ae
beg

fo es
'’ RECEIVED @
anne: _JAN23 2007

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

House Bill No. 4800

Introduced by Kabataan Party-list Representative Sarah Jane |. Elago

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Article Il Section 17 of the 1987 Constitution states, “The State shall give
priority to education, science and technology, art, culture, and sports to foster patriotism
and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and
development.”

This isthe guiding principle behind the crafting of the Comprehensive Free Public
Education Bill. Thrust before Congress is a bill drafted collectively by youth and students
in the Philippines to holistically address the worsening state of the Philippine public higher
education system. This proposed bill not only seeks to make public education up to the
tertiary level free and accessible to all, but also to uphold the public character of our state-
tun higher education institutions, and address the structural ills of the Philippine education
system.

Historical Roots of the Worsening State of Education

Before we tackle the proposed bill, there is a need for us to recognize the vast and
disastrous effect of decades of implementation of the educational restructuring, a
restructuring that served to transmogrify a fundamental right to a burgeoning business.
Decades of implementation of policies that put hefty price tags on education have left
generations of Filipinos without a chance to even enter college, much less finish their
studies,

At the heart of the crisis is neoliberalism, the extensive and predominant 20th
economic dictate that endorses economic liberalization policies which include reduction
in government spending for public services, deregulation, and privatization. Led by

1


Ronald Reagan (United States), Margaret Thatcher (Great Britain), and Augusto Pinochet
(Chile), the neoliberal dogma was spread throughout the world starting the 1970s through
packaging reforms as “new and progressive.” Euphemistic language was employed to
appeal to the public and hide the real nature of neoliberal structural adjustment programs.

In education, for example, commercialization schemes were called “income-
generating projects,” privatization was labeled as ‘joint ventures,” and state abandonment
of social services was christened “fiscal autonomy.”

Yet no euphemism can hide neoliberalism's disastrous attack against the people
of the world, Neoliberal policies on education have slowly but steadily crept in public
policy, thereby chipping and eroding the public character of our educational institutions
throughout the years.

In 1982, under the Marcos administration, Congress passed the Education Act of
1982 or Batas Pambansa 232, which deregulated education in the country. This began
the intensification of annual tuition and other school fee increases in both public and
private educational institutions.

During the Corazon Aquino administration, the “Task Force to Study the State of
Higher Education’ was formed. The task force heavily criticized the fact that state
universities and colleges source almost 90 percent of their funding from the government
The task force's report stated, “All students except for those qualifying on the basis of
need, merit ahd priority area are to pay fully for their education.”! From the task force’s
recommendations, the University of the Philippines implemented the Socialized Tuition
and Financial Assistance Program, which gave way for the increase in tuition in UP from
P40 to P200 in 1989. Meanwhile, other SUCs also began increasing tuition and other
school fees

While the government pushed for the gradual reduction of state funding for SUCs, it
also introduced the Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private
Education (GASTPE) under Republic Act 6728 in 1989. The government maintained that
public higher education institutions cannot keep up with global standards for engineering
and other technical courses to justify its introduction of financial subsidies for private
education institutions.

Under the Ramos administration, Congress passed the Higher Education
Modemization Act (HEMA) which further opened SUCs to the onslaught of privatization
and commercialization. Under HEMA, SUCs were administered much like for-profit
corporations with powers to enter joint ventures with the private sector, and utilizing

* Task Force to Study State Higher Education. "Report on the Panel on Financing State Higher Education.” Ministry
of Education, Culture and Sports. Philippines. 1987,


assets to earn more income, all in a bid to make SUCs “self-sustaining.” HEMA also
empowered the governing boards of SUCs to set the rate of tuition and other school fees
charged from students. This move was a precursor to the ever-increasing tuition and other
school fee rates in the subsequent years.

During the Estrada administration, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank
pushed for more structural reforms in education through the Philippine Education Sector
Study (PESS). Aside from pushing SUCs to earn more income through the privatization
of assets and services, particular focus was again given to technical-vocational education
while decreasing time allotted for Social Studies in the curriculum of schools. The
government also aimed to reduce the number of SUCs from 110 to 12-15 by 2008. The
Estrada administration also formed the Philippine Commission on Education Reform
(PCER) in 2000 which released recommendations to “rationalize” state funding for public
higher education, raise tuition rates, and implement socialized tuition schemes.

In 2001, the Arroyo administration particularized the recommendations under the
PESS and PCER through the Long-Term and Medium-Term Education Development
Plan (2001-2010), which pushed for:

‘* The closure of 20 percent of SUCs;

* Transformation of 20 percent of SUCs into semi-corporatized entities;

+ Self-sufficiency of 20 percent of SUCs through generating income from the sale of
intellectual property and grants:

+ Urging 50 percent of SUCs to engage in active income-generating projects;

* Charging matriculation at par with private institutions in 70 percent of SUCs; and

* Ordering 60 percent of SUCs to enter contracts with the private sector.

This same blueprint has been adopted by the administration of Benigno Aquino Ill
under its “Roadmap for Public Higher Education Reform,” with an emphasis on
“rationalizing” program and course offerings of SUCs.

The Disastrous Effect of Neoliberal Policies on Education

The cumulative effect of decades of neoliberal restructuring has left Filipino
students and their families heavily burdened, with most opting to drop out of schoo! due
to the prohibitive cost it entails.

According to the 2013 Functional Literacy, Education, and Mass Media Survey
(FLEMMS), about one in every 10 or about four million Filipino children and youth 6 to
24 years old are out-of-school.? The 2013 FLEMMS also reveal that 9.3 percent of

* Philippine Statistics Authority. “2013 Functional Literacy, Education and Mass Media Survey.” 2015.

3


Filipinos aged 6 and over — or about 7.6 million ~ reach college but are not able to
graduate.

The 2013 FLEMMS survey also reveal that among out-of-school youth aged 16-
24, about 1.6 million youth point to their family's inability to sustain their education as
reason for not attending school, while about 824,000 or 7.8 percent point to the high
cost of education as main reason for not studying. The report also revealed that only
20.7 percent of persons 16 to 24 years old, or one in five, attended college.

Reason for not attending ee
G2 Gil 24S 1624

Philippines 11480326584 10,870
Number (in 000)

Schools are very far 04 4106
No school within the barangay 02 17) oan
‘No regular transportation + on . ’
High cost of education 7S 344578
Wloess/ disability 30 204 «103k
Housekeeping 387 aa
Marrioge 129 + 44 139
Employment/looking for work me 0377309
Lack of personnal interest M9249 46129
Cannot cope with school work os 4439
Finished schooling 100 ‘ + 109
Problem with school record 03 15k
Problem with birth certificate 0202742
Too young to goto schoo! 06 «19102 *
Family income not sufficient to send 157° 118198186

child to schoo!
Others 06 849° 10s,

Tote An astenak denotes a hgure Tens han O08 parca
Source: 2013 Functional Literacy, Education and Mass Media Survey

Similarly, the Commission on Higher Education reports that among the bottom 20
percent of the population, 37.8 percent point to “high cost of education/financial concerns”
as main reason for not going to school.4

Higher education in the country is dominated by private educational institutions.
According to CHED, of the 1,934 higher education institutions in the country, 88 percent
or 1,706 are private, while only 228 are public. About 2.2 million students are enrolled in

* Philippine Statistics Authority. "2013 Functional Literacy, Education and Mass Media Survey.” 2015,
* Commission on Higher Education. “Improving Access to Higher Education: Preliminary CHEO position paper on
the Senate-led Free Tuition Proposal,” 2016.


private universities and colleges, while 1.8 million are enrolled in public universities and
colleges.°

The prevalence of private higher education institutions in the Philippines betrays
the extent of privatization and commercialization in the Philippine educational system. For
the most part of the country, tertiary education has become a lucrative business, with
many businessmen investing in education landing top spots in the list of billionaires.

Yet the high cost of education is not limited to private institutions. Even in SUCs,
the cost of education has skyrocketed, With the intensified implementation of neoliberal
policies, SUCs were encouraged to increase tuition and other school fees.

In UP, the “socialized tuition scheme” — a scheme where students pay tuition and
other school fees supposedly based on their capacity to pay — only resulted in repeated
increases in tuition, from P40/unit in 1989 to the current P1,500/unit.

[ Increase in Tuition in UP 1982-2016°
Year | 82-83 | 84-85 | 85-86 | 86-87 | 89-90 | 92-93 | 07-08 13-14 |

funit | 15.13 | 23.00 | 28.00 40.00| 200.00 | 300.00] 1,000.00 | 7,500.00 |

18 | 272.34) 414.00 | 504.00 | 720.00 | 3,600.00 | 5,400.00 | 78,000.00} 27,000.00

units |

The promise of “socialized tuition” has continually been debunked. In UP Diliman,
over two decades of implementation of socialized tuition resulted in the almost 90-percent
decline in the number of students benefiting from free tuition, In 1991, two years after
socialized tuition was first implemented, one in every five undergraduate students in
Diliman benefited from free tuition under the program. In 2011, only one in every one
hundred students was granted free tuition.”

Extant government policies compel SUCs to ear their own income through
various means, including charging tuition and other fees, and utilizing assets. Data from
the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) reveal that since 2010, the average
internal income of all SUCs amount to an average of P36 billion, two-thirds or almost P11
billion of which comes from fees paid by students.

In 2016, total tuition collections in all SUCs amount to P8.3 billion, while collection
from Other School Fees amount to P5.1 billion. Some SUCs, like the Polytechnic
University of the Philippines, even earn more from other school fees than tuition.

* Briefing Paper of the Commission on Higher Education for the 2017 Budget. August 31, 2026.

* Data for 1982-1987 taken from: Riel, T. 1987. A comparative analysis of the tuition fees of selected tertiary
schools in Metro Manila from SY 1980-1988

”Tucay, Marjohara. “In two decades of STFAP implementation: Students with free tuition decreased by over 90
percent.” In Philippine Collegian, June 2, 2011


Curiously, SUCs sit on billions of funds earned from their income-generating
schemes. According to the 2017 Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing, while
total receipts of SUCs amount to P45.2 billion in 2016, SUCs only used P19.5 billion from
their internal income, leaving an ending balance of P25.7 billion (see table below). This
case is most evident in the UP System, which unsurprisingly also has the highest tuition
rate among SUCs. Data from DBM show that while UP has total internally-generated
income of P14.5 billion in 2016 (of which P367.9 million is from tuition alone), the
university system utilized only P2.7 billion, leaving an ending balance of P11.8 billion. The
budget books reveal a similar pattern in previous years.

What these figures highlight is the effect of extant policies in education that direct
school administrators to run their universities like corporations, and collect and amass
internal income at the expense of students. Even if the funds remain unused, SUCs are
still driven to charge fees from students annually.

PARTICULARS

NATIONAL GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY |

"APPROPRIATIONS |
eran Services zrrveee | 26916,021| 35,909,700] 230%] a.04%
arterurce nd ter Opera Expensas uyosig2s| ysigez9 | inze2u6] dais] 229%
Cantal Outly Lg ;| sisuoo77 | _siozzisez| 2.0804] 0.49%
$= Toa, Nem General Appropriations S276 14,727 | oooases] 691%) 18.51%]
Ad: LIP Automate Rppropetions _2a7sam | aasecaa| 2707900 1.27551 20.90%)
Total Appropriate» Natal Government Subsioy (A) Sa7.635 | 961.390) — Sasi, s69 | 6 39%] — hs

OBLIGATIONS |
Pers Sers 27,715,495 | 26916021 | 35,809,700] 2.9084) 32.04%
Mabtenance and Other Operateg Expenses gusamai | 11 siee29| 112238] 28228) 2.23%
‘capa ay soca | sseoo7?| sozza2| isis) 0.50%]
‘Sb = Tot, New Genera Aporooraos ‘Woreses | a7a04,227) Soom ses} — 540m) 1837

‘3d: BLIP Automatic Approprone
‘oan Cegators "xia Government Subscy (8)
BALANCE
Unreleased Accretion
Uretagete Alone

g0| _2.717.000| 2770] 20.94%]
o'se1- 100} seat se | — 5.26] Tea)

INTERNALLY GENERATED INCOME
[BEGINNING BALANCE (ESTIMATES) 2yg769%0| 26,490,215 | 25,709070] 20.54%) 2.9505)
600; IWTERNALLY - GENERATED INCOME (RECEIPTS) 21374403 | 1324677 |_17429.458| 12.00%)
Tunion Fess 53sa0.33 7789,907 | 12 79%] 6.28)
Income Cotected tum Seseres 6,382,208 4369,376 | 19.39% 15.07%)
Income fen Obra Sources Yaanioa 950m] 13.30%)
Income fen RevoMrg Furd 96m] Sa0%)
rants | Donations asiee| -7 92%)
Oars 3.00%) 2.29%)
Total Irteraty Goneratnd Inco (Reewors) (C) aati]
LESS: OWARGES TO INCOME (EXPENDITURES) (0) 16.9%] 9.56]
Poca Servers ‘Oachat 0.27]
Nooe Lai] ar
Fedssury Foe Saree) 37.20%]
Coyts Our

Bs DR In 22428)
ESSN AMOK)

seats
GRAND TOTAL, AVALABLE ROS = (44 6) saaror2| wr 1soso| 2.7761 _ zor
Gran TOTAL, OBLIGATIONS » (8 + D) CONLAATY NL

Source: 2017 Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing

ENOING BALANCE, INTERNALLY <ENERATED INCOME



The Need for Free Public Higher Education

Clearly, there is a need for a paradigm shift in higher education, a shift that should
reverse the reigning system that turned college education into an expensive private
pursuit. This bill thus seeks to introduce a system of free public higher education, with
particular emphasis on promulgating new state policy that translates to a repudiation of
the neoliberal education framework. This bill has the following features:

¢ Abolition of the Tuition System — The proposed bill does not espouse the
concept of “subsidizing” tuition and other school fees. Rather, it rethinks the
manner in which public financing of state-run higher education institutions
is done. Instead of creating a separate fund to pay for the equivalent tuition
and other school fee rates of students, this bill seeks to finance the actual
“cost of attendance” of students, the total amount a particular state-run
university or college needs to provide education for a student per year,
including proportional cost per student for personnel services, maintenance
and other operating expenses, and capital outlay. The total projected cost
of attendance will become the primary determinant of a state-run university
or college’s annual funding from the government and shall also serve as
guide for the Executive Department in preparing the annual national
expenditure program.

+ Readmission of drop-outs — Due to the high cost of education and related
expenses, millions of students are not able to finish their studies. The bill
seeks to give these out-of-school youth an opportunity to continue studies
by including a provision for their readmission.

* Special Grant for Financially-Disadvantaged Students - The bill also
creates a special grant that will offer additional support for financially-
disadvantaged students, outside of tuition and other school fees. This
Special Grant covers

© Allowance for books, supplies, transportation, and miscellaneous
personal expenses, including a reasonable allowance for the
documented rental or purchase of a personal computer or laptop

© Anallowance for room and board costs incurred by the student

© Fora student with a disability, an allowance determined by the public
higher education institution he/she is enrolled in for expenses related
to the student's disability, including special services, personal
assistance, transportation, equipment, and supplies that are
reasonably incurred


© For a student in a program requiring professional licensure or
certification, the one-time cost of obtaining the first professional
credentials

¢ Introduction of a nationalist, scientific, and mass-oriented higher
education curriculum — This bill also establishes a new higher education
curriculum responsive to the needs and the goals of the nation. The
curriculum shall:
© Foster patriotism and nationalism by instilling in every student the
firm resolve never to allow our people to be dominated and controlled
by foreign powers or domestic tyrants, and focusing on developing a
self-reliant and independent national economy, with particular
emphasis on agrarian reform, and the development of the nation’s
agriculture and national industries;
© Inculcate a_ scientific worldview that heightens the social
consciousness of all Filipino students towards total human liberation,
as well as foster a culture of learning that nurtures learning directed
towards understanding and solving the basic problems of Philippine
society
© Serve to equip students with the knowledge and skills needed to
serve the Filipino nation. The new curriculum shall also encourage
study programs that respond to community needs. Students should
not only learn through formal learning instruction and textbooks, but
also through immersion into the larger society that exists beyond
their classrooms

If passed, this bill stands to benefit not only the 1.6 million students currently
enrolled in SUCs, but also millions others who will be able to enter college without fearing
the heavy costs. At a more fundamental level, the passage of this bill will also result in
the reversal of decades of attacks on the right of every Filipino to education.

Believing that fundamental changes in education should address the basic ills that
hound the system, we need to collectively strive for a type of education that is not only
free, but also empowering and liberating.

In this light, the passage of this bill is earnestly sought.

gum

Hon. Sarah Jane I. Elago
Representative, Kabataan Party-list


10

a

2
13
14
15

16
v7
18

19

20
21
22
23

24
25

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

House Bill No. 4800

Introduced by Kabataan Party-list Representative Sarah Jane I. Elago

AN ACT
PROVIDING FOR FREE PUBLIC HIGHER EDUCATION, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS.
THEREFOR

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled:

SECTION 1. Title. — This Act shall be known as the "Comprehensive Free Public Higher
Education Act of 2017.”

SECTION 2. Declaration of Policy. — It is hereby the declared policy of the State that
education at all levels is a fundamental right of every Filipino. In order to achieve this, the State
shall:

(1) Make public education up to the tertiary level free and equally accessible to all

(2) Uphold and preserve the public character of state-run universities and colleges by ensuring
sufficient annual funding for their administration, maintenance, and operation, and promulgating
laws, policies, rules, and guidelines that break free from the framework that treats education as a
commodity, including commercialization schemes and privatization efforts;

(3) Introduce a new higher education curriculum that serves to foster patriotism and nationalism,
strengthen respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, accelerate social progress, and
promote total human liberation and development

SECTION 3. Definitions. — For purposes of this Act, the following terms shall mean

(1) Free Public Higher Education, — All Filipinos have the right to enroll and finish their studies
free of charge in all state universities and colleges (SUCs), and local universities and colleges
(LUCs) established, administered, maintained and funded by local government units, and those
public universities and colleges which may be established by law;

(2) Tuition Fee. — Refers to the fee representing the direct costs of instruction, training and other
related activities, the students’ use of the instruction and training facilities, and fees that cover

9


aase

10
cr

12
13
14
15
16
7
18
19
20
21

2
23

24
25
26

a
28
29
30

31
32
33
34
35
36
37

38
39

costs supportive of instruction, including but not limited to medical and dental, athletic,
development and construction, library, and laboratory fees;

(3) Other School Fees. — Refer to fees illegally, redundantly, and/or exorbitantly collected from
‘students, as such fees should already constitute part of the tuition fee, with the exception of fees
related to student activities, including student organizations, student governments and councils,
and student publications;

(4) Cost of Attendance. — Refers to the total amount a particular state-run university or college
needs to provide education for a student per year, including the proportional cost per student for
personnel services, maintenance and other operating expenses, and capital outlay. The total
projected cost of attendance shall be the primary determinant of a state-run university or college's
annual funding from the government.

SECTION 4. Implementation of Free Public Higher Education. — The system of free public
higher education as provided in this Act shall commence in Academic Year 2017-2018, and that
the students enrolled in tertiary course offerings in all SUCs including the University of the
Philippines System, and LUCs established, administered, maintained and funded by local
government units, and those public universities and colleges which may be established by law,
shall be free from payment of tuition and other school fees, except fees related to student
activities, including student organizations, student governments and councils, and student
publications: Provided, that nothing in this Act shall cause or authorize the reduction or removal
of any benefit which the national or local government may have granted to the student, teachers,
and other school personnel of these public tertiary schools prior to the enactment of this Act.

SECTION 5. No Collection Policy. - All public higher education institutions are hereby
prohibited to collect tuition and other school fees and to introduce new fees.

SECTION 6. Readmission. — All students who have discontinued their tertiary education
prior to the enactment of this Act who wish to continue their studies shall be readmitted free of
charge and shall be covered by all provisions of this Act.

SECTION 7. Determination of Annual Funding for Free Public Higher Education. ~ As the
establishment of the Free Public Higher Education prohibits the collection of tuition and other
school fees, the very concept of tuition fees shall also hereby be eliminated and shall no longer
be used as determinant/benchmark for the funding requirements of this Act.

In lieu of tuition and other school fees, the amount required to implement free public higher
education shall be determined by the respective governing boards of SUCs based on the
expected total cost of attendance, in relation to the projected number of enrollees for each
academic year. The cost of attendance in public higher education institutions shall become the
primary factor in computing for the annual proposed budget of SUCs and shall in turn serve as
the baseline during the Department of Budget and Management's preparation of the annual
National Expenditure Program

In the case of LUCs, a similar system of budgeting shall be adopted to ensure that students
in said universities and colleges shall also be covered by this Act. In the case when a local

10


eNous

10
in

12
13

14
15
16
wv

18
19

20
21
22

23
24
25
26
7
28

29
30
31
32

33
34
35
36
37
38

government unit cannot fully sustain the funding requirements for LUCs under their supervision,
a special allotment shall be provided under the Local Government Support Fund in the General
Appropriations Act

SECTION 8. Special Grant for Financially-Disadvantaged Students. ~ A Special Grant for
Financially-Disadvantaged Students, hereinafter referred to as the Grant, is hereby established
and shall be administered by the CHED. This Grant shall be used to support qualified financially-
disadvantaged students, as determined by their respective educational institutions, in shouldering
other personal costs related to pursuing higher education, The Grant shall cover:

(1) Allowance for books, supplies, transportation, and miscellaneous personal expenses,
including a reasonable allowance for the documented rental or purchase of a personal computer
or laptop, as determined by the public higher education institution he/she is enrolled in;

(2) An allowance for room and board costs incurred by the student, as determined by the public
higher education institution he/she is enrolled in;

(3) For a student with a disability, an allowance determined by the public higher education
institution he/she is enrolled in for expenses related to the student's disability, including special
services, personal assistance, transportation, equipment, and supplies that are reasonably
incurred;

(4) For a student in a program requiring professional licensure or certification, the one-time cost
of obtaining the first professional credentials,

SECTION 9. Formulation of a Nationalist, Scientific, and Mass-Oriented Higher Education
Curriculum. — Along with the introduction of the system of free public higher education, the CHED
shall formulate a new higher education curriculum that is:

(1) Nationalist - The new higher education curriculum shall be crafted based on the needs and
the goals of the nation. The curriculum shall foster patriotism and nationalism, and shall instill in
every student the firm resolve never to allow our people to be dominated and controlled by foreign
powers or domestic tyrants. Tertiary-level research and development shall also focus on
developing a self-reliant and independent national economy, with particular emphasis on agrarian
reform, and the development of the nation's agriculture and national industries;

(2) Scientific - The new higher education curriculum shall inculcate a scientific worldview that
heightens the social consciousness of all Filipino students towards total human liberation. Public
higher education shall serve to foster a culture of learning directed towards understanding and
solving the basic problems of Philippine societ

(3) Mass-oriented - The new higher education curriculum shall inculcate the value of free
education and the importance of providing access to education at all levels. It shall serve to equip
students with the knowledge and skills needed to serve the Filipino nation. The new curriculum
shall also encourage study programs that respond to community needs. Students should not only
learn through formal learning instruction and textbooks, but also through immersion into the larger
society that exists beyond their classrooms.

u


10
cv
12
13

14
15
16

7
18
19
20

24
22
23

24
25

26
a7
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

36
37
38
39

SECTION 10. Transitory Provisions. — The CHED shall formulate the appropriate
strategies and mechanisms needed to ensure smooth and swift implementation of free public
higher education. Taking into consideration the influx of students who will enter public tertiary
schools and/or continue college studies, CHED ~ in partnership with other government agencies
including the Department of Budget and Management — shall craft strategies that may cover
changes in physical infrastructure, manpower, organizational and structural concerns.

To manage the initial implementation of free public higher education system, the CHED,
and the public higher education institutions shall coordinate closely with one another to implement
strategies that ensure the academic, physical, financial, and human resource capabilities of state-
run universities and colleges. For this purpose, a transition period shall be provided for in the
implementing rules and regulations of this Act, which shall cover capacity-building, infrastructure
development, and the hiring and proper compensation of new teaching and non-teaching
personnel

SECTION 11. Joint Congressional Oversight Committee on the Free Higher Education
System, — There is hereby created a Joint Oversight Committee to oversee, monitor and evaluate
the implementation of this Act.

The Oversight Committee shall be composed of five (5) members each from the Senate
and from the House of Representatives, including Chairs of the Committees on Education, Arts
and Culture, and Finance of both Houses. The membership of the Committee for every House
shall have at least two (2) opposition or minority members.

SECTION 12. Mandatory Evaluation and Review. — Starting the first academic year upon
the effectivity of this Act, the CHED shall conduct a mandatory review and submit a midterm report
to Congress as to the status of implementation of this Act,

The Midterm Report shall include the following key metrics of access to and quality of
public tertiary education:

(1) Enrollment rate;

(2) Retention rate;

(3) Student demographics;

(4) Graduation rate

(5) Budget utilization;

(6) Number of students covered by the Special Grant for Financially-Disadvantaged Students;
(7) Teachers’ welfare and training profiles;

(8) Adequacy of funding requirements;

(9) Other educational quality indicators, including but not limited to physical learning
infrastructure, teacher-to-student ratio, and student housing

SECTION 13, /mplementing Rules and Regulations. — Upon enactment of this Act, the
CHED shall hereby establish a multi-sectoral committee that will craft the Implementing Rules
and Regulations (IRR) needed for the implementation of this Act. This Committee shall be led
by the CHED Chairperson with the following members: (1) the Department of Budget and

12


won

10
un

2
13
14

15
16
7
18

1g
20

Management; (2) the Department of Social Welfare and Development; (3) the National Youth
Commission; (4) a representative from the Philippine Association of State Universities and
Colleges; (5) a representative from the Association of Local Colleges and Universities; (6)
Faculty Representative; (7) National Youth and Student Organizations and Formations:
Provided: That the committee shall finish and promulgate the IRR within ninety (90) days after
the effectivity of this Act

SECTION 14, Appropriations. — The President is hereby authorized to realign or
transfer any item of appropriation within the CHED and/or utilize any savings therein to carry out
the purposes of this Act during its first year of implementation. Whatever additional amount as
may be needed for its implementation shall be included in the General Appropriations Acts for
the ensuing fiscal years, subject to the provisions stated in Section 7 of this Act.

SECTION 16, Separability Clause. ~ If any provision o part thereof is held invalid or
unconstitutional, the remainder of the law or the provision not otherwise affected shall remain
valid or subsisting.

SECTION 16. Repealing Clause, — Pertinent provisions of Batas Pambansa Big. 232 or
the “Education Act of 1982", Republic Act No. 8292 or the “Higher Education Modernization Act
of 1997," and all other laws, decrees, executive orders and rules and regulations contrary to or
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SECTION 17. Effectivity Clause. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
Publication in the Official Gazette or in two (2) newspapers of general circulation

Approved,

13