Electioneering, duplicate payments plague AICS and AKAP — COA

Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!

Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.

Visit Suniway.ph to learn

MANILA, Philippines — Despite warnings that government cash assistance programs function as "soft pork" and evidence of poor implementation, the bicameral conference committee approved doubling the proposed 2026 budget for the Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (AICS) to P63.9 billion.

These concerns are reflected in the Commission on Audit’s (COA) findings, which showed that the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) failed to properly and effectively utilize AICS funds in 2024.

State auditors found that AICS beneficiaries received duplicate payments under the Ayuda para sa Kapos ang Kita Program (AKAP) and that agency personnel drew funds interchangeably from the two programs' budgets.

AKAP, specifically, was flagged over P768 million disbursed to beneficiaries who were unable to provide complete supporting documents in compliance with the program's guidelines. COA also found that it had been used for electioneering and to advance a politician's agenda. 

AKAP replicated AICS

The DSWD admitted there was confusion between the two programs due to their overlapping mandates. In Eastern Visayas, this was evident after the field office was found to have disbursed P1.44 billion to AICS beneficiaries and P773.6 million to AKAP beneficiaries for similar purposes.

For instance, financial assistance granted to DSWD beneficiaries of both programs due to the rising cost of goods and services amounted to P1.12 billion in the region alone. Meanwhile, cash aid intended to help partially cover hospital expenses through guarantee letters reached P578.69 million.

In Cagayan Valley, a total of 3,565 AKAP beneficiaries reportedly received assistance despite already receiving the same kind under AICS during the same period, which amounted to P12.1 million released.  

So what distinguishes AICS from AKAP?

AICS is a stopgap measure that provides aid to various sectors, including poor, marginalized and vulnerable communities. AKAP, meanwhile, targets minimum-wage and low-income earners in both the formal and informal sectors who have been severely affected by inflation.

In terms of assistance, AICS provides cash aid for medical, burial, food, transportation and education needs. AKAP offers similar support but in the form of one-time assistance to beneficiaries who are not covered by the 4Ps program, intended to augment family income.

"Hence, a determining factor between AKAP and AICS has not been clearly established, leading to multiple availments of financial assistance by the same beneficiaries... Thus, AKAP simply replaces the existing AICS program," COA said.  

Improper fund utilization

Apart from overlapping payments, state auditors also flagged the charging of transportation and educational allowances to AKAP funds, even though these are not listed as eligible forms of assistance under the DSWD’s Memorandum Circular 30.

"[Some] disbursement vouchers intended for AICS were charged against AKAP or vice versa, showing both funds were used interchangeably. In some cases, the nature of expenses per disbursement voucher was not aligned with the budgetary documents and in disarray with the accounting records," the report read.

About 19,500 beneficiaries in Metro Manila also received multiple AKAP disbursements within three months, contrary to the program’s one-time assistance rule. COA said this was possible due to the simultaneous payouts conducted by different disbursing officers, leading to millions in duplicated spending.

In total, COA reported that P108.3 million in AKAP funds were spent on duplicate and overlapping payments nationwide due to poor cross-checking, inconsistent databases, weak inter-office coordination and reliance on “manually validated or politically endorsed beneficiary lists.”

The audit added that transparency gaps in AICS and AKAP — such as the failure to publish lists of paid beneficiaries on the field office’s website — compounded the implementation problems.

Although AKAP was defunded in the 2026 National Expenditure Program and not reinserted by Congress, the DSWD urged the bicam to increase the AICS budget to cover millions of beneficiaries who would be affected due to the program being discontinued.

Electioneering

State auditors have also confirmed long-standing criticisms that AKAP was used for one's political gain. COA found, through personal interviews, that beneficiaries received aid through lists referred by a congressman or party-list.

It also documented cases where politicians attended payouts, shared videos of the events and delivered speeches, or directly "sponsored" the distributions. There were also cases where payouts were made with tarpaulins featuring the names and faces of local officials, sometimes even alongside the AKAP logo. 

AKAP was also known as former House Speaker Martin Romualdez's pet project that was strongly promoted by resigned Rep. Elizaldy Co. Both have been at the center of corruption allegations since the flood control probe was launched and the budget insertions have been questioned.

"This interference also led to the widespread misperception that the financial assistance originated from these politicians rather than from the DSWD, financed by taxpayers' money and borrowings by the Philippine government," the audit report read. 

COA warned that the DSWD’s failure to prevent political interference and enforce control measures has effectively turned the program into a band-aid, reinforcing financial dependence rather than promoting solutions to help Filipinos rise above poor economic conditions.

"Rather than being viewed as a stopgap solution, the 'AYUDA' mentality fosters a culture of dependency/complacency where individuals rely too much on government support, instead of people diligently seeking self-sufficiency," state auditors said. 

DSWD Assistant Secretary Irene Dumlao said in a statement on December 22 that the agency has already responded to COA’s audit findings, detailing measures it will take to improve internal controls and data management systems.

AICS is just one of several government financial assistance programs whose budget the bicameral conference committee chose to increase, despite COA’s warnings about implementation issues.

The question now is how President Bongbong Marcos will respond to these findings once he receives the ratified budget. Will he veto the allocations or keep them?