The table above presents the total number of respondents.

There were 30 respondents who were traffic

enforcers; 40 respondents who were passengers; and 30 respondents who were drivers.

The table above shows that one driver who was not aware on the implementation of traffic management
in Ormoc City. 1 from the TEAM who was slightly aware; 19 passengers who were slightly aware; and 4
drivers who were slightly aware. There were 6 TEAM respondents who were aware on the implementation
of traffic management in Ormoc City; 16 passengers and 15 drivers who were aware on the said
implementation.

The table above presents that a one driver was very dissatisfied on the implementation of the traffic
management in Ormoc. There were 7 passengers who were dissatisfied and 2 drivers who were
dissatisfied on the said implementation. As to “satisfied”, there were 5 TEAM respondents; 29 passengers;
and 14 drivers. There were 25 TEAM respondents; 4 passengers and 13 drivers who were very satisfied
on the implementation of the traffic management in Ormoc. (NOTE: MORAG NAAY SAYOP PAGKA-
ENCODE ANI. VERY DISSATISFIED ATA ANG UNA ANI)
The table above presents that all of the “TEAM” respondent’s perception of the penalties like first offense,
second offense, third offense and confiscation of driver’s license were effective since they were the
implementing unit. Among the passengers as respondents, 26 perceived the first offense as an effective
penalty, 10 did not perceive it as an effective penalty, and 4 were undecided. As to the second offense,
26 perceived it as an effective penalty, 10 perceived as not an effective penalty, and 4 were undecided.
As to the third offense, 30 perceived it as an effective penalty; 7 did not perceive it as an effective penalty,
and 3 were undecided. As to the confiscation of driver’s license, 26 perceived it as an effective penalty, 9
did not perceive it as an effective penalty, and 5 were undecided. It can be said that “TEAM” respondents
were fully aware on the effectiveness of penalties rather than the passenger respondents since it’s the
nature of their job.

The table above shows the TEAM perception on the existing problems in the implementation of traffic
management in Ormoc City faced by them. There were 21 “TEAM” respondents responded “YES” while
9 respondents who said “NO” for the lack of equipment; 24 respondents responded “YES” while 6
respondents responded “NO” for lack of budget; 23 responded “YES” while 7 responded “NO” for the
insufficiently salary of traffic enforcer; 13 responded “YES” while 17 responded “NO” for lack of
manpower; 22 responded “YES” while 8 responded “NO” for increasing volume of vehicles; and 3
respondents responded “YES” while 27 respondents who said “NO” for the inadequate planning.
The table above shows the common violation rules in the implementation of traffic management in Ormoc
City. All of the respondents responded “YES” for the arrogant/reckless discourteous driver; 29
respondents who said “YES” while 1 respondent who said “NO” for the colorum operation; all of the
respondents responded “YES” for the driving against unauthorized flow of traffic; 28 respondents who
said “YES” while 2 respondents who said “NO” for evading apprehension; 29 respondents responded
“YES” while 1 respondent responded “NO” for ignoring traffic/officers; 29 respondents responded “YES”
while 1 respondent responded “NO” for loading/unloading in prohibited zone; 29 respondents responded
“YES” while 1 respondent responded “NO” for overloading passengers; all respondents responded “YES”
for parking in prohibited areas; and 18 respondents who said “YES” while 12 of them who said “NO” for
unauthorized color and body number.