cpbrdnotes - cpbrd.congress.gov.phcpbrd.congress.gov.ph/images/pdf attachments/cpbrd...

Reforming the Pension Systemfor the Military and Uniformed Personnel*

No. 2013-01

CPBRDNotesCongressional Policy and Budget Research Department

July 2017 No. 2017-03

* This paper was prepared by Aurea Hernandez-Sempio. The study benefitted from discussions with Director Pamela Diaz-Manalo, Executive Director Roentgen F. Bronce, and Director General Romulo Emmanuel Miral, Jr. Ph.D. The views, opinions, and interpretations in this report do not necessarily reflect the perspectives of the House of Representatives as an institution or its individual Members.

The Constitution provides for immediate and adequate care, benefits and other forms of assistance to war veterans, and veterans of military campaigns, their surviving spouses and orphans. The objective is to reward the men and women in uniform for their bravery and selfless service to the nation.

The Armed Forces of the Philippines Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-RSBS) was established in 1973 by virtue of Presidential Decree No. 361. Its primary mandate was to ensure the “welfare of those who serve in the Armed Forces of the Philippines after their retirement or honorable separation” from service. The AFP-RSBS was intended to guarantee the continuous financial support to and self-sufficiency of the retirement and separation benefits scheme for the military. However, the AFP-RSBS failed to sustain the pension funds admittedly due to the generous pension package, limited contribution, and increasing number of pensioners.1

At present, the national government (NG) annually appropriates for the retirement and pension pay of the Military and Uniformed Personnel (MUP). The pension costs have sufficiently grown over the years and were estimated to eventually surpass the payroll for active MUP by the year 2022.2 This situation is alarming because of the fiscal burden on NG, and the difficulty in the payment of pensions of existing and incoming MUP retirees.

Background on the aFP-rSBS

The AFP-RSBS was created initially for the active military members of the AFP. It was funded out of the following: (1) appropriated seed money amounting to P200 million; (2) contributions equivalent to four percent (4%) of the monthly base and longevity pay of the officers and enlisted personnel of the AFP, (3) donations, gifts, legacies, bequests, etc., (4) tax free earnings of the System, and (5) additional lump sum fund worth P200 million under P.D.1909, s. 1984.

Under the AFP-RSBS, the monthly contributions of the military personnel had no corresponding counterpart from the government, and the accumulated contributions are returned to the soldiers or their beneficiaries upon separation from service, retirement or death. In the case of the GSIS and SSS members, the contributions were not subject to refund and they are used to further make the retirement fund grow and sustain the civilian pension requirements.

Membership to the AFP-RSBS was later extended to retired members of the military who were also required to contribute five percent (5%) of their gross monthly pension. The military retirees (or their beneficiaries) were also entitled to a full refund of their total contributions upon the “termination of their entitlement to the retirement

1 The AFP-RSBS recognized the causes of its collapse in the frequently asked questions (FAQs) published at http://www.afprsbs.com/faqs.html. 2 Explanatory Note, House Bill No, 1137

RefoRming the Pension system foR the militaRy and UnifoRmed PeRsonnel

3 Section 17 of PD 1638, s. 19794 Republic Act No. 7696, Section 35 Republic Act. No. 7696, Section 2, paragraph (h)

pension from the government” (P.D. No. 1909)—e.g., upon death, change of citizenship. The lack of government counterpart fund, the return of soldiers’ contribution, and the relatively generous retirement package of the AFP-RSBS resulted in the collapse of the military pension system.

FiScal Burden due to MuP PenSionS Unlike the civilian personnel in government and private sector employees who contribute to the GSIS and SSS, respectively, pensions of the military and uniformed personnel are fully subsidized by the NG through annual appropriations. Table 1 shows that the total allocation for pensions grew by P16.1 billion or 30% within three years—from P52.5 billion in 2012 to P68.6 billion in 2015. Those who get the bulk of the pension funds are the military (GHQ-47.4%) and police (PNP-33.2%).

Similarly, a CPBRD study observed that about 10% of the NG budget for personal services (PS) was utilized for pensions. It steadily grew from P27.4 billion in 2005 to as much as P68.4 billion by 2013, about 98% of which was paid out to the retired

taBle 1PenSionS oF uniForMed/Military PerSonnel

2012-2015, (in Million PeSoS)

Source: General Appropriations Act 2012-2015

1

Agencies 2012 2013 2014 2015 Average Share to Total (%)

(2012-2015)

DND

34,347.8

39,703.2

39,097.3

42,377.5 62.3

GHQ

27,238.7

29,117.9

29,200.3

32,480.5 47.4

PVAO

7,109.1

10,585.3

9,897.0

9,897.0 14.9

DILG

17,701.4

23,894.2

25,443.6

25,600.3 36.8

BFP

968.1

1,324.7

1,457.1

1,457.1 2.1

BJMP

696.6

982.0

1,080.2

1,103.9 1.5

PNP

16,036.7

21,587.5

22,906.3

23,039.3 33.2

DENR – NAMRIA

14.7

19.5

17.6

15.9 0.0

DOTC – PCG

453.9

541.6

591.3

639.1 0.9 Total

52,517.8

64,158.4

65,149.8

68,632.8 100.0

MUP alone (Manalo 2015). This year, appropriation for the MUP pension is P102.4 billion (GAA 2017).

Extraordinary Pension Package. The growing amount of pension funds is partly due to the extraordinary pension package for the MUP. Under the amended law3 on the AFP-RSBS, members of the military who are due to retire are promoted to the next rank—hence, increasing the base of their retirement pay. The monthly pension of the retirees are also automatically adjusted to the prevailing salary rates of their counterparts in active service. Thus, any planned salary increase for MUPs automatically carries with it the additional funding requirement for pension adjustments.

Aside from the regular monthly pension, Table 2 shows the other subsidies/benefits for MUP. They receive additional monthly “old-age pension” of up to P5,0004, and “total administrative disability pension” (P1,700 per month for spouse and P500 per month for each minor children)5 starting at

Congressional PoliCy and Budget researCh dePartment

age 65 and 70, respectively. These benefits were initially exclusive to those in military service but were later extended to the uniformed personnel of the Philippine National Police (PNP),6 Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP), Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP),7 as well as to the Philippine Coast Guard and National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). The inclusion of these groups of uniformed personnel greatly increased the budget requirement for the MUP’s pension fund.

It may be noted that the salary rates of MUP were not adjusted under the recent Salary Standardization Law (SSL IV) because of the fiscal implications of the indexation policy of MUP pensions. Instead of a raise in basic salary, the MUP were given provisional allowance and an increase in hazard pay and officers’ allowance until such time that their base pay schedule is modified and rationalized.8

taBle 2PenSion Package For Military/uniForMed PerSonnel

Source: CPBRD Discussion Paper, Issue No.7, August 2015

1

Pension Age Legal Basis Computation

3 Years Lump Sum Benefit 56 PD 1638 1 month base pay & longevity of the next grade higher than the permanent grade last held, multiplied by 36 months

Regular Monthly Pension 59 PD 1638 1 month base pay & longevity of the next grade higher than the permanent grade last held, automatically adjusted based on existing salary rate in active duty

Old Age Pension 65 RA 7696 as amended

P5,000 per month

Total Administrative Disability Pension

70 RA 7696 as amended

P1,700 per month + P500 per month for spouse and for each minor child

Survivorship Benefit (PVAO)

Death RA 7696 as amended

P1,000 per month for surviving spouse and for each minor child

Survivorship Benefit (AFP) Death PD 1638 50%-70% of regular pension

Educational Benefits Death P18,000 per semester per college student

Burial Assistance

Death P1,000 granted to the next kin of a deceased veteran

Regular Disability Benefit Disability Ranging from P500 to P1,700 per month, depending on disability

Poor Monitoring of MUP Pension. There are potential leakages in the pension system that could bloat the financial obligation of NG. According to the 2015 Annual Audit Report of the Commission on Audit (COA), the databases of the Pension Management Information System (PenMIS) of the AFP are unreliable. This led to the poor monitoring of the pension system as evidenced by the overpayments and unclaimed checks, among others. The COA findings also include lax data entry control with 46 records without dates of birth and/or separation from service of MUP.

The COA recommended that the AFP Management form a Technical Working Group to revisit its procedures, particularly in the monitoring of active and deceased retirees. COA also emphasized the need to update the locations/addresses of pensioners, and group them by province, city, municipality and barangays to facilitate the investigation of pensioners with suspicious status.

6 Section 74 of RA 6975, s. 19907 Section 2 of RA 9263, s. 2004 8 Executive Order No. 201, s. 2016

PenSion reForMS For MuP

The fast growing pension expense has already raised concerns among the government economic managers. They recognize the need to establish a balance between NG’s fiscal stability and its policy of providing socio-economic security to the military and uniformed personnel who stake their lives for the country.

There are proposals to institute reforms in the pension system for MUPs. These include the following: (1) Full deactivation of the AFP-RSBS, (2) Integration of the military/uniformed personnel into the GSIS retirement/pension system, (3) Creation of a Uniformed Personnel Retirement Fund (UPRF) to be managed by the GSIS, and (4) Repeal of the indexation provisions in various retirement laws for MUP.

Deactivation of the AFP-RSBS. Despite the deactivation order contained in Executive Order No. 590 in 2006, the AFP-RSBS is still operational.9 The System has not been fully liquidated after eleven years. It was supposed to have transferred its assets to a government financial institution, sold these assets and remitted the proceeds from the sale to a Trust Fund. All these activities should have been done for purposes of giving back to the members their contributions with 6% interest upon retirement. Last year (2016), Memorandum Order No. 90 was issued by Malacanang directing the abolition of the AFP-RSBS with the same instructions and procedures stated in E.O. No. 590, s. 2006.

Integration of the MUP into the GSIS System. The proposal to merge the MUP’s retirement scheme with the GSIS system was seen as a possible threat to the financial stability of GSIS. In an article by DBM Secretary Diokno (2013), he emphasized that the distinctions in the structures of retirement benefits being enjoyed by the MUP compared with those received by the civilian employees may put

too much pressure on the fiscal soundness of the pension fund.

Military and uniformed personnel retire at age 56 (with at least 20 years of active service) while civilian employees retire four to nine years later at age 60 or 65. The gap in retirement age and the generous retirement packages for MUP may cause the GSIS fund to dwindle at the expense of civilian employees.

Creation of a Uniformed Personnel Retirement Fund (UPRF). The President in his 2017 Budget Message recognized the need to create a retirement fund that will reduce (if not end) the yearly appropriations for pensions of MUP. The proposed pension reform law is expected to ease NG of the pressure brought about by the ballooning budget for pensions of MUP.

House Bill No. 1137 filed this 17th Congress seeks to establish the Uniformed Personnel Retirement Fund (UPRF) requiring both the MUP and NG to contribute to the Fund. Additional funds for the UPRF will come from the proceeds of the lease or joint development, reclamation projects, and sale or disposition of public lands (to be authorized by the President).

taBle 3ProPoSed Schedule

oF contriBution to uPrF

Source: House Bill No. 1137, 17th Congress

1

Schedule Member Contribution

NG Counterpart

First three (3) years 5% 22%

Next three (3) years 7% 20%

Every year thereafter 9% 18%

Table 3 shows the schedule that gradually reduces the NG share in contribution from 22% (during the first three years) to 18% (on the seventh year thereafter). The staggered reduction in NG counterpart is a way of transitioning to a system comparable to the GSIS where employee contribution is at 9% of the member’s monthly salary. Although the UPRF shall be managed by the GSIS, it is proposed to be


9 There is an ongoing recruitment of applicants for various vacant positions in the AFP-RSBS official website (www.afprsbs.com) as of date.


maintained separately from that of the government civilian employees’ pension scheme.

Under HB 1137, the proposed schedule of graduated contributions to UPRF may need to be clarified. The law should be clear on whether all contributing members will have to pay 9% of the premiums by the 7th year of the effectivity of the law or that all new MUP entrants (regardless of year of appointment) will have to go through the schedule that settles their contribution at 9% on the 7th year from the members’ appointment. The latter case could possibly result in different take home pay among members of the same rank but of different years of entry to the service.

Removal of the Indexation Provision. The number of retirees from the military services has increased by 6,000 annually since 2014 and is expected to grow by the same size until 2018 (SEPO 2012). The fast growing pension payroll brought about by the yearly increase in number of retirees and the indexation of MUP pensions have resulted in accumulated liabilities of NG amounting to about P18 billion (as of 2012).10

As early as 2013, DBM Secretary Diokno pushed for the cancellation of the indexation provision in the existing MUP Retirement Law. Concerns on a possible mass retirement among MUP who would want to avail of the existing generous retirement scheme were also raised. A well-designed transition plan must be prepared to cushion the impact of a possible mass retirement resulting in shortage of defense manpower for the country.

SuMMary

The growing fiscal burden due to rising pension expenditures needs immediate attention. The indexation of MUP pension with those in active service continues to put a heavy toll on NG finances. Congress needs to consider the repeal

of the indexation provision in the retirement law, and it may also review the provision on automatic promotion given to retiring MUP.

However, extra care is needed to guarantee that the change in the pension scheme will still be fair and attractive to those who want to join the military and uniformed services. Problems encountered by the AFP-RSBS which led to its abolition should provide lessons for the pension system that shall be set up for the military and uniformed personnel. A transition plan may be explored to ease the tension that might be caused by the revocation of the indexation provision.

Once a UPRF is set up, a periodic monitoring of the system should be undertaken such that any future proposal to increase the retirement benefits of MUP should take into account the viability of the Fund. The efficient and regular monitoring of legitimate retirees should also plug leakages in the pension system.

10 COA Legal Information Archive, Decision No. 2015-125, April 6, 2016

reFerenceS

AFP-RSBS, ‘Frequently Asked Questions’, [Online], Available at www.afprsbs.com/faqs.html.

Annual Audit Report (2015), ‘Executive Summary’, Department of National Defense, Commission on Audit, [Online], Available at www.coa.gov.ph.

Decision No. 2015-129 (2015),’Money claim of CAUSA-AFPRVPI on payment of their accumulated pension amounting to P17,891,468,975, Commission on Audit, [Online], Available at www.coa.gov.ph.

Diaz-Manalo, Pamela (2015), ‘An Analysis of the National Government Expenditures for Personal Services’, CPBRD Discussion Paper, House of Representatives.

Diokno, Benjamin (2013) ’Military Pension’, Per Se, University of the Philippines, August 17, [Online], Available at: www.econ.upd.ph/perse.

House Bill No. 1137 on the Amendment of Pertinent Laws on the Retirement Benefits and Pension of the Uniformed Personnel of the Uniformed Services (authored by Representative Gary C. Alejano), 17 th Congress.

Republic of the Philippines, General Appropriations Act (GAA) (various years) Republic of the Philippines (September 1979) Presidential Decree No.1638 “Establishing a New System of Retirement and Separation for Military Personnel of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and for other Purposes.”

Republic of the Philippines (April 1994) Republic Act No. 7697 “Amending Certain Sections of Republic Act No. 694 Otherwise Known as “An Act Standardizing and Upgrading the Benefits for Military Veterans and their Dependents.”

Republic of the Philippines (December 2006) Executive Order No. 590, s. 2006 “Deactivating the Armed Forces of the Philippines Retirement and Separation Benefits System by 31 December 2006, Directing the Transfer of its assets in Trust to a Government Financial Institution, and for Other Purposes.”

Republic of the Philippines (April 2016) Memorandum Order No. 90, s. 2016 “Directing the Abolition of the Armed Forces of the Philippines-Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-RSBS), Privatization of its Subsidiaries, and for Other Purposes.”

Republic of the Philippines (December 1973), Presidential Decree No. 361 “Providing for an Armed Forces Retirement and Separation Benefits System.”

Republic of the Philippines (September 1979), Presidential Decree No. 1638 “Establishing a New System of Retirement and Separation for Military Personnel of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and for Other Purposes.”

Republic of the Philippines (March 1984), Presidential Decree No. 1909 “Further Amending Presidential Decree 361Establishing the Armed Forces of the Philippines Retirement and Separation Benefits System.”

Republic of the Philippines (December 1990), Republic Act No. 6975 “An Act Establishing the Philippine National Police under a Reorganized Department of the Interior and Local Government and for other Purposes.”

Republic of the Philippines (February 1998), Republic Act No. 8551 “An Act Providing for the Reform and Reorganization of the Philippine National Police and for other Purposes, Amending Certain Provisions of Republic Act Numbered Sixty nine Hundred and Seventy-Five Entitled, ”An Act Establishing the Philippine National Police under a Re-organized Department of the Interior and Local Government, and for other Purposes.”

Republic of the Philippines (March 2004), Republic Act No. 9263 “An Act Providing for the Professionalization of the Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) and the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP), Amending Certain Provisions of Republic Act No. 6975, Providing Funds Thereof and for Other Purposes.”

SEPO (January 2012), ‘The AFP Pension System,’ At a Glance, Senate of the Philippines.

The President’s Budget Message (2017), ‘Budget Philosophy’, pp. 24-25, [Online], Available at www.dbm.gov.ph.



Monitoring Compliance to Gender and Development Budget Policy*

The passage of the Women in Development and Nation Building Act of 1992 (RA 7192) paved the way for the recognition of women in nation building. The law set forth the indispensable role of women in all aspects of national development and the fundamental equality of women and men before the law.

Three broad strategies were identified under RA 7192 to achieve the policy of providing equal rights and opportunities. These include: 1) setting aside and utilizing a substantial portion of official development assistance (ODA) funds to support programs and activities for women; 2) ensuring that women benefit equally and participate directly in the development programs and projects of all government departments; and 3) “gender mainstreaming” or removing gender bias in the regulations, circulars, issuances and procedures of all government departments and agencies. Under RA 7192, the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) is the lead agency responsible for ensuring that women are recipients of programs funded out of foreign aid, grants, and loan.

gad Budget Policy

While RA 7192 sought to ensure Gender and Development (GAD) funding through the ODA, it was the 1995 General Appropriations Act (GAA) that initially required all public entities1 to set aside no less than 5% of their annual approved budget to support gender-related programs and activities. The GAD budget policy gained affirmation with the enactment of RA 9710 or the Magna Carta of

Women (MCW) in 2009. From thereon, the 5% mandatory spending for GAD is stipulated in the GAA-General Provisions. The said budget can be used: 1) to support in full GAD-focused programs and activities, 2) to partially fund agency flagship programs that integrate gender perspectives, or 3) to serve as counterpart fund to support gender-responsive ODA-funded projects. To determine how much of the agency budget can be attributed to the GAD budget, the agency subjects its programs to gender analysis using the Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines (HGDG)2 (See Table 1). Depending on the score, a corresponding percentage of the budget of an agency may be attributed to the GAD budget. For example, a program that is identified with “promising GAD prospects” may be given a score between 4.0 - 7.9, thus, 25% of the budget for such program can be tagged for the GAD budget.

* This paper was prepared by Priscilla B.Escama. This paper benefited from the inputs of Director Pamela Diaz-Manalo, and the overall guidance of Executive Director Roentgen F. Bronce and Director General Romulo E.M. Miral, Jr.1 Public entities refer to all government agencies, state universities and colleges (SUCs), government-owned-and-controlled corporations (GOCCs), and local government units (LGUs).2 Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines (HGDG) is a tool to integrate gender concerns in the design, management, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of agency programs and projects.

taBle 1harMonized gender

and develoPMent guidelineS

Source: Joint Memorandum Circular 2012-01(PCW, NEDA, DBM)

HGDG Score Description Corresponding budget for

the year of the program that may be attributed to

the GAD budget (%)

Below 4.0 GAD is invisible 0%

4.0-7.9 Promising GAD prospects (conditional pass)

25%

8.0-14.9 Gender sensitive 50%

15.0-19.9 Gender-responsive 75%

20.0 Fully gender-responsive 100%

monitoRing ComPlianCe to gendeR and develoPment BUdget PoliCy

rePorting and Monitoring All agencies must submit their respective GAD Plan and Budget (GPBs) and Accomplishment Report (ARs) every January (one year before the national budget year) to the Philippine Commission on Women (PCW). The PCW is the overall authority mandated to ensure the implementation of RA 9710 or the Magna Carta for Women. It is tasked to monitor, approve, endorse, and submit the consolidated GPB reports to the President, Congress, DBM and NEDA as stated in the JMC 2012 -01.3

Preparation of the agency’s GPB is supervised and reviewed by the members of the GAD Focal Point System (GFPS) before submission to PCW. The review by the GPFS and subsequently by the PCW focuses on the alignment of the GAD plan with the GAD agenda as embodied in the Magna Carta for Women: 1) to ensure that the identified programs and activities are gender responsive, 2) that expected outcomes and performances have been identified, and 3) that the 5% GAD budget has been properly disbursed.

All reports that pass the review of the PCW are endorsed to the DBM. However, reports that are found to be inconsistent with the GAD agenda are returned to the agency for further evaluation and revision by the Gender Focal Point person using the HGDG. During the preparation of the GAD Annual Report, the agency again administers the HGDG test to determine the extent of the attainment of the targeted HGDG score. This score will be the basis in determining actual expenditure for GAD.

The Social Watch (2010) noted in its review of the Philippine GAD budgeting process that while the Philippines authorizes at least 5% of the budget for GAD, there is lack of operational mechanisms to actively promote compliance and performance. To address the problem, PCW implemented, starting in 2015, the General Mainstreaming Monitoring

System (GMMS). It is an online platform for the submission, review and endorsement of GPBs and GAD accomplishment reports.

Meanwhile, the Commission on Audit (COA) issued last 18 March 2014 the Revised Guidelines in the Audit of GAD Funds and Activities in government agencies to ensure agency compliance with existing laws and regulations, and to monitor the proper utilization of the GAD budget.

gad Plan and Budget rePort coMPliance

Prior to the implementation of the GMMS, all GAD plans and budget were manually received by the PCW. Despite the intent of the GMMS to facilitate review and endorsement, the initial years of implementation posted some challenges resulting in relatively low submission of GPBs for FY 2015-2017.

3 JMC 2012–01, “Guidelines in the Preparation of the Annual GAD Plan and Budget and GAD Accomplishment Report to Implement the Magna Carta of Women”, issued by the NEDA, PCW and DBM. 4 The Philippine Commission on Women published in December 31, 2016 the “Report on the Compliance of National Government Agencies in the Gender and Development (GAD) Budget Policy: FY 2014 – 2017.”

taBle gPB SuBMiSSion vS. endorSeMent

2015 - 2017

Source: PCW Compliance Report, 2016

Year GAD Plan and Budget (GPBs)

Submission (no.)

Endorsed (no.) 2015-2017 (%)

2015 662 193 29.2

2016 624 150 24.0

2017 556 127 22.8

According to the PCW, the low endorsement rate can be attributed to the following reasons:

Based on the compliance report4 prepared by the PCW in 2016, there is a decreasing trend in both submission and endorsement of the GPBs. Total GPB submission declined from 662 in 2015 to 556 in 2017. Less than one-third (29.2%) of the total GPBs submitted in 2015 was endorsed. The endorsement ratio was much lower at 22.8% for fiscal year 2107.


(1) the agency GPBs are not aligned with the GAD parameters, (2) many agencies still lack an overall GAD agenda to guide them in their GPB preparation; and (3) limited number of PCW reviewers. Note that the Compliance Report does not cover late submissions, and those agencies not registered in the GMMS.

All GPBs that are not endorsed by PCW are returned to the agency for review, and remain in the GMMS. It is not certain how the implementation of the GPB plans proceed at the agency level absent the endorsement of the PCW. Moreover, a question may be raised on whether unendorsed GPBs should be funded.

Meanwhile, only 546 accomplishment reports (ARs) were submitted in 2015—of which 160 or 29.3% was reviewed by the PCW. The number of reviewed ARs in 2015 is considerably lower compared with 183 or 31.2% in 2014. The PCW attributed the rather low review of ARs to limited manpower. All reviewed ARs which do not meet the reporting standard as embodied in the guidelines (JMC 2012-01) are returned to the agencies for review and, likewise, remain in the GMMS.

gad gender iSSueS and challengeS

“The GAD Budget Policy is undoubtedly an important instrument in the realization of gender-responsive governance in the Philippines. As a guaranteed fund for GAD projects, it ensures that the empowerment of and development of women are kept in the regular government planning.” (Francisco 2001) However, some issues and challenges in the implementation of the GAD budget need to be addressed in terms of improving compliance, ensuring accountability, and monitoring for results.

On Compliance. Low endorsement and review of GAD Plan and Budget (GPB) and Accomplishment Report (AR) is largely due to the lack of an over-all GAD agenda that could guide the agency in the

GPB preparation. The inability to identify gender issues and GAD programs, activities and projects that are relevant to the agency mandates contributes to the delays in report submission and endorsement. Frequent changes in the membership of the GFPS and Technical Working Group (TWG) also hamper the efficiency of GAD planning and reporting. GAD tasks must be considered as a regular function rather than just an intervening assignment to GAD focal point staff.

The PCW also needs to undertake more GAD-related capacity building programs. Agencies should be made familiar with—1) the use of the HGDG to determine the 5% GAD budget, and 2) identifying GAD-related programs and performance measurements. Agencies should be acquainted with the Gender Mainstreaming Monitoring System to encourage registration, timely submission, and efficient monitoring of the GAD reports.

On Accountability and Monitoring. “The weakest part of the implementation of the GAD Budget Policy is seen to be the budget execution, the related task of accounting for the gender budget and, the linking of the GAD investments to GAD results” (Illo et al. 2010). The oversight of the GAD budget may not be left solely to the PCW. More participatory methods of monitoring can be used to complement the existing reporting procedures.

Agencies should be able to diligently prepare their GPBs to assure endorsement of their plans. On the other hand, the PCW must undertake a more systematic review of GPBs to minimize non-endorsements. The Annual Reports submitted by the PCW to Congress can be used to examine compliance to the GAD policy, and to ensure that government funds and resources are indeed allocated and effectively spent to mainstream gender concerns. Some non-government organizations (NGOs) engaged in community works could be tapped to provide capacity building activities for women (in the grassroots) so the latter could effectively demand accountability from government on the use of the GAD budget.

The impact of the GAD Budget Policy is difficult to assess because reporting and audit is limited to compliance. There are also no sanctions for non-compliance in the preparation and delayed submission of the GAD Plan and Budget and Accomplishment Reports. It is not very clear as yet whether the GAD budget and plans have led to increased consciousness in gender and development in government institutions. A more effective mechanism of determining results and impact instead of mere reporting of GAD related activities should be in place. Aside from monitoring compliance in report submissions, the PCW should be able to demand quality reporting of performance and use of measurements to determine results.

monitoRing ComPlianCe to gendeR and develoPment BUdget PoliCy

reFerenceS

COA Circular 2014-01 (18 March 2014), Revised Guidelines in the Audit of Gender and Development (GAD) Funds and Activities in Government Agencies.

Francisco, Josefa et al. (2001). The GAD Budget, Examining Public Financing with Gender and Poverty Lens. Social Watch-Philippines.

GAD Budget Advocacy Forum. (1 March 2011). Compliance, Performance, and Results, a Review of the Philippine GAD Budget Policy.

General Appropriations Act (GAA) 2010 and 2017.

Illo, Jeanne Francis et al. Accounting for Gender Results, A Review of the Philippines GAD Budget Policy, Women and Gender Institute, Miriam College. 2010.

Joint Memorandum Circular 2012-01 on the “Guidelines for the Preparation of Annual Gender and Development (GAD) Plans and Budgets and Accomplishment Reports to Implement the Magna Carta of women”, issued by the Philippine Commission on Women (PCW), National Economic Development Authority (NEDA,and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) on January 15, 2013.

Philippine Commission on Women. (December 31, 2016). Report on the Compliance of National Government Agencies to the Gender and Development (GAD) Budget Policy: (FY 2014-2017).

cpbrdnotes - cpbrd.congress.gov.phcpbrd.congress.gov.ph/images/pdf attachments/cpbrd...

Documents