COA: Why were senior high vouchers given to students in 'high-tuition' schools?

[Lee]

MANILA, Philippines — Senior high school students enrolled in expensive private schools with annual tuition reaching as high as P317,314 received government vouchers meant to help low-income learners, the Commission on Audit found in its latest report on the Department of Education.

The annual audit report released Friday, December 26, flagged DepEd's lack of "clearly defined and standardized parameters" for determining students' actual financial need in the senior high school voucher program, which provides up to P22,500 in tuition subsidies to qualified students. 

DepEd launched its senior high voucher program in 2016 at the start of senior high school, in an effort to help low-income Grade 10 graduates enroll in private schools and supposedly ease overcrowding in public schools.  

The voucher subsidy is remitted directly to the school the student chooses rather than given as cash, and the amount varies based on location and student category. 

Some of the more recent controversies of the program have centered on the separate issue of “ghost students” — cases where private schools allegedly listed non-existent students to claim government subsidies. This has since prompted DepEd Secretary Sonny Angara to launch a probe and order the removal of at least 55 private schools from the program.   

But less clear has been how many of the vouchers have gone to affluent students who could have enrolled without the subsidies from the start.

COA's audit report released today provides a snapshot based on NCR data for the school year 2023-2024, which shows several recipients enrolled in schools that charge over hundreds of thousands of pesos.

The audit shows that of 3,356 voucher grantees tracked in selected "high-tuition" schools, 546 were automatically qualified learners while 1,838 were voucher applicants, according to data from the Private Education Assistance Committee Administration Portal cited in the report. 

In the audit report, high-tuition schools are defined as prestigious private institutions where annual tuition fees range from over P100,000 to as high as P317,314. 

"The presence of [beneficaries] in these prestigious or high-tuition private schools ... raises concerns regarding the equity and appropriateness of public fund allocation under the SHS Voucher Program," the report stated.

COA noted that, because the voucher subsidy covers only up to P22,500, families paying the remaining balance — over P294,000 in some cases — are presumed to have the financial capacity to afford schooling without government aid. 

"This is inconsistent with the program's core objective to prioritize financially disadvantaged learners," the report added.   

For instance, in one unnamed school with annual fees as high as P195,753, there are at least 1,208 students in Grade 11 and 12 who benefited from voucher subsidies, according to the summary in the audit report. As a result, DepEd coughed up P22.77 million in total voucher subsidies to this high-tuition school.

 

 

The problem, state auditors found, lies in how students qualify for the program in the first place. While there are rules for prioritizing students, in practice, the evaluation of applicants is largely "discretionary," giving significant leeway to participating schools and PEAC in determining who gets approved, COA said. 

There are no explicit criteria, such as specific income thresholds or scoring mechanisms to consistently assess financial need, COA said. 

Because of this, the reverse can also happen, in that students who need the subsidies the most end up not qualifying.

"Consequently, there is a risk of inconsistent application of the eligibility criteria, potentially leading to the inclusion of students who may not be financially disadvantaged, and the exclusion of those applicants who need it most," the audit report stated. 

But are government vouchers truly only for the poor? This is what the law says: Republic Act 8545 or the Expanded Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education (E-GASTPE) Act mandates that government assistance programs give preference to underprivileged students. 

The implementing rules of the K to 12 law also specify that voucher assistance should primarily benefit students who completed junior high school in public schools, with income background and financial needs among key considerations.

The COA report also takes care to mention that there should be no "discriminatory" aspect to the selection process of voucher recipients.

"While the program’s objective does not intend to exclude or discriminate against any learner — given that equal enjoyment of rights and privileges is constitutionally guaranteed — the law mandates that preference be given to underprivileged students," state auditors said.

"Consequently, the program’s limited budget may be allocated to beneficiaries who are not among the most financially in need, thereby depriving more economically disadvantaged students of much-needed educational support," the report added.

COA shared a similar finding in the early years of the SHS program. In 2018, a COA performance report stated that the Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education (GASTPE) program — which the SHS vouchers are under — was benefiting “non-poor” students due to DepEd’s inability to ensure its efficient implementation. 

This 2018 report found that DepEd “does not check whether or not the students are actually underprivileged."

Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian, then-chair of the Senate basic education panel, said last year that the program was a "wastage" and a "leakage" for failing to target the learners who needed vouchers the most. 

COA: Why were senior high vouchers given to students in 'high-tuition' schools?

 

[scott h]

I don't know. 

Why are high income seniors given a 20% discount at high end restaurants? (Such as my wife and her friends, one of who is the wife of a well-known Jeepney manufacturer. We went to her son's wedding held at Ayala Alabang golf club, where for the first time in my life I actually had a 7-course meal.)

But low-income seniors cannot get 20% off at the wet market?

[OnMyWay]

7 hours ago, Lee said:

The implementing rules of the K to 12 law also specify that voucher assistance should primarily benefit students who completed junior high school in public schools, with income background and financial needs among key considerations.

 

7 hours ago, Lee said:

COA noted that, because the voucher subsidy covers only up to P22,500, families paying the remaining balance

My step-daughter used the voucher system when she moved from private grade 10 to another private grade 11, during covid.  I can't recall the numbers, but it seemed like it saved us a lot more than 22k.  I did not know anything about the voucher system at the time.

[Lee]

12 hours ago, Lee said:

COA noted that, because the voucher subsidy covers only up to P22,500, families paying the remaining balance — over P294,000 in some cases — are presumed to have the financial capacity to afford schooling without government aid. 

In good conscience, why are obviously wealthy families even applying for these discounts meant to help less fortunate families?

[Joey G]

20 minutes ago, Lee said:

In good conscience, why are obviously wealthy families even applying for these discounts meant to help less fortunate families?

I'm guessing they are legally allowed to... or they are committing fraud and would (should) be prosecuted (??). And the way people seem to thrive on the turning others into the ombudsman here... many would have someone knocking at their door.

If it is legal however... I find fault no one for getting something from the government that is legally allowed.  If the intention is for only specific people to get anything... then the lawmakers need to do their job and make it happen that way. Otherwise it's their fault... and the people who elected them (and continue to) have no one else to blame but themselves.

With all that said... just another routine Philippine head scratcher for me... I can think of a couple dozen worse things that are half donkey here.

[Lee]

9 minutes ago, Joey G said:

I'm guessing they are legally allowed to... or they are committing fraud and would (should) be prosecuted (??)

First line of OP.

13 hours ago, Lee said:

Senior high school students enrolled in expensive private schools with annual tuition reaching as high as P317,314 received government vouchers meant to help low-income learners, the Commission on Audit found in its latest report on the Department of Education.

 

[scott h]

Without seeing the actual application document and the listed requirements, as the OP states

31 minutes ago, Lee said:

meant to

We do not know if the program is "required" to only help low-income students, or if anyone can apply, lots of grey area.

[hk blues]

7 hours ago, scott h said:

Without seeing the actual application document and the listed requirements, as the OP states

We do not know if the program is "required" to only help low-income students, or if anyone can apply, lots of grey area.

Probably like the example you gave about 20% discount in high-end restaurants - open to all to avail. 

[craftbeerlover]

10 hours ago, Joey G said:

I'm guessing they are legally allowed to... or they are committing fraud and would (should) be prosecuted (??). And the way people seem to thrive on the turning others into the ombudsman here... many would have someone knocking at their door.

If it is legal however... I find fault no one for getting something from the government that is legally allowed.  If the intention is for only specific people to get anything... then the lawmakers need to do their job and make it happen that way. Otherwise it's their fault... and the people who elected them (and continue to) have no one else to blame but themselves.

With all that said... just another routine Philippine head scratcher for me... I can think of a couple dozen worse things that are half donkey here.

I am guessing it wasnt legal, or at least against guidelines.   We are in the land of fraud, I doubt very much "Fraud" was on anybody's mind.    fn country.       The buddy I mentioned in a previous post (had a house built in Biliran) came for a visit yesterday with his wife and a friend of his wife's.  I took them out to dinner and was about to pay when he pulled out some PWD id to get us 20 percent off the bill.   I asked how he got it, and he said his Dr friend got it for him blah blah.      "Fraud" is accepted and almost expected and absolutely not a concern.    Side note - I asked my buddy what he thought about the Philippines (this was his first time out of the US).   "OMG, garbage everywhere, it smelled, dirty etc.....(that was in the province) He asked me, "How come everybody just throws their garbage everywhere?"   His quick stop in Manila was the same reaction, except he added the smell of urine to the above description.  

Edited December 27, 2025 by craftbeerlover

[hk blues]

21 hours ago, craftbeerlover said:

I took them out to dinner and was about to pay when he pulled out some PWD id to get us 20 percent off the bill.   I asked how he got it, and he said his Dr friend got it for him blah blah.     

Of all the things that annoy me here, this is close to topping the list. No big deal in itself,  but clear evidence of how corruption is entrenched right throughout the system.

I read an article the other day about how Blue Badge holders (folks with disability) in the UK are now being verbally abused by others when it's perceived they are exploiting the system. Off the bat, I don't agree this is a good thing, but does show some Brits do have some sense of moral compass , even if misguided. Would that happen here - never, ever.