the Tribal Chieftain (Datu, Bae, or Timuay), and comply with the guidelines of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), respecting customary laws and obtaining Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) where applicable.
• Religious and Spiritual Leaders: Visiting the local Catholic parish priest or pastoral council, Protestant pastors, Islamic Imams or Ulama, and traditional faith elders.
• Sectoral Leaders: Establishing contact with leaders of local women's clubs, tricycle drivers' associations (TODA), small farmers' associations, and senior citizens.

Navigating Local Politics and Avoiding Patron-Client Traps

A critical trap in the Entry Phase is political co-optation and entanglement in entrenched patron-client relationships (padrino system):

• Refusing Elite Lodging: The Barangay Captain or a wealthy landlord may offer the social worker a luxurious air-conditioned room in their personal compound. The worker must politely and respectfully decline, explaining that the agency's policy requires living among ordinary residents in a modest home.
• Maintaining Non-Partisan Stance: The worker must never participate in partisan campaign rallies, endorse candidates, wear partisan political colors, or accept rides in partisan political campaign vehicles.
• Preventing Elite Capture: Elite capture occurs when local politicians or wealthy merchants insert their relatives into leadership positions to capture project benefits or redirect resources toward their private businesses. The worker avoids this by maintaining transparent community communication.

The First Community General Assembly (Pulong-Bayan)

The General Assembly is the formal introduction of the agency to the broad community:

• Venue & Timing: Held in a neutral, accessible public space (e.g., covered basketball court, public school ground, or chapel grounds) on a day and time that does not conflict with residents' livelihood (e.g., Sunday afternoon after religious services or late afternoon when fishers return from sea).
• Agenda:
  1. Introduction of the social workers and sponsoring agency;
  2. Explanation of the COPAR goals, philosophy, and developmental approach;
  3. Clarification of the social worker's role as a facilitator of capability building, rather than a donor delivering material hand-outs;
  4. Open forum to answer community questions, clear misunderstandings, and address suspicions.

Establishing Pakikipagpalagayang-loob (Mutual Rapport and Trust)

During entry, community members often regard the social worker with curiosity, suspicion, or apprehension. Residents may wonder: "Taga-BIR ba sila? Mga rebelde ba sila? Magbebenta ba sila ng pampaganda o manghihingi ng boto?" (Are they tax investigators? Insurgents? Sales agents? Political campaigners?)

• The worker builds trust through transparency, humble deportment, respectful language (po and opo), and active listening.
• The worker dresses in simple, practical, culturally appropriate attire (e.g., jeans, t-shirt, rubber slippers or sturdy boots), avoiding flashy jewelry, expensive electronics, or corporate power-dressing.

The Cardinal Rule: Avoiding Premature Promises (Huwag Magbitaw ng Pangako)

One of the most fatal mistakes an organizer can make during the Entry Phase is making premature promises:

Organizer makes premature promises of cash grants, water pumps, or road paving
  │
  ▼
Community develops passive clientelist expectations ("Tagatanggap ng biyaya")
  │
  ▼
Residents focus on pleasing the worker to secure funds rather than organizing
  │
  ▼
Unforeseen delays occur; funds are delayed or denied
  │
  ▼
Community feels betrayed; deep cynicism sets in; organizing process collapses

The social worker must explicitly clarify from day one: "Nandito po kami hindi upang magdala ng pera o mamigay ng materyales, kundi upang magtulungan tayong matutunan kung paano natin sama-samang susuriin at lulutasin ang ating mga suliranin." (We are here not to distribute cash or give away materials, but to work together so that we may learn how to collectively analyze and resolve our own problems.)

---

5. Illustrative Practice Scenario: Navigating Entry Protocol in an Upland Indigenous Barangay

Field Vignette

Social worker Jocelyn is assigned by a non-government developmental agency to initiate a COPAR program in Sitio Kalinaw, an upland barangay in Mindanao composed of 60% indigenous Teduray families and 40% Christian migrant settlers. The community experiences extreme poverty, lack of potable water, and high maternal mortality.

Upon arrival at the municipal hall, the Municipal Mayor warmly welcomes Jocelyn and insists that she stay at his family's private agricultural ranch house located 5 kilometers away, offering his private security escort. When Jocelyn arrives in the barangay, the elected Punong Barangay, an affluent settler merchant who owns the local crop-buying station, welcomes her and says: "Ma'am, huwag ka nang mag-abala sa mga katutubong iyan; tamad ang mga iyan. Dito ka na sa bahay ko tumira, at ako na ang magsasabi sa iyo kung ano ang kailangan ng barangay." (Ma'am, do not bother with those indigenous people; they are lazy. Live here in my house, and I will be the one to tell you what the barangay needs.)

Professional Social Work Analysis & Action Steps

1. Managing Political Co-optation: Jocelyn respectfully declines both the Mayor's ranch house and the Barangay Captain's private mansion. She diplomatically explains agency policy regarding community immersion and finds modest lodging with an ordinary, respected elder couple in the central sitio.
2. Customary Protocol & RA 8371 Compliance: Recognizing that the Punong Barangay holds legal authority but harbors ethnic prejudice against the Teduray, Jocelyn fulfills statutory protocol by conducting an official courtesy call at the Barangay Hall. Immediately thereafter, accompanied by an indigenous community health volunteer, she pays a formal customary courtesy visit to the Timuay (Tribal Chieftain) and the Teduray Council of Elders (Baglalan), presenting traditional tokens of respect and securing their cultural blessings.
3. Neutral Venue General Assembly: Jocelyn coordinates with both settler leaders and indigenous elders to hold the first Community Assembly at the public elementary school covered grounds on a Saturday afternoon. During the meeting, she clarifies that the agency brings no cash dole-outs, explains COPAR, translates key concepts into both Tagalog and Teduray, and ensures both indigenous women and settler farmers voice their expectations.

---

6. High-Yield Board Exam Traps & Pitfalls

Exam Trap #1: Selecting a Site Based Strictly on Poverty Incidence While Ignoring Security or Accessibility. Board questions often present an upland community with 95% poverty that is currently an active warzone experiencing weekly mortar shelling. Examinees who choose this site fail to recognize that extreme physical combat violates the criterion of relative peace and order, making sustained civilian organizing impossible.

Exam Trap #2: Equating Courtesy Calls with Securing Statutory Barangay Permission Alone. In indigenous ancestral domains or multi-ethnic rural barangays, paying a courtesy call only to the elected Barangay Captain is an exam error. Candidates must select options that include customary courtesy visits to tribal elders (Datu, Timuay) under RA 8371, as well as religious and sectoral leaders.

Exam Trap #3: Making Promises of Tangible Assistance to Entice Assembly Attendance. When community members ask if attending meetings will grant them free fertilizers, cash allowances, or housing units, examinees must identify the answer that refuses premature material pledges. The worker must demystify expectations and emphasize capability building, self-reliance, and collective organizing.