The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) builds bridges that connect people, streetlights that make roads safer, and classrooms that serve schoolchildren.
In the agency’s words, it is their mission to bring about “a comfortable life for Filipinos through safe, reliable and resilient infrastructure.”
But recent congressional investigations have exposed the true nature of the DPWH budget: It is crafted not so much to uplift the welfare of Filipinos as to advance the interests of lawmakers and ranking executive officials who pocket hundreds of millions of pesos in kickbacks. The result: poorly planned and underfunded projects.
Much has been written about the massive payoffs from flood control projects, but there is little clarity on the so-called “allocable” funds that the DPWH provides to congressional districts. These funds represent a new form of pork barrel because, in the words of the civil-society People’s Budget Coalition, they are “discretionary, politically motivated,” and directed toward “politically determined projects that crowd out more equitable and accountable public spending.”
From 2023 to 2025, the highest shares of nearly ₱1.2 trillion in “allocable” funds have gone to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s son, Ilocos Norte (1st District) Rep. Ferdinand Alexander “Sandro” Marcos, and first cousin, Leyte (1st District) Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez.
The younger Marcos had been allotted ₱15.8 billion and Romualdez, ₱14.4 billion, for the past three years. In comparison, the other 251 district representatives in the previous Congress were each entitled to anywhere from ₱1 billion to ₱10 billion in allocables during that period, and some legislators allied with ex-president Rodrigo Duterte got nothing in the final version of the 2025 budget.
How the President’s relatives got such huge amounts is a mystery because the allocables are based on a formula that only one ex-undersecretary of the DPWH, Catalina Cabral, understands.
This means that Ilocos Norte’s first district, with a population of less than 320,000, got almost twice the ₱7.8-billion allocable of Rizal’s first district, the Philippines’ most populous legislative constituency with 1.2 million residents.
Not only that: A document obtained by PCIJ also showed political maneuvering for so-called “non-allocable” projects. These are projects that the DPWH proposes, supposedly based on an infrastructure masterplan premised on poverty alleviation, disaster mitigation, and service provision. But Congress members and executive officials often make major insertions for non-allocable projects as well, skewing DPWH priorities.
Here is a breakdown of our findings:
1. Although the Supreme Court has declared pork barrel unconstitutional, there is automatic allocable funds from the DPWH for district congresspersons. Since 2023, the President’s kin have gotten the bulk of allocable funds.
The term “allocable” has been used in numerous congressional hearings and caused confusion for lawmakers who have been trying to understand the DPWH budget under the Marcos administration.
Cabral explained that it is the “ceiling budget” that each engineering office gets and is based on a “parametric formula” that her then chief, former public works secretary Manuel Bonoan, instructed her to make.
On Nov. 14, retired public works undersecretary Roberto Bernardo cut to the chase. Allocables are, in effect, district congresspersons’ DPWH pork barrel allocations lodged in the National Expenditure Program (NEP) or the “president’s budget.”
In the Philippine context, pork barrel refers to government funds over which a legislator has control; it is intended for projects that in theory would benefit a lawmaker’s constituents. In 2013, in the wake of the scandal that involved the funneling of some ₱10 billion to nonexistent NGOs, the Supreme Court ruled pork barrel unconstitutional.
Allocables are the current form of pork barrel but with a difference: The total amounts are determined by the executive branch, rather than by the legislature, although lawmakers can decide how those amounts should be spent. Moreover, unlike the old pork barrel, allocables are itemized and decided on by Congress before, not after, the budget is enacted.
DPWH documents obtained and vetted by the PCIJ show that Sandro Marcos had the highest allocables among all district congressmen in 2025, followed by Romualdez, the former speaker of the House of Representatives.
According to Bonoan, the allocable formula was based on calculations made by the Marcos administration from the time it assumed office in 2022 and first became effective in 2023.
District engineers inform congressmen how much their allocable amounts are and present a menu of projects that fulfill that budget ceiling, according to incumbent lawmakers reached by PCIJ. A former lawmaker told PCIJ that ex-Ako Bicol Rep. Zaldy Co, a former chair of the House appropriations committee, informed him how much his allocable amount was in the 19th Congress.
The district representative then picks the projects he wants from the menu provided by the DPWH—whether roads, flood control structures, or street lights—sometimes exceeding the allocable amount, in the hope of having his desired projects granted.
“All wish lists are with the DPWH Usec for Planning Service (Cabral) who in turn will pick and choose which projects to include and be endorsed by the DPWH Sec to DBM,” Roberto Bernardo said in his sworn affidavit. This means that the “ceiling” or allocable can still be changed in the final version of the NEP, as determined by Cabral.
The allocable projects in the NEP are scrutinized by Congress, led by the House appropriations committee and the Senate finance committee, during budget deliberations that result in the General Appropriations Bill.
The two chambers iron out differences in their budget versions through the bicameral conference committee (or bicam). Toward yearend, Congress passes the final version for approval by the president. Upon passage, it becomes the General Appropriations Act (GAA).
The five legislative districts with the highest allocables in the NEP retained their share even after the 2025 GAA was passed. In other districts, there were slight differences in the NEP and GAA allocations. Meanwhile, the allocables of Duterte-allied lawmakers Paolo Duterte, Isidro Ungab, Pantaleon Alvarez and Khymer Olaso were completely eliminated.
The total amount of district congressmen’s DPWH pork funds that survived in the 2025 GAA amounts to ₱356 billion from the original “ceiling” of nearly ₱402 billion.
The original ceiling for 2023 and 2024 was ₱393 billion each. The PCIJ was unable to secure documents providing a breakdown of the final allocable amounts for those years.
2. The ‘BBM Parametric Formula’ supposedly determines the allocable amounts. Ex-DPWH official Cabral is allegedly the only one who understands it.
Cabral, who headed the DPWH planning service, invented the allocable formula, according to Bernardo. The PCIJ obtained the DPWH document detailing the so-called “BBM Parametric Formula” that has steered the department’s budget since 2023, the first year the Marcos administration enacted a national budget.
“BBM” stands for “Baselined, Balanced and Managed.” It also happens to be the popular nickname of the President.
A portion of the 16-page document also says that “a number of areas and/or legislative districts may receive additional infrastructure allocation in support of area-specific poverty alleviation, disaster-resiliency support and performance in budget implementation.”
Bernardo said only Cabral understands the formula and that it was never explained to him and other DPWH officials. He said the district size and population were considered but so were many other factors drawn from what he described as “a wide universe.”
Public Works Secretary Vince Dizon, who replaced Bonoan in September, has repeatedly claimed that he does not understand Cabral’s formula either, and has committed to scrap it altogether. But he said he can only do so in the 2027 budget.
“My problem with the 2026 budget is it’s no longer in our hands,” Dizon said. “And to be quite frank, I had zero part in that budget at all. For 2027 moving forward, we’re definitely going to review all these processes, all these formulae, because these cannot continue.”
3. ‘Non-allocables’ are free-for-all pork projects of lawmakers and executive officials, and actively pursued by contractors.
The DPWH’s current planning service director, Alex Bote, told senators that “non-allocables” consist of the department’s core projects, big-ticket programs, counterparts of foreign-assisted projects and national highways, among others, as opposed to allocables that are local in nature.
But testimonies from former DPWH officials have also described “non-allocables” as a free-for-all pork barrel allocation for lawmakers and executive officials.
Bernardo and former Bulacan (1st District) engineer Henry Alcantara said they assisted party-list representatives, senators, and executive officials in inserting projects in the non-allocable portion of the NEP during the 19th Congress.
Alcantara, in particular, testified at the Senate that his district engineering office handled a number of non-allocable projects. He interchangeably referred to these as “over and above the allocable” and “special projects.” He further said Bonoan, Cabral and the House sponsored these projects and have gotten “advances” or kickbacks paid for by contractors wishing to secure these contracts.
But unlike allocables, non-allocables cannot be “touched” by district representatives even if these are lodged in their own districts. This was confirmed by Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian, who sponsored the DPWH budget in the Senate plenary on Nov. 25.
Navotas Rep. Toby Tiangco, who has been outspoken about anomalies in the DPWH budget, put it this way to the PCIJ: “Ang non-allocable, either DPWH ‘yan or may nakabili na.” He explained that there are “legit” DPWH projects lodged in non-allocables, but a portion of them consists of projects “bought” by contractors—that is, these contractors pay kickbacks in advance to secure these projects.
A classic example is the now infamous photo of a billiard hall in Bulacan filled with bundles of cash worth ₱579 million. The photo was presented to the House on Sept. 9.
This payoff was made by contractors who were given contracts for DPWH projects that then Representative Co had “inserted” into the budget, according to Alcantara.
Still, the DPWH’s main projects under non-allocables have to go through the scrutiny of legislators who can then also insert new projects in any district engineering office and regional office of the DPWH at various stages of the budget process.
Bernardo confirmed this in a Sept. 25 Senate hearing during which he said last-minute changes can happen in the DPWH budget during bicams—that is, some projects get more while the department’s “needed” projects get less, and the reasons are seldom clear.
A DPWH document vetted by the PCIJ shows that “outside allocables” were lodged in all district engineering offices and regional offices of the department in the 2025 GAA. These totaled ₱732 billion, more than twice the amount of allocables.
Multiple times, the PCIJ asked the DPWH for a list of project sponsors of non-allocable projects in the past three years. Multiple times, they dodged our requests.
We turned to lawmakers who have publicly divulged information on lawmakers and executive officials who allegedly inserted projects in the budget.
Tiangco, for instance, has partially disclosed Co’s insertions in the budgets of different provinces. Batangas Rep. Leandro Leviste said he had obtained the proponent list of all 2025 DPWH projects in the NEP. And in September, Sen. Ping Lacson claimed that nearly all senators had at least ₱100 billion worth of insertions in the 2025 GAA.
But all of them either refused to give out their lists or said they would “have to double-check.” Leviste, in particular, has been pressuring the DPWH itself to release the list of proponents.
4. After the flood control scandal broke, Congress proposed a 2026 budget that still has allocables, but no longer for flood control.
In late August or early September, or just weeks after the 2026 NEP was handed over to the House and the country was being rocked by the flood control scandal, fears were raised that some ₱250 billion worth of flood control projects for districts would be removed from the NEP.
To allay those fears, the House appropriations committee instructed congresspersons how to submit “errata” that would convert their allocable funds to other projects besides flood control. This way, their allocable funds would be intact.
Four types of project conversion tactics were suggested.
The first three “errata” options allow congresspersons to change DPWH projects assigned to their allocables to other types of DPWH projects. “Type 4” gives them the option to convert their OO2 or flood control projects to other agencies.
Another slide enumerated these agencies.
Leviste told the PCIJ that he has seen this presentation and that “it is the basis of the proposed 2026 budget.” Tiangco also said this allocable scheme is unique to the 2026 budget.
The House passed its version of the General Appropriations Bill on Oct. 13. An analysis by the People’s Budget Coalition found that while local flood control projects were slashed, allocations for other kinds of DPWH projects surged.
These include the Convergence and Special Support Program and Asset Preservation Program which cover roads, bridges and multipurpose buildings. Projects in agencies where other allocables were converted also experienced increases.
The Senate is now deliberating on the budget and is expected to wrap up next week. In their plenary debate last Nov. 25, Sen. Loren Legarda claimed there are ₱400 billion worth of allocables, roughly the same amount as in the past three years. In addition, ₱100 billion worth of non-allocables are in the 2026 budget of the DPWH.
The bicam composed of representatives of the Senate and the House are expected to meet in December to reconcile differences in their versions of the 2026 budget. The bicam has historically been a secret event. Critics have clamored for an #OpenBicam to prevent lawmakers from making surprise decisions on the budget. Some lawmakers, including Senate President Tito Sotto, have expressed openness to the suggestion.
Will Congress’ commitment to transparency go as far as disclosing how much pork each lawmaker and the executive are entitled to this year?
And will former and current DPWH officials in the know finally release the list of proponents for all infrastructure projects in the past three years? It could be the prized missing puzzle piece in determining who had a hand in influencing the budget of the corruption-infested DPWH. —WITH RESEARCH BY JENELLE RAGANAS AND KLYDE CHARLES PAINOR
