Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 18

AGENCY BUDGET NOTES

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

PREPARED BY THE
CONGRESSIONAL POLICY AND BUDGET RESEARCH DEPARTMENT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 2011

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION1
SITUATIONER
1. Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016: Targets and Goals/Strategies 1.1 Inclusive growththe policy framework by which the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2011-2016 was craftedhas been defined in the Plan as high growth that is sustained, that massively creates jobs and reduces poverty.1 The Plan acknowledged that this can only be achieved if human capital buildup through health and education is sufficient. 1.2 By 2013, the PDP aims to reach the targets of 98.1% simple literacy rate and a 90.1% functional literacy rate from the 2008 baseline of 95.6% and 86.4%, respectively. In terms of accessibility to education, the PDP targets a 100% net enrolment rate at the elementary level and a 93% net enrolment rate at the secondary level by 2016 (Table 1). It also intends to address gender inequalities as the Plan targets to achieve a Gender Parity Index of 1. 1.3 In pursuit of these goals, the PDP intends to improve and expand access to basic education by making the most of public-private partnerships and utilizing alternative modes of service delivery. Expansion of opportunities and lifelong learning shall be emphasized by broadening the reach of education, keeping in mind the needs of out-ofschool youths and adults, the mentally-challenged, persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, Madrasah students, students in conflict-affected areas, and other vulnerable groups.2 1.4 Foundations for global competitiveness shall be pursued within the Kindergarten to 12 Years (K+12) Basic Education framework by better preparing students for the world of work. This shall be done by building capacities of students for higher learning, career counseling and complying with the legal and formal requisites for employment domestically and internationally. 3

This document is prepared by Glenndale Cornelio as input to the deliberations of the Committee on Appropriations on the proposed 2012 National Budget. The report benefited from inputs of Director Novel V. Bangsal and from over-all guidance of Acting Director-General Romulo E. M. Miral, Jr.

TABLE 1 PHILIPPINE DEVELOPMENT PLAN EDUCATION TARGETS 2011-2016


Indicators Literacy Simple Literacy Rate (10 yrs old above) Functional Literacy Rate (10-64 yrs old) Elementary Net Intake Rate in Grade 1 Gross Enrolment Rate Net Enrolment Rate Cohort Survival Rate Completion Rate Secondary Gross Enrolment Rate Net Enrolment Rate Cohort Survival Rate Completion Rate
Source:

Baseline

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

95.6 (2008) 86.4 (2008)

98.1 90.1

58.61 105.37 88.09 74.38 72.18

65.89 108.30 90.09 76.45 75.13

73.17 111.22 92.09 78.51 76.61

80.44 114.15 94.10 80.57 78.09

87.72 117.07 96.10 82.64 79.56

95.00 120.00 98.10 84.67 81.04

100.00 122.93 100.00 86.76 82.52

81.03 59.52 78.44 73.74

86.83 65.16 79.35 74.25

92.62 70.79 80.27 74.51

98.41 76.43 81.18 74.76

104.21 82.06 82.09 75.02

110.00 87.70 83.00 75.27

115.79 93.34 83.91 75.53

Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016, National Economic and Development Authority

2. Issues and challenges 2.1

Inequalities associated with location and wealth. According to the Education For All
(EFA) Global Monitoring Report 2010, the Philippines has suffered from extreme marginalization primarily linked to poverty and location.4 The Report observed that in the Philippines, along with countries India and Viet Nam, a child born into a poor household is twice more likely to remain in the bottom 20% of the income stratum.5 The Report also singled out the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao as seriously marginalized because of the prevalent poverty situation and persistent conflict in its locality. 6

2.2

Location and school retention. UNESCOs dataset on Deprivation and Marginalization


in Education, some variables of which are indicated in Table 2, shows the inequalities on educational achievement in terms of location and wealth. On average, 2.4% of the countrys entire population had no education. ARMM had 11% of its population aged 716 with no education, the largest percentage in the entire country. On the other hand,
2

virtually no one in Region I and CAR are uneducated. It is essential that the Government address these regional disparities as successes in some regions may be pulled down by poor performance in other regions. 2.3

Wealth and school retention.

Table 2 also shows that in the Philippines, those belonging to the top 20% of the income stratum are more likely to stay in school, about five years more than those at the bottom 20%. Again, students in ARMM are more likely to stay in school for eight years compared to NCR students who could obtain at least 10 years of education.
TABLE 2 EDUCATION MARGINALIZATION BY DIMENSION
Region % of the population aged 7-16 w/ no education 2.4 1.2 0.0 0.6 2.4 1.8 1.6 2.3 1.0 2.7 2.8 2.4 3.1 1.2 3.6 3.3 3.3 11.6 Years of Education Richest 20% 11.0 11.1 11.2 10.9 11.2 10.9 11.2 10.5 11.1 11.2 10.8 10.4 Total 9.4 10.4 9.9 10.3 10.0 9.6 10.2 8.2 9.1 9.0 9.1 8.7 8.2 8.8 8.7 8.6 8.9 7.7 Poorest 20% 6.3 6.2 6.9 6.4 5.9 6.2 5.3 5.4 5.6 6.8 6.2 6.8

PHILIPPINES NCR I CAR II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII CARAGA ARMM

Source: www.unesco.org, viewed 22 August 2012.

2.4

Wealth and scholastic achievement. In terms of highest grade completed, Table 3


shows that majority of those unable to complete the full elementary course belong to the lowest 30% of the income stratum. On the other hand, those within the highest 70% of
3

the income stratum are more likely to finish high school (24.8%). Furthermore, 15.4% of the population who are relatively well-off are more likely to reach college and even pursue a higher degree compared to 1.2% of the population who are poor.
TABLE 3 HIGHEST GRADE COMPLETED BY INCOME STRATUM
Selected Background Characteristics Income Stratum (Percent Distribution) Both Lowest Highest Income 30% 70% Strata

Highest Grade Completed Total No Grade Completed Pre-school (Nursery/Kinder/Prep) Elementary Undergraduate Elementary Graduate High School Undergraduate High School Graduate Post Secondary College Undergraduate College Graduate or Higher
Source: Annual Poverty Indicators Survey 2007

100.0 3.0 0.2 20.6 19.8 11.5 21.7 1.8 10.2 11.2

100.0 6.0 0.3 34.9 25.6 13.0 14.4 0.8 3.6 1.2

100.0 1.7 0.2 14.4 17.3 10.9 24.8 2.2 13.0 15.4

2.5

Low participation rates due to demand-side factors. It has been observed that
children tend to enter school at a later age than they are supposed to. 7 While basic education in the country is able to attract over-aged students as indicated by high gross enrolment rates (104.2% in 2004 and 100.8% in 2009), it has less students of the same cohort going to school as suggested by much lower net enrolment rates (87.1% in 2004 and 85.0% in 2009) (Appendix 1).

2.6

Gender dimension to school achievement. In contrast to other countries where


education is usually heavily biased towards boys, gender bias in the Philippines tends to favor girls. In both elementary and secondary levels, as indicated by all school retention indicators, namely, cohort survival rate, completion rate and dropout rate, female students tend to stay longer in school compared to males in 2004-2009 (Appendix 1). Furthermore, in the same period, females tend to outperform males on learning achievements as shown by their higher mean percentage scores in National Achievement Tests for Grade 6 and
4

Second Year High School. It has also been noted that male students are more likely to engage in child labor than female students.8

BUDGET ALLOCATION FOR BASIC EDUCATION


3. Budget Trends 3.1

Comparative Regional Education Spending.

The 2010 EFA Global Monitoring Report specifically recommended that in order to overcome inequality, among the most important governance reforms developing countries need to implement, is to raise national spending on education.9 While the Report acknowledged that increased public education spending does not automatically improve access, equity or learning outcomes, persistent underinvestment in education will inevitably result in poor quality and inaccessible education. Fast-rising economies in the ASEAN have set aside about 17.0% to 25.0% of their total government expenditure for education (Table 4). In contrast, Philippine spending on education as a percentage of total government expenditure is among the lowest at 16.9%. Consequently, the Philippines has fared poorly on keeping kids in school, as evidenced by its primary completion rate of 94.0% in 2008, as compared to Indonesia at 106.0% and Malaysia at 97.0%.
TABLE 4 PUBLIC SPENDING ON EDUCATION, TOTAL (% OF GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE) SELECTED ASEAN COUNTRIES
Country Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Thailand 2006 17.2 16.7 25.0 2007 18.7 18.2 15.9 20.9 2008 17.9 17.2 16.9 20.5 2009 20.3

Source: World Development Indicators

3.2

Social Services Spending. Social Services proposed budget for 2012 stands at Php575.8
billion (Table 5). Aside from being the largest allocation in NGs expenditure program across all sectors for 2012, this amount also represents the biggest share at 31.7% of total budget that social services will receive since FY 2000 at 31.2%. This indicates the Governments commitment to its 2012 budget sloganPaggugol na Matuwid: Diretso sa Taochanneling government spending directly to the people. Budget for the sector grew by 10.4% from its 2011 budget of Php521.4 billion, which is almost the same growth rate exhibited by the total NG budget. About one-third of the growth of the total NG budget 2012 is attributable to the growth of the Social Services budget.
TABLE 5 NG EXPENDITURE PROGRAM SOCIAL SERVICES AND DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (IN MILLIONS) FYS 2010-2012
Particulars 2010 Actual 1,472.98 415.84 191.10 2011 Adjusted 1,645.00 521.45 207.27 Percent Share 2012 Proposed 1,816.00 575.77 238.77 Growth Rate 2011-2012 10.4 10.4 15.2 Contribution to Growtha of 2012 Budget (%) 3.3 1.9 4.8

Total Budget Social Services DepEd

Social Services to Total Budget DepEd to Total Budget DepEd to Social Services

28.2 13.0 46.0

31.7 12.6 39.7

31.7 13.1 41.5

Source: Budget Expenditure and Sources of Financing 2012 a / Contribution to Growth of 2012 Budget = Percent share from 2011 Budget x Growth Rate in 2011-2012

3.3

Basic Education Spending. Of the total budget of Social Services, 13.1% is allocated to
the Department of Education (DepEd). According to the Presidents Budget Message, DepEds proposed budget for 2012 amounts to Php238.8 billion. This represents the Departments General Appropriations for next year, plus two items classified as Special Purpose Funds: the Php1.0 billion allocation for Educational Facilities Fund and the Php8.9 billion Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund (Table 6). The latter is specifically allotted for the Funding Requirement for the Filling up of Unfilled Positions.
6

DepEds proposed budget for next year corresponds to 13.1% of the total NG budget and a 15.2% increase from its current years budget. This also accounts for almost half of the growth of the social services allocation and 0.2% of the total NG budgets growth (Table 5).
TABLE 6 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION EXPENDITURE PROGRAM BY ATTACHED AGENCIES FYS 2010-2012
PARTICULARS Department of Education Office of the Secretary National Book Development Board National Council for Children's Television National Museum Philippine High School for the Arts DepEd Educational Facilities Fund Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund, FY 2012 TOTAL
Source: BESF, various years; NEP 2012

Levels in million pesos 2010 2011 2012 191,106 206,271 228,871 190,873 206,037 228,538 22 22 22 11 6 7 154 149 245 46 56 60 1,000 1,000 8,895 191,106 207,271 238,766

Compared with 2010s budget allocation, the following will experience budgetary increases in 2012: Office of the Secretary (19.7%), National Museum (58.5%) and Philippine High School for the Arts (29.0%). Note that under the budget of the Office of the Secretary, about Php1.9 billion will be allocated for the universal kindergarten program. It has been estimated that out of the 2.3 million five-year old children to enter kindergarten, about 17% or 1.7 billion will be served by public schools (Table 6). In contrast, the National Council for Childrens Televisions appropriation will decrease to Php7.0 million next year from Php11.0 million last year, which is equivalent to a reduction of 37.7%. On the other hand, National Book Development Boards budget of Php22.0 million last year will continue up to 2012 (Table 6). 3.4

Budget by Expense Class. Net of Special Purpose Funds, i.e., Educational Facilities
Fund and Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund, DepEds proposed budget for 2012 amounts to Php228.9 billion (Table 7). This consists of Php181.7 billion for Personal
7

Services (PS), Php26.4 billion Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) and Php20.8 billion for Capital Outlay and Net Lending. While PS increased by 7.7% from Php168.7 million to Php181.7 million from 2010 to 2012, its share to DepEds total budget has decreased significantly, from 88.3% in 2010 to 79.4% in 2012. On the other hand, MOOE will increase by 6.1% from last years allocation to 2012s budget proposal.
TABLE 7 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION EXPENDITURE PROGRAM BY OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE FYS 2010-2012
Fiscal Year 2010 2011 2012 In Million Pesos CO & MOOE Net Lending 18,177 4,172 24,880 15,123 26,390 20,778 % Share to Total TOTAL 191,106 206,271 228,871 PS 88.3 80.6 79.4 MOOE 9.5 12.1 11.5 CO & Net Lending 2.2 7.3 9.1

PS 168,756 166,268 181,703

Source: BESF 2012

3.5

Budget by Key Programs. Of the major programs of the DepEd (Table 8), lump-sum for
the requirement of basic educational facilities which will receive Php17.4 billion in 2012 accounts for the largest share (at 7.3%) of the Departments total proposed budget. The next largest allocation will go to the Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education (GASTPE) which corresponds to 2.6% of the Departments total budget. Under the GASTPE, DepEd spends between P5,000 to P10,000 per student yearly so that private schools may receive students who can no longer enroll in public schools due to insufficient resources. Funding requirement for the newly created teaching and non-teaching positions nonteaching positions subject to actual deployment to schools, schools division offices and newly legislated/established high schools will cover the third biggest share amounting to Php2.9 billion or 1.2% of the total proposed budget. Lump-sum for purchase of textbooks/instructional materials (including P100M for the handicapped) will be allotted the fourth biggest share at 1.1% or Php2.6 billion. Budgetary increases across these programs indicate the Governments inclination to provide educational services instead of delegating the task to private schools. The lumpsum for the requirement of basic educational facilities will post the largest increase at
8

54.3%, followed by lump-sum for purchase of textbooks/instructional materials (including P100M for the handicapped), which will grow by 47.6% from this years allocation. Funding requirement for the newly created teaching and non-teaching positions registered a 27.2% increase from this years budget, while GASTPE expanded by 7.8%. Note that World Bank has pointed out that expanding the GASTPE Program is a more cost-effective way of increasing access to secondary basic education. The Bank estimated that building more public schools would cost about Php7,486 to Php10,825 per student per year whereas scaling up GASTPE would cost Php5,300 per student per year. Building more public schools would then cost the Government about Php11.0 billion to Php34.9 billion per year while expanding GASTPE would cost the Government Php7.8 billion to Php15.0 billion.10
TABLE 8 SELECTED NATIONWIDE PROGRAMS FYS 2011-2012
Particulars Funding Requirement for the newly created teaching and non-teaching positions subject to actual deployment to schools, schools division offices and newly legislated/ established high schools Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education (GASTPE) Lump-sum for Purchase of Textbooks/Instructional Materials (Including P100M for the handicapped) Lump-sum for the Requirement of Basic Educational Facilities
Source: GAA 2011, NEP 2012

2010

2011

2012

1,934,640,000

2,263,128,000

2,879,249,000

3,939,560,000

5,829,884,000

6,286,387,000

2,072,500,000

1,777,918,000

2,624,982,000

11,291,236,000

17,420,020,000

The DepEd provided regional breakdown of these major programs in the 2012 budget proposal (Table 9). Of the 17 regions, Region IV-A will receive the largest allocation for three out of four programs. These are GASTPE, funding requirement for the newly created teaching and non-teaching positions and lump-sum for purchase of textbooks/instructional materials at Php722.9 million, Php415.1 million and Php270.0
9

million, respectively. On the other hand, NCR will receive the largest share of the budget for lump-sum for the requirement of basic educational facilities amounting to Php2.4 billion, followed by Region IV-A at Php1.6 billion and ARMM at Php1.4 billion. Region III will receive the second largest budgetary allocations for funding requirement for the newly created teaching and non-teaching positions (Php311.8 million) and lump-sum for purchase of textbooks/instructional materials (Php236.4 million).
TABLE 9 PROPOSED REGIONAL ALLOCATION OF SELECTED NATIONWIDE PROGRAMS FY 2012 (IN MILLION PESOS)
REGION Lump-sum for the Requirement of Basic Educational Facilities GASTPE New Teaching and Non-Teaching Positions Lump-sum for Textbooks/ Instructional Materials

TOTAL Central Office NCR I CAR II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII CARAGA ARMM

17,420.0 5,000.0 2,412.9 264.5 193.8 181.2 887.0 1,562.8 360.9 712.8 490.4 957.9 636.2 456.0 514.9 522.5 569.1 305.8 1,391.3

6,286.4 560.4 502.2 364.4 181.0 263.1 618.9 722.9 186.7 339.0 435.0 401.1 242.1 164.8 268.7 264.7 350.3 169.9 251.2

2,879.2 292.4 123.8 51.6 81.7 311.8 415.1 106.8 171.4 186.3 266.2 162.1 109.6 136.4 131.8 140.9 94.6 96.8

2,625.0 254.5 216.4 119.0 41.5 77.2 236.4 270.0 85.9 174.8 185.1 179.2 142.8 105.3 111.4 116.7 109.9 73.8 125.1

Source: National Expenditure Program 2012

Note that in terms of allocation of education inputs, i.e. classrooms and teachers, regional disparities indicate the urgent need for more resources, especially in areas with severe shortages. During SYs 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, a classroom in the Philippines accommodates 39 pupils at the elementary level and as much as 54 students at the
10

secondary level. This indicates that the secondary level has far less resources to meet the prescribed DepEd ratio of 45 pupils/students in a classroom (Table 10). At the elementary level, 15 out of 17 regions were able to comply with the DepEd policy of 45 pupils in a classroom. Only two regions, namely, NCR and ARMM, failed to meet this standard. However, at the secondary level, classroom shortages are much more serious, as 14 out of 17 regions are beyond the maximum 45 students in a classroom policy. Only CAR, Region VI (Western Visayas) and Region II (Cagayan Valley) have less than 45 pupils in a classroom for both SY 2009-2010 and SY 2010-2011.
TABLE 10 AVERAGE NUMBER OF PUPILS/STUDENTS PER CLASSROOM, PER REGION ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY LEVELS SYS 2009-2010 AND 2010-2011
Region / School Division Name
TOTAL, PHILIPPINES I - ILOCOS REGION II - CAGAYAN VALLEY III - CENTRAL LUZON IV-A CALABARZON IV-B MIMAROPA V - BICOL REGION VI - WESTERN VISAYAS VII - CENTRAL VISAYAS VIII - EASTERN VISAYAS IX - ZAMBOANGA PENINSULA X - NORTHERN MINDANAO XI - DAVAO REGION XII - SOCCSKSARGEN CARAGA ARMM CAR NCR

Pupil-Room Ratio Elementary 2009-10 39 29 27 36 44 37 37 30 40 33 36 38 40 43 36 61 28 78 2010-11 39 28 27 37 44 36 37 30 40 34 36 38 41 43 37 62 30 76

Student-Room Ratio Secondary 2009-10 54 45 40 54 62 48 50 45 56 50 47 53 55 53 48 82 39 76 2010-11 53 44 39 54 62 48 49 43 54 50 47 50 53 52 47 83 38 79

Source: Department of Education. NCR assumes two shifts.

In terms of teacher deployment, DepEd database indicates that on the average, an elementary teacher handles 36 pupils in a class while a high school teacher handles 38
11

(Table 11). This number is still within the DepEd standard of 45 pupils or students for every teacher. Of all the regions, teachers in ARMM have to teach at least 50 pupils in elementary and no less than 53 students in high school. On the other hand, teachers in CAR have the lowest number of elementary and high school students averaging 27 and 30, respectively.
TABLE 11 AVERAGE NUMBER OF PUPILS/STUDENTS PER TEACHER, PER REGION ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY LEVELS SYS 2009-2010 AND 2010-2011
Region Pupil-Teacher Ratio Elementary 2009-2010
TOTAL, PHILIPPINES I - ILOCOS REGION II - CAGAYAN VALLEY III - CENTRAL LUZON IV-A CALABARZON IV-B MIMAROPA V - BICOL REGION VI - WESTERN VISAYAS VII - CENTRAL VISAYAS VIII - EASTERN VISAYAS IX - ZAMBOANGA PENINSULA X - NORTHERN MINDANAO XI - DAVAO REGION XII - SOCCSKSARGEN CARAGA ARMM CAR NCR
Source: Department of Education

Student-Teacher Ratio Secondary 2009-2010 38 34 34 41 42 38 37 35 41 39 37 38 37 39 37 54 30 36 2010-2011 38 34 33 40 43 38 36 34 42 39 37 38 37 38 37 53 29 35

2010-2011 36 29 29 37 41 36 36 31 38 32 34 36 38 39 34 50 28 39

36 29 29 37 41 36 35 31 37 32 34 35 37 39 33 50 27 40

3.6

Regional Allocation. Table 12 shows DepEds regional allocation in the last three years.
From 2010-2012 Region IV-A (CALABARZON) was consistently given the highest budget, followed by Region III and NCR. On the other hand, other than the ARMM, CAR received the smallest allocation.

12

Whatever gains the regions may realize from large budgetary allocations seem to be watered down by the size of their population. While Region IV-A (CALABARZON), Region III and NCR are allocated the largest budgets, they also have the lowest per capita expenditure as a result of the number of school age population they have to serve (Appendix 2).
TABLE 12 REGIONAL ALLOCATION OF DEPED EXPENDITURE PROGRAM FY 2010-2012 IN BILLION PESOS
Region TOTAL Nationwide Central Office NCR I CAR II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII CARAGA ARMM 2010 170.8 25.2 1.1 14.3 9.4 3.5 6.4 14.3 15.4 5.4 11.1 13.7 10.6 8.7 6.5 7.2 6.9 6.3 4.8 2011 206.3 36.6 1.4 16.6 10.9 4.1 7.6 16.8 17.8 6.3 12.9 15.9 12.3 10.2 7.6 8.3 8.0 7.4 5.6 2012 228.9 1.1 8.1 21.8 13.5 5.4 9.4 21.6 23.6 8.1 16.2 19.5 16.8 13.0 9.8 10.7 10.3 10.0 7.3 2.7

Source: BESF, various years

On the average, per capita education expenditure increased from Php7,835 per year in 2010 to Php10,949 per year in the 2012 budget proposal by the DepEd. In the last three years, Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) had the highest per capita education expenditure. On the other hand, Region IV-A (CALABARZON) was persistently allocated per capita budgets below the national average from 2010 to 2012. Region IV-A also registered the highest population estimates in the same period.
13

FINDINGS OF THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT (2009)


4. In its 2009 report, the Commission on Audit made the following observations: 4.1 DepEd did not conduct a program audit of the Education Service Contracting (ESC) Scheme of the GASTPE. As a result, it had not been possible to validate the existence of schools and the identity of students participating in the program. Furthermore, this hindered the DepEd from adequately monitoring and evaluating the programs implementation. 4.2 MOOE amounting to Php66.4 million was not spent due to (a) DepEds failure to download the amount to schools, (b) reversion/lapsing of the Notice of Cash Allocation (c) absence of fiscal management aspect in School Improvement Plans. The amount could have been used to fund classroom and school operations. DepEds leniency on contractors resulted in deficiencies and non-compliance to specifications of school furniture in NCR-RO and 12 Division Offices amounting to Php113.4 million and school buildings in eight regions equivalent to Php48.3 million.

4.3

14

APPENDIX 1 FORMAL BASIC EDUCATION PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, BY SEX: 2004-2009 (PDP)


Indicators 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

ELEMENTARY Net Intake Rate in Grade 1 Male Female Gross Enrolment Rate Male Female Net Enrolment Ratio Male Female Cohort Survival Rate Male Female Completion Rate Male Female Dropout Rate (School Leaver) Male Female Achievement Rate (Grade 6 NAT MPS) Male Female SECONDARY Gross Enrolment Rate Male Female Net Enrolment Ratio Male Female Cohort Survival Rate Male Female Completion Rate Male Female Dropout Rate (School Leaver) Male 83.9 80.2 87.8 60 55.0 65.0 78.1 73.3 82.8 72.4 66.9 77.8 8 9.9 80.5 77.0 84.1 58.5 53.7 63.5 67.3 61.5 73.0 61.7 55.1 68.1 12.5 15 79.5 76.4 82.6 58.6 53.9 63.4 77.3 72.7 81.8 72.1 67.2 77.0 6.6 7.5 81.4 78.7 84.2 61.9 57.4 66.6 79.9 75.21 84.5 78.7 71.6 86.0 7.5 9.3 82.9 80.6 85.3 60.7 56.4 65.2 79.7 75.5 83.9 75.2 70.4 79.9 7.5 9.1 82.2 80.2 84.1 62.4 57.9 67.0 78.5 74.2 82.8 73.7 69.1 78.3 8.0 9.7 41.3 37.5 45.3 104.2 104.9 103.5 87.1 86.17 88.08 71.3 66.1 77.2 69.1 63.6 75.2 7.0 8.4 5.4 58.73 57.10 60.29 36.6 33 40.5 101.1 101.9 100.3 84.4 83.56 85.35 70.0 65.5 75.0 68.1 63.3 73.5 7.3 8.6 6 54.66 52.89 56.58 39.7 36.2 43.5 99.9 100.7 99.0 83.2 82.39 84.08 73.4 68.8 78.6 71.7 67.3 76.7 6.4 7.6 5 59.94 58.59 61.81 45.6 43.4 48.0 102 102.9 101.1 84.8 84.01 85.72 75.3 70.9 80.1 73.1 68.4 78.3 6.0 7.2 4.7 64.81 63.73 65.87 48.4 46.4 50.5 102.1 103.3 100.8 85.1 84.86 85.71 75.4 71.5 79.7 73.3 69.1 77.9 6.0 7.1 4.9 66.33 64.38 66.72 56.3 54.6 58.0 100.8 102.1 99.5 85.0 85.0 85.0 74.4 69.9 79.4 72.2 67.4 77.5 6.3 7.5 4.9 68.00 66.65 69.36

15

Female Achievement Rate (Year II NAT MPS) Male Female


Source: Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016

6.1 46.80 45.83 47.61

10.1 46.97 45.44 48.31

5.9 46.64 44.81 48.29

5.6 49.26 47.84 50.45

5.8 47.4 44.89 48.32

6.2 45.55 43.95 46.98

REGIONAL ALLOCATION OF PER CAPITA EDUCATION EXPENDITURE 2010-2012


Region 2010 Budget Proposal (Billion Pesos) 2010 Projected Population (5-14 y.o.) 2010 Per Capita 2011 Budget Proposal (Billion Pesos) 2011 Projected Population (5-14 y.o.) 2011 Per Capita 2012 Budget Proposal (Billion Pesos) 2012 Projected Population (5-14 y.o.) 2012 Per Capita

APPENDIX 2

Average NCR I CAR II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII CARAGA 14.3 9.4 3.5 6.4 14.3 15.4 5.4 11.1 13.7 10.6 8.7 6.5 7.2 6.9 6.3 4.8 2,301,200 1,089,900 357,500 698,000 2,102,400 2,484,100 731,100 1,305,600 1,586,400 1,479,900 1,008,600 893,100 932,700 882,500 919,700 564,200

7,835 6,222 8,645 9,859 9,222 6,812 6,216 7,450 8,479 8,664 7,179 8,612 7,230 7,690 7,816 6,801 8,462 16.6 10.9 4.1 7.6 16.8 17.8 6.3 12.9 15.9 12.3 10.2 7.6 8.3 8.0 7.4 5.6 2,295,360 1,113,980 365,200 702,280 2,110,500 2,489,380 753,060 1,315,360 1,623,620 1,499,100 1,020,660 910,920 945,360 882,680 941,340 571,520

9,005 7,228 9,804 11,198 10,773 7,950 7,163 8,340 9,815 9,814 8,224 9,970 8,314 8,750 9,116 7,890 9,727 21.8 13.5 5.4 9.4 21.6 23.6 8.1 16.2 19.5 16.8 13.0 9.8 10.7 10.3 10.0 7.3 2,289,520 1,138,060 372,900 706,560 2,118,600 2,494,660 775,020 1,325,120 1,660,840 1,518,300 1,032,720 928,740 958,020 882,860 962,980 578,840

10,949 9,539 11,860 14,350 13,262 10,214 9,467 10,445 12,252 11,754 11,070 12,555 10,507 11,187 11,668 10,389 12,597

ARMM 834,900 856,020 2.7 877,140 715 Source: BESF, various years; Population data were estimates by the Commission on Population based on the National Statistics Office 2000 Census of Population and Housing.

16

ENDNOTES
1 2 3 4

Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016, National Economic and Development Authority, pp. 18-19. Op cit, p. 268. Op cit, p. 269.

EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010: Reaching the Marginalized, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, p. 14.
5

Op cit, p. 24. Op cit, p. 14.

6 7

Former DepEd Undersecretary Juan Miguel Luz in 2010 Development Agenda: Education, Second draft reflecting consensus of Roundtable Discussion, January 20, 2010, Movement for Good Governance. UNESCO Philippine Education for All 2015: Implementation and Challenges, in 2010 Development Agenda: Education, Second draft reflecting consensus of Roundtable Discussion, January 20, 2010, Movement for Good Governance.
8
9

EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010: Reaching the Marginalized, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, p. 4. Philippines Private Provision, Public Purpose: A Review of the Governments Education Service Contracting Scheme, The World Bank, 2011.
10

17