AAGGEENNCCYY BBUUDDGGEETT NNOOTTEESScpbrd.congress.gov.ph/images/PDF Attachments/ABN/ABN2015-08 … · 1.1 The Commission on Higher Education was created through Republic Act (RA)

AAGGEENNCCYY BBUUDDGGEETT NNOOTTEESS

COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION (FOR FY 2016)

PREPARED BY THE

CONGRESSIONAL POLICY AND BUDGET RESEARCH DEPARTMENT

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. Mandate and Organizational Outcomes 1

II. Budget Allocation 2

III. Budget Utilization 5

IV. Status of Implementation of COA Recommendations 10

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Allocation by Expense Class, 2014-2016

Table 2. Programs, Activities and Projects by MFO

Table 3. Total and Unfilled Positions, 2013-2016

Table 4. Appropriations and Obligations, 2011-2014

Table 5. Obligations-Appropriations Ratio, 2011-2014

Table 6. Unused Appropriations, 2011-2014

Table 7. Utilization Based on NCAs, 2013-2015

Table 8. Accomplishment Based on Organizational Outcomes

Table 9. Performance Report Based on Selected Indicators, 2013-2016

Table 10. Statistical Indicators on Philippine Development

Table 11. Status of Implementation of COA Recommendations

Table 12. COA Findings on Various Financial Assistant Programs

1

COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION1

I. MANDATE AND ORGANIZATIONAL OUTCOMES

Mandate

1.1 The Commission on Higher Education was created through Republic Act (RA) 7722,

also known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994”. The Act separates the CHED as

an agency distinct and independent from the Department of Education, Culture and

Sports (DECS), and attached to the Office of the President for administrative

purposes. The CHED is mandated to promote relevant, quality and accessible higher

education through its powers and functions as RA 7722 provides. It covers all higher

education institutions, and degree-granting programs in post-secondary schools, both

public and private.

The 2016 National Expenditure Program (NEP) states CHED’s mandate as follows:

“Given the national government's commitments to transformational leadership that puts education as the central strategy for investing in the Filipino people, reducing poverty, and building national competitiveness and pursuant to Republic Act 7722, CHED shall: a) Promote relevant and quality higher education (i.e. higher education institutions and programs are at par with international standards and graduates and professionals are highly competent and recognized in the international arena); b) Ensure that quality higher education is accessible to all who seek it particularly those who may not be able to afford it; c) Guaranty and protect academic freedom for continuing intellectual growth, advancement of learning and research, development of responsible and effective leadership, education of high level professionals, and enrichment of historical and cultural heritages; and d) Commit to moral ascendancy that eradicates corrupt practices, institutionalize transparency and accountability and encourages participatory governance in the Commission and the sub-sector.”

Organizational Outcomes

1.2 Organizational outcomes reflect the commitment of a government agency to inform

Congress and other stakeholders of what it shall deliver in exchange for its budget

(DBM National Budget Circular No. 552, S. 2014). Consistent with this commitment,

the 2016 National Expenditure Program outlines the organizational outcomes of

CHED as follows:

1 This document was prepared by Glenndale J. Cornelio as an input to the deliberations of the House Committee on

Appropriations on the FY 2016 proposed National Budget. The report benefited from inputs of Director Novel V. Bangsal and

from overall guidance of Acting Director General Romulo E.M. Miral, Jr.

2

Quality tertiary education programmed to promote inclusive growth;

Access increased for deserving but poor students to quality tertiary education; and

Higher education research and extension purposely directed to meet needs of agro-

industrialization and development.

II. BUDGET ALLOCATION

2.1 CHED proposes a budget of P10.53 billion for 2016, representing a 209.6% increase

from its 2015 allocation (Table 1). Note that CHED suffered a 38.7% budget shrink in

2015. Expanded scholarship grants account for the bulk of CHED’s budget increase

in 2016.

TABLE 1

COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION

ALLOCATION BY EXPENSE CLASS, 2014-2016

(AMOUNTS IN MILLION PESOS)

Particulars

Levels in million pesos Share to Total (%) Growth Rate (%)

Actual Adjusted Proposed

2014 2015 2016 2014 2015 2016 2014-2015 2015-2016

PS 290.8 255.7 260.4 5.2 7.5 2.5 -12.1 1.8

MOOE 5,152.3 3,146.3 9,986.7 92.8 92.5 94.8 -38.9 217.4

CO 109.3 - 286.4 2.0 0.0 2.7 -100.0

Total 5,552.4 3,402.0 10,533.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 -38.7 209.6

Source of basic data: BESF 2016.

2.2 Consistent with its commitment to comply with its mandate, CHED’s budget proposal

has been prepared according to its Programs, Activities and Projects (PAPs),

categorized into Major Final Outputs (MFOs), to wit:

MFO 1: Higher Education Policy Services, in fulfillment of CHED’s function to

set the direction for the country’s higher education system. This includes

formulation of a higher education plan as well as establishing policies and priorities

for research; public information dissemination; development of mechanisms to link

with higher education institutions abroad; and formulation of policies and

guidelines on student affairs and provision of student services;

MFO 2: Higher Education Development Services, which are mainly financial

assistance given to target beneficiaries, including incentives, scholarships and grants

to students, faculty members and HEI administrators;

3

MFO 3: Supervision of the Higher Education Development Fund, as provided for

in RA 7722. Government contribution towards the HEDF are obtained from part

of collected travel tax, Professional Registration fee, and sales of lotto operation.

Priority areas funded by HEDF include institutional capacity building, research,

rationalization of programs, standards and guidelines, among others;

MFO 4: Higher Education Regulation Services, in fulfillment of CHED’s

regulatory function, which consist of: (1) Monitoring and evaluation of

performance of higher education programs and institutions and provision of

appropriate incentives as well as imposition of sanctions; (2) Development of

standards for higher education programs and institutions; (3) Development of

Standards for the Expanded Tertiary Education Equivalency Accreditation

Program (TEFAP); and (4) Ladderized Education Program.

2.3 Of the proposed total new appropriations of P6.5 billion for 2016, MFO 2 (Higher

Education Development Services) allocated with P4.3 billion, accounts for the bulk of

the total CHED budget at 65.8%, but lower than its share of 81.6% in 2015 (Table 2)

Nevertheless, under the 2016 proposal, MFO 2’s budget shall receive the highest

increase at 121.5% from 2015 levels. This consists of 54.7% growth in provision of

assistance, incentives, scholarships and grants and 1,674.9% expansion of provision of

scholarship to faculty members and HEI administrators.

TABLE 2


PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES AND PROJECTS BY MFO

Particulars

Levels in million pesos Share to Total (%) Growth Rate (%)

2014 2015 2016 2014 2015 2016 2014-

15 2015-

16

General Administration and Support

General management and supervision 72.1 72.6 100.6 1.0 3.1 1.5 0.7 38.5

Administration of personnel benefits 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.02

Sub-total, General Administration and Support 72.1 72.6 101.9 1.0 3.1 1.6 0.7 40.3

Support to Operations 0.0 0.0 0.0

Provision of Legal Services 5.8 6.4 7.9 0.1 0.3 0.1 11.8 22.3

Subtotal, Support to Operations 5.8 6.4 7.9 0.1 0.3 0.1 11.8 22.3

Operations

MFO 1: HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY SERVICES 42.1 34.7 34.1 0.6 1.5 0.5 -17.7 -1.5

Formulation of higher education plan and policies/priorities on research and planning for a systematic documentation, publication and dissemination of information on higher education

21.0 17.7 17.7 0.3 0.7 0.3 -15.6 0.0

Development of strategies and schemes to establish linkages with international institutions of higher learning

6.8 5.0 5.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 -27.1 2.9

Formulation of policies and guidelines on student affairs and provision of student services

14.3 12.0 11.3 0.2 0.5 0.2 -16.2 -5.5

MFO 2: HIGHER EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

4,743.3 1,933.3 4,282.9 68.3 81.6 65.8 -59.2 121.5

4

Provision of assistance, incentives, scholarships and grants

4,663.5 1,853.6 2,867.5 67.2 78.3 44.0 -60.3 54.7

Provision of scholarship to faculty members and HEI administrators

79.7 79.7 1,415.4 1.1 3.4 21.7 0.0 1,674.9

MFO 3: SUPERVISION OF THE HIGHER EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT FUND

6.5 6.4 5.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 -2.7 -14.2

Management of receipts and payments in relation to the Higher Education Development Fund

6.5 6.4 5.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 -2.7 -14.2

MFO 4: HIGHER EDUCATION REGULATION SERVICES

304.3 294.3 302.1 4.4 12.4 4.6 -3.3 2.6

Monitoring and evaluation of performance of higher education programs and institutions and provision of appropriate incentives as well as imposition of sanctions

239.6 230.3 231.2 3.5 9.7 3.6 -3.9 0.4

Development of standards for higher education programs and institutions

56.9 57.0 63.0 0.8 2.4 1.0 0.1 10.6

Development of Standards for the Expanded Tertiary Education Equivalency Accreditation Program (TEFAP)

4.7 3.5 4.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 -25.0 24.1

Ladderized Education Program 3.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 15.1 1.1

Sub-total, Operations 5,096.2 2,268.7 4,624.6 73.4 95.8 71.0 -55.5 103.8

TOTAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES 5,174.0 2,347.7 4,734.4 74.5 99.1 72.7 -54.6 101.7

Locally-Funded Project(s)

Education 1,767.0 21.0 1,777.5 25.5 0.9 27.3 -98.8 8,348.2

Tertiary Education 1,763.0 21.0 1,777.5 25.4 0.9 27.3 -98.8 8,348.2

Research and Scholarship Project 1,763.0 0.0 1,763.0 25.4 0.0 27.1 -100.0 !

Study Grant Program under the Payapa at MAsaganang PamayaNAn (PAMANA)

4.0 9.0 14.5 0.1 0.4 0.2 125.0 61.1

Higher Education Management Information System (HEMIS)

12.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 -100.0

Sub-total, Locally-Funded Project(s) 1,767.0 21.0 1,777.5 25.5 0.9 27.3 -98.8 8,348.2

TOTAL PROJECTS 1,767.0 21.0 1,777.5 25.5 0.9 27.3 -98.8 8,348.2

TOTAL NEW APPROPRIATIONS 6,941.0 2,368.8 6,511.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 -65.9 174.9

Source of basic data: GAA 2014, GAA 2015, NEP 2016.

Staffing pattern

2.4 As of 2014, CHED had 638 actual positions available, 146 of which still remain vacant

or equivalent to 23% of total workforce programmed for the Agency (Table 3). For the

period 2011-2014, total plantilla positions increased from 609 to 638. Despite this,

total unfilled positions also grew from 119 to 146. It may therefore be worth reviewing

the reasons behind the creation of new positions even as unfilled positions also

increased in number.

5

TABLE 3 COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION

TOTAL AND UNFILLED POSITIONS, 2013-2016

Particulars 2011 2012 2013 2014

Total positions 609 611 614 638

Unfilled Positions 119 104 116 146

% Unfilled Positions to Total 19.5 17.02 18.9 22.9

Source: Staffing Summary, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016

III. BUDGET UTILIZATION

Obligations and Appropriations

3.1 Actual available appropriations for CHED in 2014 totaled P9.8 billion (Table 4). These

were sourced from new appropriations of P6.9 billion, automatic appropriations of

P1.4 billion, continuing appropriations of P1.4 billion and budgetary adjustments of

P51.2 million. Out of these available appropriations, P5.6 billon were actually

obligated. Unobligated allotment of P4.3 billion accounted for the difference between

CHED’s appropriations and actual obligations.

3.2 From 2011 to 2014, total available appropriations for CHED increased from P3.4

billion to P9.8 billion. Despite a slight cut in 2012, CHED experienced the biggest

growth in its appropriations from 2013 to 2014 by 108% (or P4.7 billion to 9.8 billion).

However, actual obligations in the same period grew by only 84% (P3 billion to P5.6

billion).


APPROPRIATIONS AND OBLIGATIONS, 2011-2014 (AMOUNTS IN MILLION PESOS)

Description 2011 2012 2013 2014

New General Appropriations 925.3 1,420.9 2,782.1 6,941.0

General Fund

R.A. No. 10147 925.3

R.A. No. 10155 1,420.9

RA No. 10352 2,782.1

R.A. No. 10633 6,941.0

Automatic Appropriations 772.1 794.8 828.5 1,400.2

Retirement and Life Insurance Premiums 21.3 20.0 22.0

23.8

Special Account 750.8 774.8 806.6 1,352.0

Military Camps Sales Proceeds Fund 24.5

Continuing Appropriations 1,453.1 560.9 862.2 1,449.1

Unreleased Appropriation for MOOE

R.A. No. 9970 915.5

6

Unobligated Releases for Capital Outlays

R.A. No. 10147 11.6

RA No. 10155 185.4

RA No. 10352 9.2

Unobligated Releases for MOOE

R.A. No. 9970 537.6

R.A. No. 10147 549.3

RA No. 10155 676.9

RA No. 10352 1,439.9

Budgetary Adjustment(s) 297.7 357.7 264.5 51.2

Transfer(s) from:

Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund 35.9 56.5 17.7 11.3

Priority Development Assistance Fund 253.8 251.339 95.825 0

Pension and Gratuity Fund 1.2 3.7 45.2 14.4

Overall Savings

R.A. No. 9970 50.0

R.A. No. 10147 52.4 8.5

R.A. No. 10155 37.8 90.5

E-Government Fund 15.3

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (Calamity Fund) 25.5

Transfer(s) to:

Overall Savings

R.A. No. 9970 (84.5)

R.A. No. 10147 (11.1)

Total Available Appropriations 3,448.2 3,134.4 4,737.3 9,841.6

Unused Appropriations (1,445.2) (1,115.3) (1,715.7) (4,289.2)

Unreleased Appropriation (821.0)

Unobligated Allotment (624.2) (1,115.3) (1,715.7) (4,289.2)

TOTAL OBLIGATIONS 2,003.0 2,019.1 3,021.6 5,552.4

Source: NEP 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016; BESF 2014 and 2015, Table B.2.a

Obligations to Appropriations Ratio

3.3 Obligations to appropriations ratio attempts to show how much an agency uses its

authorized budget (Table 5). As a case in point, CHED’s actual available appropriations

from 2011-2014 averaged P3.1 billion and but its actual obligations during the period

averaged at only P3.1 billion. Therefore, from 2011-2014, CHED used up only about

61% of its authorized budget.

7


OBLIGATIONS-APPROPRIATIONS RATIO, 2011- 2014

Particulars 2011 2012 2013 2014 Average

Obligations (in million pesos)

2,003.0

2,019.1

3,021.6

5,552.4

3,149.0

Appropriations (in million pesos)

3,448.2

3,134.4

4,737.3

9,841.6

5,290.4

Obligations to Appropriations (%) 58.1 64.4 63.8 56.4 60.7

Source of basic data: NEP 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016; BESF 2014 and 2015, Table B.2.a

Unused Appropriations

3.4 Details of the unused portion of CHED’s authorized appropriations are shown in

Table 6. In 2011, CHED had an unreleased appropriation of P821 million plus an

unobligated allotment of P624.2 million totalling P1.4 billion in unused appropriations

in 2011. From 2011 to 2014, CHED’s unused appropriations averaged P2.1 billion, the

highest of which was in 2014 at P4.3 billion.

TABLE 6


UNUSED APPROPRIATIONS, IN MILLION PESOS, 2011-2014

Particulars 2011 2012 2013 2014

Unreleased Appropriation 821.0 - - -

Unobligated Allotment 624.2 1,115.3 1,715.7 4,289.2

Total Unused Appropriations 1,445.2 1,115.3 1,715.7 4,289.2

Source of basic data: NEP 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016; BESF 2014 and 2015, Table B.2.a

3.5 Low levels of fund utilization were also evident in CHED’s Notice of Cash Allocation

(NCA). NCA is a disbursement authority issued quarterly by the DBM to an agency,

its field offices and operating units to cover their cash requirements.


UTILIZATION BASED ON NCAS, 2013-2015 (JAN-JUN) AMOUNTS IN MILLION PESOS

Year NCA Released* NCA Utilized** Utilization Rate (%)

2013 3,917.2 2,567.9 65.6

2014 8,260.6 3,483.0 42.2

2015 (Jan-Jun) 2,801.4 2,342.5 83.6

Source: www.dbm.gov.ph *NCA releases refer to NCAs credited by the Modified Disbursement Scheme (MDS)-Government Servicing Banks

(GSBs) to the agencies' MDS sub accounts, inclusive of lapsed NCAs. **NCA utilization refers to agency issuance of checks or Advice to Debit Account (ADA) against the NCAs issued.

8

Table 7 shows that out of P3.9 billion NCAs released to CHED in 2013, only 65.6%

was used. CHED’s cash utilization in 2014 lowered even further in 2014 at 42.2%. In

the first semester of 2015, CHED utilized only 83.6% of its cash authorization.

3.6 Table 8 shows CHED’s performance indicators in pursuit of its organizational

outcomes. Note that for a majority of its indicators, CHED had a different baseline

data for 2015 and 2016. Moreover, targets were also lowered from 2015 to 2016.


ACCOMPLISHMENT BASED ON ORGANIZATIONAL OUTCOMES

Organizational Outcomes/Performance Indicators

Baseline Targets Status* 2015 2016 2015 2016

Quality tertiary education programmed to promote inclusive growth Percentage change in the number of

HEIs implementing programs that are compliant with the CHED minimum standard

Percentage of HEIs that are

implementing strategic growth programs in the CHED identified priority areas

1,640

500

1,640

28.91% (556/1,923)

Increase of not less than 5%

Increase of

not less than 5%

Increase of not less than

3%


1%

Access increased for deserving but poor students to quality tertiary education Percentage of scholarship grantees from

CHED completing their courses in priority programs

82% (8,713/10,550)

86.49% (13,937/16,114)

Increase of not less than 3%


1%

Higher education research and extension purposely directed to meet needs of agro-industrialization and development Percentage increase in the number of

CHED-funded research and/or CHED-recognized extension programs in Agriculture, Fisheries, Environmental Science, Entrepreneurship, Science, Technology, Engineering, Food and Nutrition, and Health Sciences that have a) produced patents or Intellectual Properties (IPs); b) engendered business incubators; or c) created partnerships with local business, community-based organizations or local government units.

Percentage of CHED funded research

and/or CHED recognized extension programs which have a) produced patents or IPs; b) engendered business incubators; or c) created partnerships with local business, community based organizations or LGUs

69

(30% (21/69)

70

35.71% (25/70)

Increase of

not less than 10%

Increase of not less

than 10%


3%

Increase of

not less than 3%

Source: GAA 2015 (Vol. 1); NEP 2016

*Latest available information on actual accomplishments from CHED’s Transparency Seal is as of 2013

3.7 CHED’s regulatory function in the higher education sector may be its most critical

among its responsibilities as it helps ensure that the established standards for quality

education are complied with by HEIs, with corresponding incentives and sanctions as

needed. Table 9 shows some of these indicators as shown in CHED’s Transparency

Seal and budget documents. Latest report available is as of 2013, indicating CHED

9

surpassed its 2013 targets for 2 out of 3 indicators for Higher Education Quality

Assurance Services.

However, in some instances, some indicators in CHED’s Transparency Seal are not

present in the budget documents, such as Number of non-compliant programs to standards

(that are closed/phased out) in both public and private HEIs. On the other hand, Percentage of

incentives or sanctions implemented within 3 months of recommendation, while present in the

Transparency Seal and 2014 and 2015 GAA, was omitted in the 2016 NEP. It is

laudable, though, that CHED decided to raise its 2016 target to 24% Number of HEIs

with program and institutional accreditation as a percent of total number of HEIs given that it has

done fairly well in this area in 2013.


PERFORMANCE REPORT BASED ON SELECTED INDICATORS, 2013-2016

Major Final Output/ Performance Indicator

2013 2014 2015 2016

Target Actual

Accomplishment Target Target Target

MFO: HIGHER EDUCATION QUALITY ASSURANCE SERVICES

Number of non-compliant programs to standards (that are closed/phased out) in both public and private HEIs

335 programs

363 programs Indicator omitted

Indicator omitted

Indicator omitted

Number of HEIs with program and institutional accreditation as a percent of total number of HEIs

1.77% (32 out of 1,798)

1.72% (31 out of 1,798)

22% 22% 24%

Percentage of incentives or sanctions implemented within 3 months of recommendation

60% (201 out of 335)

66% (221 out of 335)

70% 70% Indicator omitted

Source: Transparency Seal; GAA 2014 and 2015 and 2016

3.8 According to the Philippine Statistics Authority, the Philippines will likely meet its target number of higher education graduates of 601,505 by 2016. However, the country is seriously lagging behind its target of faculty members with postgraduate degrees (Table 10).

10

TABLE 10 STATISTICAL INDICATORS ON PHILIPPINE DEVELOPMENT, 2013-2016

PDP TARGET OUTCOME

PDP CRITICAL INDICATOR

BASELINE DATA

LATEST DATA PDP

TARGET

OF ACHIEVING

THE PDP TARGET

DATA SOURCE AGENCY

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

Improved access to

quality education,

training and culture

Number of higher education

graduates 4/

496,949 522,570 564,769 605,375 601,505 CHED

2010 2011 2012 2013 2016

Proportion of higher education institution faculty

with MA

38.9 41.4 38.75 40.87 65.0 CHED

2010 2011 2012 2013

Proportion of higher education institution faculty

with PhD

11.1 12.7 11.45 11.72 30.0

CHED

2010 2011 2012 2013

Higher education institutions with

accredited programs

19.9 21.5 22.4 24.47 35.0

CHED

2010 2011 2012 2013 2016

National passing percentage

(across discipline) in licensure

examinations

33.9 35.9 42.6 39.2 52.5 CHED/PRC

2010 2011 2012 2013 2016

Source: Philippine Statistics Authority, <http://www.nscb.gov.ph/stats/statdev/2014/ch7_social.asp.>, viewed 25 August 2015.

Likelihood of reaching target is high.

Likelihood of reaching target is medium.

Likelihood of reaching target is low.

IV. STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF COA RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Table 11 shows CHED’s record in terms of its ability to comply with standards set by

the Commission on Audit on its financial accounting and reporting. From 2011 to

2013, Commission on Audit (COA) recommendations increased from 26 to 36 and

CHED’s full compliance also increased from 3 to 4 during these years. While

implementation of most recommendations is still underway, there were at least 3

recommendations that remain unimplemented as of 2013.

11


STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF COA RECOMMENDATIONS

Fiscal Year COA Recommendations Fully implemented Partially implemented Not implemented

2011 26 3 22 1

2012 21 2 15 4

2013 36 4 29 3

Source: Commission on Audit, Annual Audit Report: Commission on Higher Education, FYs 2011, 2012, 2013

4.2 Among the items highlighted by the COA in its 2013 Annual Audit Report on CHED is the way it implements its various financial assistance programs. Audit findings and the status of their implementation are identified in Table 12.

TABLE 12

COA FINDINGS ON VARIOUS FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Audit Findings Status of Implementation Amount Involved

Non-adherence to CHED guidelines, rules and regulations in implementing Student Financial Assistance Programs (StuFAPs) which are mostly funded by the PDAF and DAP

a) The selection, screening, awarding and determination of the amount of the grant to each student beneficiary, which are normally functions of the CHED Office of the Student Services/Regional Scholarship Unit, were entrusted to the Office of the Legislator thru a MOA in the CHED-CO and the CHED-NCR, thus, resulted to: the granting of financial assistance ranging from P16,000.00 to P110,000.00 per semester per grantee which are more than the maximum allowable benefit of P15,000.00 per semester given by CHED to Full Merit scholars, per CMO No. 29; and the absence of undertaking between the CHED and the student grantee assuring the continuity of the educational assistance until they graduate which is presently done in scholarship programs regularly funded under the GAA and HEDF.

b) Claims totaling P112,638,412.43 were not supported with adequate documentation such as ITR, students’ grades etc.or documents submitted were not authenticated in CHED-CO and CHEDROs NCR and V, contrary to Section 61 of PD 1445, thus, failing to ensure that the grantees are qualified beneficiaries of the scholarship program;

c) Checks totaling P18,840,038.60 were

released by the Cashiers of CHED-CO and CHEDROs NCR and IV-A to persons other than the payees/student – grantees, contrary to Section 3.1 of COA Circular No. 2004-006 dated September 9,2004, failing to ensure that the educational benefits were received by the students and on time;

c) Delayed processing/release of claims

Partially implemented

P16,000.00 to P110,000.00 per semester per grantee

P112,638,412.43

P18,840,038.60

12

ranging from one month to 17 months and unclaimed/cancelled/stale checks totaling P11,264,376.95, in nine CHEDROs deprived the qualified student beneficiaries timely receipt of the financial assistance and entailed additional cost to CHED,

d) The processing and awarding of double/multiple scholarship slots to 63 students were not immediately detected and cancelled, thus, depriving other qualified students to avail of the allocated slotsto CHEDRO VI.

P11,264,376.95

Procedural lapses were noted in the implementation of the grant and loan component under StuFAPs paid to the grantees thru the HEIs, due to inadequacies in the CHED guidelines, and the lack of regular monitoring on the status of the funds released to HEIs

Partially implemented P6 million – P79 million

Of the total collectibles from the SNPLP of P322,275,954.59, the amount of P138,591,978.43 were reported due in nine CHEDROs, however, only P2,469,242.65 had been collected with collection efficiency ranging from 0.07% to 4.68%, due to lack of manpower, non-enforcement of the terms of the Contract, inadequate monitoring system, and the absence/nonupdating of SLs.

Not implemented P322 million

Source: COA Annual Audit Report, 2013

AAGGEENNCCYY BBUUDDGGEETT NNOOTTEESScpbrd.congress.gov.ph/images/PDF Attachments/ABN/ABN2015-08 … · 1.1 The Commission on Higher Education was created through Republic Act (RA)

Documents