Comparative Study on the Life Aspiration and Life Satisfaction of the Recipients and Non-Recipients of PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program Researchers: Jhudiel Angela G. Tamayo Bachelor of Science in Psychology Colegio de San Juan de Letran-Intramuros #096 SL Tubigan St. Brgy. Sico, Lipa City, Batangas 0935-4142-909 Earlaine Shane Torres Bachelor of Science in Psychology Colegio de San Juan de Letran-Intramuros #59 Dulong Bayan, San Pablo City, Laguna 0916-839-2767 Conflict of Interest In line with the study that has been conducted there was no conflict of interest as the researchers had no affiliation nor personal relationships to any employees under the department that may influenced the author’s opinion. Abstract Poverty has been a perennial problem in the Philippines. The government adapted the Conditional Cash Transfer program of Latin America with the main objective of resolving and eradicating poverty in the country. The local version was named PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program or 4Ps. The present study aimed to know if thePantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program has increased the life aspiration and life satisfaction of the recipients as compared to those of non-recipients. A total of 200 participants, 100 who were recipients of the 4Ps and 100 non-recipients of the program, served as participants of the study. The participants were residents of the cities of Manila, Caloocan and Pasay. The study was conducted with the coordination of the Department of Social Welfare and Development. Two scales were used to generate data that would answer the research questions: Life Aspiration Scale (PanukatsaNilalayonsaBuhay) and Life Satisfaction Scale (PanukatsaKasiyahansaBuhay). Both were translated into Filipino for convenience in their administration. The t-test for independent sample was used as the statistical treatment to measure the impact of the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program. The findings revealed that thereis a significant difference between the life aspiration of the recipients and non-recipients except in the category of wealth. Meanwhile, the recipients also reported a higher level of satisfaction in life compared to non-recipients. It is recommended to further study thePantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program using a psychological lens and explore the underlying motivationsthat make a person satisfied in life or aspire for more. Keywords: Conditional Cash Transfer, PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program, Life Aspiration, Life Satisfaction, Recipients, Non-Recipients INTRODUCTION Poverty is prevalent in different areas of the world (Lever, Piñol, & Uralde, 2005),regardless of whether a country is classified as developed or still in the process of developing (G. G. Kingdon & Knight, 2004). The issue of poverty is evident and persistent, making legislators, researchers, and governments interested in delving into its underlying causes and effects to the society (Kura, 2012)as well as discoveringsolutions and plans on how to gradually lessen its prevalence (Rojas, 2003). It is the duty of any government to constantly find the means to solve social issues, particularly the issue of poverty(Conchada & Tiongco, 2014). Poverty in the Philippines is a major social issue that has been continuous and still present today (DSWD, 2009). This issue needs wider attention and immediate solution from the government. The PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) formerly dubbed as “AhonPamilyang Pilipino” is the version of Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) in the Philippines (Conchada & Tiongco, 2014; Frufonga, 2015; Reyes, Tabuga, & Mina, 2015). Like other CCT programs, the 4Ps would want to alleviate the poverty in the Philippines by immediately supplying the needs of poor Filipino families (Reyes, Tabuga, Mina, & Asis, 2013) on a cash basis (dela Torre, 2016). The PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Programwas begun in year 2008 under the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) (Montilla, Delavin, Villanueva, & Turco, 2015). It has been highly-criticized because of its huge allocation in the country’s annual budget.According to OSEC-Public Information Unit, the Department of Budget and Management allotted P62.7 billion for the widening of the program. It is considered to be the government’s most costly social protection program(Reyes, Tabuga, & Mina, 2015) and the sixth largest gainer in the budget of the National Expenditure Program in 2016 compared to the previous year. Administrative Order No.16, series of 2008 (A.O. No. 16, s. 2008), sets the implementing guidelines for the “PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program” (4Ps) and the following objectives: 1) To improve preventive health care of pregnant women and young children, 2) To increase enrollment/attendance of children at elementary level, 3) To reduce incidence of child labor, 4) To raise consumption of poor households on nutrient dense foods, 5) To encourage parents to invest in their children's (and their own) future, 6) To encourage parent's participation in the growth and development of young children, as well as involvement in the community (Tadeo, 2011). PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program is a government assistance programfor the extreme poor household in the Philippines. This program helps the poor household in terms of needs in health care, nutrition, family development, and education of children under ages 0-14. It has two objectives: 1) to provide social assistance through cash support that will be used for their immediate needs, and 2) social development to break the cycle of poverty by investing in human capital (Agbon, Nolasco-Amadora, Aguilar, Abellanosa, & Ligaton, 2013). According to DSWD (2012), the targeting system of the program is through the National Household Targeting System for Poverty Reduction or NHTS-PR that was administered by DSWD using the Proxy Means Test (Chaudhury, Friedman, & Onishi, 2013). The Proxy Means Test identifies the socio-economic class of the families by assessing certain proxy variables such as ownerships of assets, house type, educational background of the household head, source of income of the family, and their access to water and sanitation facilities. The program cycle starts with the selection of provinces and municipalities. The National Household Targeting System identifies who and where the poor are in the country. The next step is the selection of households that would become recipients of the program. Household assessment and identification is done through the conduct of house-to-house interviews and the Household Assessment Form (HAF). The HAF is a software that ranks households based on their approximate income within the municipal/provincial poverty level. The third step is the validation and finalization of the list of poor households. A local verification committee assists in managing complaints and grievances from those who get excluded in the program and for possible errors in the assessment. The fourth step is report-generation and information-sharing among potential-end users like government agencies and social protection stakeholders in order for them to have some kind of reference regarding the beneficiaries of the program. The next steps involve the organization of community assemblies, followed by the preparation of a family registry, and then payment to the beneficiaries. If the beneficiaries are verified ashaving complied with the conditions of the program, then they would be given payment; if not, there would be a deduction to their payment.Those who are found to continue to fail in complying with the set conditions may be delisted from the program. Households are deemed eligible if 1) they are residents of the poorest municipalities based on the 2003 Small Area Estimates of NSCB, 2) their economic condition is equal to or below the provincial poverty level, 3) they have members aged 0 to 14 and/or a pregnant woman at the time of assessment, and 4) they agree to meet the specific conditions of the program. In order for the beneficiaries to avail of the cash grants they must comply with the following conditions: a) pregnant women must have a pre- and post-natal care and be attended during childbirth by a trained health professional; b) the parents must attend family development sessions (FDS); c) children aged 0-5 must receive regular preventive check-ups and vaccines; d) children aged 3-5 must attend day care or pre-school classes at least 85% of the time; e) children aged 6-14 must enroll in elementary or high school and must attend classes at least 85% of the time; and, f) children aged 6-14 must receive deworming pills twice a year (DSWD, 2010). The PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program package grants cash to a maximum of 3 children per family. A recipient household with 3 children receives P6,000 a year or P500 per month for their health and nutrition expenses, plus P9,000 per school year (10 months) for the 3 children or P900 per month (P300 per child) for their educational expenses (Reyes, Tabuga, & Mina, 2015). As long as they comply with the conditions of the program the household with a maximum of 3 qualified children receives a subsidy of P15,000 annually and P1,400 per month (DSWD, 2010). The cash grants are received through a Land Bank cash card. In cases where payment through a cash card is not possible, the beneficiaries aregiven the options to an alternative payment scheme like over-the-counter transactions from any nearest Land Bank branch and Globe G-cash in areas that do not have Land Bank branches (Fernandez, L. & Rosechin, O., 2011). This developmental program given by the government has positive outcomes and results as it helps in the alleviation of poverty (Agbon et al., 2013; R. Frufonga, 2016; Reyes, Tabuga, Mina, & Asis, 2015). The relationship between various aspects of well-being and economic factors has been an old subject for discussions(Rojas, 2007). Life satisfaction is considered as a component of an individual’s well-being (Bayram, Aytac, Aytac, Sam, & Bilgel, 2012). As a result, several studies have been conducted on the relationship between poverty and life satisfaction (Bayram et al., 2012; Becchetti, Castriota, & Solferino, 2011; Hajek, 2013). The most popular was the Easterlin-Paradox which posits the idea that having additional income does not raise life satisfaction (Alem, 2014). Life satisfaction has been described as the subjective evaluation of one’s life (Diener, Oishi, & Lucas, 2012; Hajek, 2013) and condition, family, living environment and social life (Bayram et al., 2012). It has also been viewed as the way in which individual sees his or her life as a whole. In order to provide a wider perspectiveon the relationship between poverty and life satisfaction, further investigation on other factors that affect overall satisfaction in life must be addressed (Becchetti et al., 2011). Since the recipients of the 4Ps are the poorest of the poor (Frufonga, 2016), having a monthly source of income could have an effect on their life aspirations. Alem’s (2014) discussion paper stated that Easterlin (1950;1995) pointed out that when income increases, aspirations also increases. The aspiration and life satisfaction of a person highly reflect on their cultural and economic status (Ingrid, Majda, & Dubravka, 2009). In line with this, the socioeconomic status of a parent serves as the predictor of the aspiration of the child (Jacob, 2010). Most studies on the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program focused on the sociological and economic aspects of the program. This prompted the researchers to take on a psychological approach this time. Several researches have argued about the relationship of income and life satisfaction.They have proven that while life satisfaction was not automatically high for nations with higher incomes, income has a large impact on the well-being of the poor people compared to the rich ones (Bayram, Aytac, Aytac, Sam, & Bilgel, 2012). On the other hand, economists usually study poverty using external constraints such as education, health, infrastructure etc., which leads them to exploring poverty using internal constraints such as hope and aspirations in life (Dalton, Ghosal, & Mani, 2011; Lybbert & Wydick, 2015). These two variables, aspiration and satisfaction in life,obviously have a connection to poverty which should be explored further. In this research study, the researchers predicted that with the aid of PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program (4P’s), the life aspirations of the recipients as well as their perceived satisfaction in life improved as their income increased. Theoretical Framework The Self-determination Theory deals withmotivation, development of personality, self-regulation and well-being of a person (Ryan & Deci, 2000). It is a macro theory that explains the factors affecting human motivation and optimal functioning (Deci & Ryan, 2008). Autonomy, relatedness and competence are the three basic and universal psychological needs that are vital to a healthy functioning human (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). Autonomy is the individual’s need to take control of his or her life (V. G. Kasser & Ryan, 1999), relatedness is the need for belongingness and good relationship to others(Sheldon & Filak, 2008)while competence refers to the individual’s need to be effective to his or her environment(Broeck, Vansteenkiste, Witte, Soenens, & Lens, 2010). The theory also discusses the two types of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation deals with the innate desire of the person to do something that seeks opportunities for the person to grow and learn(Niemiec & Ryan, 2009) while extrinsic motivation concerns with the desire of the person to do something for the sake of rewards or positive consequences for doing a certain activity (Vansteenkiste, Lens, & Deci, 2006). Motivation concerns the use of energy and it explains why the individual exhibits a particular behavior, persists in the same behavior, or intends to act in a certain way. Motivations are goal-directed behaviors and goals steer the action of the individual. Long term-goalsdrive the individual to his or her ideal future. Life aspirations, sometimes referred to as life goals (Martos & Kopp, 2012), are classified into two: intrinsic aspiration involves self-development like personal growth, community contributions and personal development, while extrinsic aspiration involves external rewards such as wealth and fame (Chantara, Kaewkuekool, & Koul, 2011a). This research study was guided by the SDT framework, specifically as regard to the concept of life aspiration. Life aspiration in this study refers to the perceived goals of the individual in the future. It provides a means for the individual to aspire in spite of his social status. If the life aspiration of a person is high, it may also encouragehim to set life goals which,otherwise, hewould think were unattainable before he began aspiring for them. As a result, the individual could be driven to act in order to achieve his goals. The PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program aims to prevent people from continuing to experience poverty by doling out cash under certain conditions. With the use of the Aspiration Index, a 7-point Likert scale, this research sought to find out whether the life aspirations of recipients are higher compared to non-recipients. Literature Review Conditional Cash Transfer The Conditional Cash Transfer scheme originated from Latin America(Leite, Acosta, & Rigolini, 2011). It refers to social programsinvolving the handing out of regular cash payment to poor householdsas long as they keep to certain conditions in exchange such as availing of health services and school attendance (Glassman et al., 2013). Different countries have their own versions of CCT such as LEAP of Ghana(Oduro, 2015), BolsaFamilia of Brazil (Hailu & Soares, 2008), The Program of Advancement through Health and Education (PATH) of Jamaica, and Tanzania Social Action Fund (TSAF) of Tanzania(Masunzu, 2014). CCT programs are mainly focused on the objective of alleviating poverty. Poverty is a perennial problem in the Philippines. The Philippine government was inspired to come up with a local version of CCT after a number of researches proved the scheme to be successful in poverty reduction in other countriesPantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), the Philippine version of CCT, also aims for poverty reduction through cash assistance(Montilla et al., 2015). Since its emergence, the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program has been adjudged as one of the best forms of CCT in the world (A. C. Orbeta & Paqueo, 2016). In a case study conducted in the Province of Iloilo regarding the implementation of 4Ps in the province, the beneficiaries of the program expressed hopefulness with regards to the future of their children since they deemed the cash grants given to them as sufficient to provide necessities like health care and education (R. Frufonga, 2016). In another evaluation of the program, the recipients of the 4Ps indicated that they have gained more through attendance in Family Development Sessions (dela Torre (2016). Through the cash grants from 4Ps, parents were able to send their child to school and provide health maintenance to their family (Montilla et al., 2015). Although there have been previous studies pertaining to the effectiveness of the implementation of the program, there were still issues with regards to CCT in general and PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program, in particular.A research in Colombia stated that there was a positive outcome in terms of school attendance but the quality of education given to these attendees was questionable (Baez & Camacho, 2011). The same criticism on the lack of impact of education to the children of beneficiaries was raised in a study on the Cambodia Education Sector Support Program. The program had no effect on the learnings of the student due to the failure of providing a good quality of education (Saavedra, 2016). Although the CCT programs provided scholarships, they turned out useless when children studied in schools with low standards of education. Meanwhile, in the case of thePantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program, it was found that the recipients became dependent on the cash grants and assistance provided by the government. There was little initiative among the recipients to find employment and a means to earn aside from receiving the direct assistance provided for them (A. Orbeta & Paqueo, 2013). Life Aspiration Life aspiration is an individual’s view of similar and attainable perspectives in life as the person bases his/her life aspiration from his/her social group of reference (Gutman & Akerman, 2008; G. Kingdon & Knight, 2004). It explains the desire to achieve something high (Gutman &Akerman, 2008) for the individual to become a better person (Ray, 2006) which is the idea behind Self-Determination Theory (Nishimura & Suzuki, 2016; Rijavec, Brdr, & Miljkovic, 2011). Life aspiration comprises of two types of aspirations. The first is intrinsic aspiration which centers on self-acceptance, community feeling, affiliation and physical fitness (T. Kasser, 2005; Rijavec et al., 2011; Ryan & Deci, 2000). The second is extrinsic aspiration which deals with having an attractive appearance, fame, and financial success(Chantara, Kaewkuekool, & Koul, 2011b; Martos & Kopp, 2012; Schmuck, Kasser, & Ryan, 2000).The occurrence of life aspiration still depends on people, most especially those who are considered to be living below the poverty line (Flechtner, 2014). There might be a tendency to experience a low capacity to aspire (Pasquier-doumer & Brandon, 2013) and a low tendency of future aspirations in life (Ibrahim, 2011). Also, people below the poverty line might experience life aspiration gap or the idea of having a ‘distance’ between the concepts of what might the individual aspire for and in what current condition the individual is (Ibrahim, 2011). Life Satisfaction Subjective well-being (SWB) meansthe current evaluation of one’s happiness (Galang, Magno, Paterno, & Roldan, 2011). It also refers to the ultimate objective of an individual which is life satisfaction (Kim, Lee, Sangalang, & Harris, 2015). SWB, therefore, can either be used to define happiness or life satisfaction. SWB has three dimensions: positive affect or the way people respond to events in life in a pleasant way, the absence of negative affect, and life satisfaction or the way people evaluate their lives (Dai, Zhang, & Li, 2013; Howell & Howell, 2008; Hudders & Pandelaere, 2012; X. Li &Zheng, 2014; Y. Li, Lan, & Ju, 2015; Luhmann, Murdoch III, & Hawkley, 2015)An argument was raised regarding the relationship of income and life satisfaction (Ferrer-i-Carbonell, 2005) since there may be an increase to life satisfaction among people who receiveadditional earnings in poorer nations (Diener, Tay, & Oishi, 2013; Minkov, 2009). In contrast, people who are materialistic tend to have a lower subjective well-being (Hudders & Pandelaere, 2012). The satisfaction of a person to the country one belongs to might also lead to a positive change in his or her life satisfaction (Morrison, Tay, & Diener, 2011). Furthermore, even the role of the government may also affect its inhabitant’s well-being(Samanni & Holmberg, 2010). This is why policy makers and governments around the world think of ways on how they can improve the welfare of their citizens. Hypotheses Ho: There is no significant difference on the life aspiration of the recipients and non-recipients of 4Ps. There is also no significant difference in the life satisfaction of the recipients and non-recipients of the program. H1: The recipients have a higher level of life aspiration than non-recipients. There is also a significant difference in the life satisfaction of recipients compared to non-recipients. Simulacrum Figure 1. Proposed conceptual scheme Method The present study used the quantitative approach. To further discuss the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program and its effectiveness in the psychological aspect of the individual, the exploratory method was utilized. Two standardized scale were used to generate the needed data. The Life Aspiration Scale of Ryan and Kasser (1996) is a 7-point Likert scale which comprises of 7 categories: wealth, image, fame, community feeling, personal growth, meaningful relationships and good health. Meanwhile, the Life Satisfaction Scale of Edward Diener (1985) is a 7-point Likert scale designed to measure the global cognitive judgment of the respondent’shappiness. Both scales were translated by professional translators into the Filipino language for the convenience of the participants. The author of Life Aspiration, Tim Kasser, had the chance to evaluate the translation of the scale he designed. The scales also underwent cultural evaluation from the Department of Social Welfare and Development to ensure that the translated questions were culturally-fit to the participants. The participants of the study were clustered into 2 groups: recipients and non-recipients of PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program.They all came from Manila, Pasay and Caloocan City, the three largest cities in the National Capital Region covered by the program. Protocols in research that were given by the Department of Social Welfare and Development were strictly followed by the researchers. Prior to the conduct of the study, the chosen barangays from the three cities were fully informed about the data gathering activity. Also, representative from the City Link accompanied the researchers in gathering data. To analyze the gathered data, the researchers used the T-test for Independent Sample since there were two variables and two groupsinvolvedin the study. Results and Analysis An Independent Sample T-test analysis was used to compare the Life Satisfaction of the recipients and non-recipients of 4Ps. There was a significant difference between the two groups, t = 3.14***, p<.001, wherein the recipients (M = 5.93, SD = 0.92) scored higher than non-recipients (M = 5.49, SD = 1.11). It was found that people from the poverty line were consistently reported to have lower life satisfaction (Haushofer, 2013). However, according to Rojas (2003) the impact of a person’s socioeconomic status on their life satisfaction depends on the person’s own judgment of how satisfied or not they are. It does not necessarily mean that the higher the income a person has, the higher life satisfaction he or she has. However, people from below the poverty line have been consistently reported to have lower life satisfaction (Haushofer, 2013). In the end, it is still the subjective view of a person whether he or she is happy with his or her status in life. In terms of the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program, if the recipients can maintain the proper allocation and investment of the cash grants for long-term purposes, they are more likely to continue to be satisfied with their lives (Velarde & Fernandez, 2011). According toVeenhoven (1996), the current status or condition of an individual can also have an impact to his or her life satisfaction. Based on the data, with the help of PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program and its objectives of attaining a positive condition to the health and education of its recipients, it is possible that a government program can actually uplift the individual’s sense of satisfaction towards life. The Life Aspiration Scale comprises of seven categories: wealth, fame, image, personal growth, relationship, community and health (T. Kasser & Ryan, 1996). Table 2 shows a comparison of the results between the recipients and non-recipients across the categories. The life aspirations of the recipients were significantly different in the categories of fame, image, personal growth, relationship, community and health. In the category of wealth, however, there was no difference between the recipients and non-recipients. It may be inferred that the recipients viewed thePantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program as an effective way for them to attaintheir daily needs. CCTs were considered as magic bullet because of their effectiveness in the reduction of poverty (Masunzu, 2014). Since the participants both came from the poverty line, it is assumed that being recipients could, therefore, affect their perception of their level of wealth.However, the data show that both groups have the same level of aspirations to wealth. This could perhaps be because regardless if one were a recipient of the program or not, it is but common for the individual to aspire for wealth. Nevertheless, some of the recipients were known to have used the cash grants to investing into small-scale business such as raising livestock or setting-up a sari-sari store. Discussion The effectiveness of thePantawidPamilyangPlipino Programhas often been evaluated in the past years; however, these researches neglected to focus on the psychological effects of the program to the recipients. The researchers then took the initiative to conduct a study which would fill this gap in knowledgeregarding the 4Ps. The present study aimed to determine whether there was a difference between the life aspiration and life satisfaction between recipients and non-recipients of 4Ps. It worked on a null and an alternative hypotheses: Ho: There is no significance in the life aspiration and life satisfaction of recipients and non-recipients of 4Ps. H1: The recipients have a higher level of life aspiration than non-recipients. There is also a significant difference in the life satisfaction of recipients compared to non-recipients. The researchers asked Tim Kasser and Edward Diener, authors of the Life Aspiration Scale and Life Satisfaction Scale, respectively, for permission and approval to use their instruments for the study. The scales were translated into the Filipino language for the convenience of the participants involved in the study. Professionals validated and translated the scale and Tim Kasser himself checked the translation of his scale. The measuring instruments also underwent cultural validation to ensure that the translated questions were culturally-fit to the participants. Based on the results, the alternative hypothesis was to be accepted in that recipients were shown to have higher levels of life aspiration and life satisfaction compared to non-recipients. Under the variable of life aspiration, recipients expressed a higher level in the categories of image, fame, personal growth, community feeling, relationship and health, than non-recipients. However, in the category of wealth, both were of the same level. It seemed like both groups hold the same aspiration to become wealthier since they both belong to the poverty level. In terms of life satisfaction, recipients also reported to have a higher level of life satisfaction compared to non-recipients. This means that recipients were happier in life because of the benefits of the program than those who were not members of the program. The results of the study showed that in terms of life satisfaction there is a significant difference between the recipient and non-recipients of the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program. The recipients also exhibited higher aspirations in life although not on all of the 7 categories of life aspiration. There was no significant difference in terms of both groups’ aspirations for wealth. The researchers concludedthat since both groups in this study came from the same communities and occupied the same poverty levels, it can be assumed that they shared common aspirations for wealth. These individuals did not feel that the impact of PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Programaffected their aspirations for wealth. This may be supported by the study of Ingrid, Majda, &Dubravka (2009) which found that individuals reflect their aspirations in life based on the economic condition they live in. The results showed that the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program elicited hopes on the recipients in terms of aspiring for fame, image, meaningful relationships, personal growth, and community contribution. Experts in the field claimed that the reason why the recipients had higher aspirations in life after becoming recipients of the 4Ps was because the main goal of 4Ps was to empower its recipients and to let them know that living in poverty should not be a hindrance for them to aspire for more in life. Also, according to them, the 4Ps was unique among other CCTs in the world because of the Family Development Sessions (FDS). Through these sessions which recipients were required to attend, they were taught and encouraged to believe that they still have the chance to live successfully and rise above their poverty. Recommendations The researchers would like to stress on the importance of advance coordination with the Department of Social Welfare to avoid conflicts with the schedule, protocols and other documents concerning research involving the agency. Partnership with the Center for Community Development is also highly recommended for similar studies dealing with subjects of community development and social protection. With regards to the scales that were used in the present study, the researchers recommend coming up with a more specific and suitable set of questions regarding the program to elicit more comprehensive responses. Some items on the scale may generate better answers if they were phrased better. This study may be useful for future researchers since, unlike most researches on the PantawidPamilyang Pilipino Program which dealt on the economic and political aspects of the program, it discussed the program with a psychological perspective. It is recommended that more similar studies be conducted to affirm the findings of the present study. In line with the number of participants in the study, it is also recommended that future researches include a larger number of participants and include more areas in the National Capital Region or conduct researches in the provinces for a comparison of the experiences of the residents and recipient of the 4Ps in NCR with those in the provinces. Finally, other avenues for study include an exploration of the underlying motivation of individuals in attaining specific life goals as well as investigationson the interplay of the variables of life aspiration and life satisfaction. Tables: I. Table 1.T-test Analysis of Life Satisfaction Recipient Non-recipient Variable M (SD) M (SD) t Cohen's d (effect size) Effect size interpretation Mean difference LL 95% CI UL 95% CI Life Satisfaction 5.93 (0.92) 5.49 (1.11) 3.14*** 0.43 Medium 0.452 0.16787 0.73613 Note: ***p<.001 II. Table 2.T-test Analysis on Life Aspiration Categories Recipient Non-Recipient Variable M(SD) M(SD) t Cohen's d (effect size) Effect size interpretation Mean difference LL 95% CI UL 95% CI a.) Wealth 5.25(0.92) 5.01(0.92) 1.82 0.26 Small 0.238 -0.01975 0.49575 b.) Fame 4.91(1.34) 4.23(1.16) 3.79*** 0.53 Medium 0.67133 0.32179 1.02087 c.) Image 4.89(1.15) 4.31(1.05) 3.69*** 0.53 Medium 0.57533 0.26786 0.8828 d.) Personal growth 5.83(0.78) 5.30(0.84) 4.59*** 0.65 Medium 0.52667 0.30033 0.753 e.) Relationship 6.00(0.74) 5.36(0.85) 5.69*** 0.8 Large 0.64067 0.41867 0.86266 f.) Community 5.72(0.77) 5.15(0.81) 5.08*** 0.72 Medium 0.56733 0.34691 0.78776 g.) Health 6.19(0.73) 5.79(0.79) 3.7*** 0.51 Medium 0.398 0.18599 0.61001 Note: ***p<.001 Government Documents: (DSWD), Department of Social Welfare and Development. 4Ps Concept Paper for MCC. N.p., 2009. Print. ---. “Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) Philippines - Improving the Human Capital of the Poor (Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program or 4P’S).” Concept Paper for MCC 51 (2010): 1–21. Print. ---. Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program. N.p., 2012. Print. Journals: Agbon, Adrian Boyett et al. “Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps): Examining Gaps and Enhancing Strategies in Cebu City, Philippines.” East Asian Development Bank 71.71 (2013): 1–78. Print. Alem, Yonas. “Life Satisfaction in Urban Ethiopia.” Environment for Development 14.4 (2014): 1–20. Print. Baez, Javier E., and Adriana Camacho. “Assessing the Long-Term Effects of Conditional Cash Transfers on Human Capital: Evidence from Colombia.” IZA Disucssion Paper (2011): 1–49. Web. Bayram, Nuran et al. “Poverty, Social Exclusion, and Life Satisfaction: A Study From Turkey.” Journal of Poverty 16.4 (2012): 375–391. Web. Becchetti, Leonardo, Stefano Castriota, and Nazaria Solferino. “Development Projects and Life Satisfaction: An Impact Study on Fair Trade Handicraft Producers.” Journal of Happiness Studies 12.1 (2011): 115–138. Web. Broeck, Anja Van Den et al. “Capturing Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness at Work: Construction and Initial Validation of the Work-Related Basic Need Satisfaction Scale.” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 83 (2010): 981–1002. Web. Chantara, Soontornpathai, Sittichai Kaewkuekool, and Ravinder Koul. “Self-Determination Theory and Career Aspirations : A Review of Literature.”International Conference on Social Science and Humanity 5 (2011): 212–216. Print. Chaudhury, N, J Friedman, and J Onishi. “Philippines Conditional Cash Transfer Program Impact Evaluation 2012.” Manila: World Bank 75533 (2013): 1–80. Web. Conchada, Mitzie Irene P, and Marites Tiongco. “Optimal Allocation of School and Health Resources for Effective Delivery of the Conditional Cash Transfer Program in Bagac , Bataan.” (2014): 1–10. Print. Dai, Bibing, Baoshan Zhang, and Juan Li. “Protective Factors for Subjective Well-Being in Chinese Older Adults: The Roles of Resources and Activity.”Journal of Happiness Studies 14 (2013): 1225–1239. Web. Dalton, Patricio S., Sayantan Ghosal, and Anandi Mani. “Poverty and Aspirations Failure.” Economic Journal 126.590 (2011): 165–188. Web. Deci, Edward L, and Richard M Ryan. “Self-Determination Theory: A Macrotheory of Human Motivation, Development, and Health.” 49.3 (2008): 182–185. Web. dela Torre, Brian O. “Financing Education through the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps).” 6.5 (2016): 99–108. Print. Diener, Ed, Shigehiro Oishi, and Richard E. Lucas. “Subjective Well-Being: The Science of Happiness and Life Satisfaction.” The Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology, (2 Ed.) (2012): 63–73. Web. Diener, Ed, Louis Tay, and Shigehiro Oishi. “Rising Income and the Subjective Well-Being of Nations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104.2 (2013): 267–276. Web. Easterlin, Richard A. “Will Raising the Incomes of All Increase the Happiness of All?” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 27 (1995): 35–47. Print. Fernandez, L., and Rosechin, O. “Overview of the Philippines’ Conditional Cash Transfer Program: The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (Pantawid Pamilya).”WB-AusAID Philippine Social Protection Note 2.2 (2011): 1–12. Print. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, Ada. “Income and Well-Being: An Empirical Analysis of the Comparison Income Effect.” Journal of Public Economics 89 (2005): 997–1019. Web. Flechtner, Svenja. “Aspiration Traps: When Poverty Stifles Hope.” The World Bank. Inequality in Focus 2.4 (2014): 1–4. Web. Frufonga, R. “Strengthening Family Ties despite Life ’ S Adversities : A Case Study on the Conditional Cash Transfer Program in the Philippines.” 3.3 (2016): 132–138. Print. Frufonga, Ronaldo F. “The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program ( 4Ps ) in Iloilo , Philippines : An Evaluation.” Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 3.5 (2015): 59–65. Print. Galang, Mary Jane A et al. “Meaning in Life , Flow , and Subjective Well-Being : A Perspective on Filipino High School Students.”Philippine Journal of Counseling Psychology 13.1 (2011): 29–45. Print. Glassman, Amanda et al. “Impact of Conditional Cash Transfers on Maternal and Newborn Health.” Journal of Health, Population, and Nutrition 31.4 (2013): 48–66. Print. Greenberg, Jeff et al. “Toward Understanding the Fame Game : The Effect of Mortality Salience on the Appeal of Fame.” Self and Identity 9 (2010): 1–18. Web. Gutman, Leslie Morrison, and Rodie Akerman. Determinants of Aspirations. N.p., 2008. Print. Hailu, Degol, and Fabio Veras Soares. “Cash Transfers ? Lessons from Africa and Latin America.” IPC Poverty In focus 15 (2008): n. pag. Web. Hajek, André. “Endogeneity In The Relation Between Poverty, Wealth and Life Satisfaction.” (2013): n. pag. Print. Haushofer, Johannes. “The Psychology of Poverty : Evidence from 43 Countries.” 1974 (2013): 1–16. Web. Howell, Ryan T, and Colleen J Howell. “The Relation of Economic Status to Subjective Well-Being in Developing Countries: A Meta-Analysis.” Psychological Bulletin 134.4 (2008): 536–560. Web. Hudders, Liselot, and Mario Pandelaere. “The Silver Lining of Materialism: The Impact of Luxury Consumption on Subjective Well-Being.” Journal of Happiness Studies 13 (2012): 411–437. Web. Ibrahim, Solava. “Poverty, Aspirations and Wellbeing: Afraid to Aspire and Unable to Reach a Better Life – Voices from Egypt .” World January (2011): 1–23. Print. Ingrid, Brdar, Rijavec Majda, and Miljković Dubravka. “Life Goals and Well-Being: Are Extrinsic Aspirations Always Detrimental to Well-Being?” Psihologijske Teme 18.2 (2009): 317–334. Print. Jacob, Monica J. “Parental Expectiations and Aspirations for Their Children’s Educational Attainment: An Examination of the College-Going Mindset among Parents.” (2010): 1–110. Print. Kasser, Tim. “Personal Aspirations, the Good Life and the Law.” Deakin L. Rev. 10 (2005): 33–47. Web. Kasser, Tim, and Richard Ryan. “Aspirations Index.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin22 (1996): 280–287. Print. Kasser, Virginia Grow, and Richard M. Ryan. “The Relation of Psychological Needs for Autonomy and Relatedness to Vitality, Well-Being and Moratlity in a Nursing Home.” 1999: 936–954. Print. Kim, Bum Jung et al. “The Impact of Employment and Self-Rated Economic Condition on the Subjective Well-Being of Older Korean Immigrants.” The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 81.3 (2015): 189–203. Web. Kingdon, Geeta Gandhi, and John Knight. “Subjective Well-Being Poverty versus Income Poverty and Capabilities Poverty?” Economic & Social Research Council (2004): 1–34. Print. Kingdon, Geeta, and John Knight. “Subjective Well-Being Poverty versus Income Poverty and Capabilities Poverty.”Global Poverty Research Group (2004): 1–34. Web. Kura, Sulaiman Y Balarabe. “Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to the Study of Poverty : Taming the Tensions and Appreciating the Complementarities.” The Qualitative Report 17.43 (2012): 1–19. Print. Leite, Phillipe, Pablo Acosta, and Jamele Rigolini. “Should Cash Transfers Be Confined to the Poor ? Implications for Poverty and Inequality in Latin America.” World November (2011): n. pag. Print. Lever, Joaquina Palomar, Nuria Lanzagorta Piñol, and Jorge Hernández Uralde. “Poverty, Psychological Resources and Subjective Well-Being.”Social Indicators Research 73.3 (2005): 375–408. Web. Li, Xu, and Xue Zheng. “WELL-BEING : EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND SELF-ESTEEM AS MODERATORS.” 42.8 (2014): 1257–1266. Print. Li, Yuan, Jijun Lan, and Chengting Ju. “Self-Esteem, Gender and the Relationship between Extraversion and Subjective Well-Being.”Social Behavior and Personality 43.8 (2015): 1243–1254. Web. Luhmann, Maike, James C Murdoch III, and Louise C Hawkley. “Subjective Well-Being in Context: County-and State-Level Socioeconomic Factors and Individual Moderators.” Social Psychological and Personality Science 6.2 (2015): 148–156. Web. Lybbert, Travis J., and Bruce Wydick. “Poverty, Aspirations, and the Economics of Hope.” Department of Agricultutral and Resource Economics January (2015): 1–42. Print. Martos, Tamás, and Mária S. Kopp. “Life Goals and Well-Being: Does Financial Status Matter? Evidence from a Representative Hungarian Sample.”Social Indicators Research 105.3 (2012): 561–568. Web. Masunzu, Daniel Salvatory. “Conditional Cash Transfers ( CCTs ) and Poverty Alleviation : A Comparative Study between Jamaica and Tanzania.” (2014): 1–48. Print. Minkov, Michael. “Predictors of Differences in Subjective Well-Being across 97 Nations.” Cross-Cultural Research 43.2 (2009): 152–179. Web. Montilla, Monica M et al. “Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program ( 4Ps ): Assistance to Pupil ’ S Education.” 2.3 (2015): 1–5. Print. Morrison, Mike, Louis Tay, and Ed Diener. “Subjective Well-Being and National Satisfaction: Findings from a Worldwide Survey.” Psychological science 22.2 (2011): 166–171. Web. Niemiec, Christopher P., and Richard M. Ryan. “Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness in the Classroom.” 7.2 (2009): 133–144. Web. Nishimura, Takuma, and Takashi Suzuki. “Aspirations and Life Satisfaction in Japan: The Big Five Personality Makes Clear.” Personality and Individual Differences 97 (2016): 300–305. Web. Oduro, Razak. “Beyond Poverty Reduction: Conditional Cash Transfers and Citizenship in Ghana.” International Journal of Social Welfare 24.1 (2015): 27–36. Web. Orbeta, Aniceto C, and Vicente B Paqueo. “Pantawid Pamilya Pilipino Program : Boon or Bane ?” Philippine Institute for Development Studies 56 (2016): n. pag. Print. Pasquier-doumer, Laure, and Fiorella Risso Brandon. Aspiration Failure. N.p., 2013. Print. Ray, Debraj. “Aspirations, Poverty, and Economic Change.” Understanding Poverty (2006): 1–10. Web. Reyes, Celia M et al. “Promoting Inclusive Growth through the 4Ps PHILIPPINE INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES.” January (2015): n. pag. Print. Reyes, Celia M. et al. “Promoting Inclusive Growth through the 4Ps.”Philippine Institute for Development Studies (2013): 1–42. Print. Reyes, Celia M, Aubrey D Tabuga, and Christian D Mina. “RESEARCH PAPER SERIES No . 2015-01 Promoting Inclusive Growth through the 4Ps.” (2015): n. pag. Print. RIJAVEC, Majda, Ingrid BRDAR, and Dubravka MILJKOVIĆ. “Aspirations and Well-Being: Extrinsic Vs. Intrinsic Life Goals.” Drustvena istrazivanja 20.3 (113) (2011): 693–710. Web. Rojas, Mariano. “A Subjective Well-Being Equivalence Scale for Mexico: Estimation and Poverty and Income-Distribution Implications.”Oxford Development Studies 35.3 (2007): 273–293. Web. ---. “Well-Being and the Complexity of Poverty: A Subjective Well-Being Approach.” N.p., 2003. Print. Ryan, R., and E. Deci. “Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being.”The American psychologist 55.1 (2000): 68–78. Web. Saavedra, Juan E. “The Effects of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs on Poverty Reduction, Human Capital Accumulation and Wellbeing.” (2016): 1–10. Web. Samanni, Marcus, and Soren Holmberg. “Quality of Government Makes People Happy.” (2010): n. pag. Print. Schmuck, Peter, Tim Kasser, and Richard M. Ryan. “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Goals: Their Structure and Relationship to Well-Being in German and U.S. College Students.” Social Indicators Research 50.2 (2000): 225–241. Web. Sheldon, Kennon M, and Vincent Filak. “Manipulating Autonomy , Competence , and Relatedness Support in a Game-Learning Context : New Evidence That All Three Needs Matter Copyright © The British Psychological Society.” (2008): 267–283. Web. Tadeo, Sehgio. “Supreme Court Decision G.R. No. 195770.” 2011. Vansteenkiste, Maarten, Willy Lens, and Edward L Deci. “Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Goal Contents in Self-Determination Theory : Another Look at the Quality of Academic Motivation.” 41.1 (2006): 19–31. Print. Velarde, Rashiel, and Luisa Fernandez. “PHILIPPINE SOCIAL PROTECTION NOTE Welfare and Distributional Impacts of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program.” The Philippine Social Protection Note 3 (2011): 1–12. Print. 34