When I hear people refer to the Unprogrammed Appropriations (UA) as a “secret fund” or “pork barrel,” I can’t help but feel concerned—not because of the criticism itself, but because of the misunderstanding behind it.

Let’s be clear from the start: the Unprogrammed Appropriations is not a discretionary or confidential fund. It is a standby appropriation, duly authorized and approved by Congress through the General Appropriations Act (GAA). It is not hidden, it is not illegal, and it is not automatic.

The UA acts as the government’s fiscal safety net. It can only be tapped when there are excess or windfall revenues, new revenue measures, or valid loan agreements for foreign-assisted projects. In simple terms, the UA allows the government to respond to urgent national priorities—such as disasters, pandemics, or social welfare programs—without violating the fiscal limits set by Congress.

It’s not a loophole; it’s a lifeline. It ensures flexibility when life happens faster than the budget. The UA typically supports programs and projects such as foreign-assisted loans and their peso counterparts, social protection initiatives like the DSWD’s Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situation (AICS) and Food Stamp Program, education and health services, including higher education subsidies and hospital infrastructure, personnel benefits such as salary increases and pensions of government employees, and special projects like the Marawi Compensation Program or renewable energy initiatives.

In 2024 alone, the UA supported ₱15 billion for AICS, ₱27.45 billion for health emergency allowance, and ₱56.9 billion for salary increases and benefits of public workers. Every peso is traceable, every item is authorized by law, and every release is documented and audited.

The release of UA funds is never automatic. It is governed by both the General Appropriations Act and the DBM Citizen’s Charter, which serve as the Department’s contract with the Filipino people. Before any release is made, there must first be a formal request from the implementing agency endorsed by its Secretary or agency head. The agency must submit complete and compliant documentation, including project justifications, and the DBM must conduct a thorough evaluation to ensure fiscal soundness, consistency with the Philippine Development Plan, and alignment with administration priorities. Finally, the Bureau of the Treasury must certify the presence of excess or new revenues or the existence of a valid loan agreement. Only when all these conditions are satisfied can the DBM issue a Special Allotment Release Order or SARO.

It is also important to emphasize that the DBM releases funds only to government agencies—never to any politician, individual, or private entity. All releases are subject to audit by the Commission on Audit (COA) and are published on the DBM Transparency Portal for public access. No request, no documents, no revenues—no release.

Some ask: if there’s an urgent need, why not simply pass a supplemental budget instead of using the UA? The answer lies in the principle of urgency. A supplemental budget, while valid, defeats the very purpose of immediacy that the UA is designed for.

Article VI, Section 23(4) of the 1987 Constitution states that “the procedure in approving appropriations for Congress shall strictly follow the procedure for approving appropriations for other departments and agencies.” In other words, a supplemental budget must go through the entire legislative process—approval by both the House and the Senate, three readings on separate days, and distribution of printed copies before passage—except in cases of emergencies certified by the President.

Moreover, under the same constitutional provision, a special appropriations bill must specify the purpose for which it is intended and must be supported by funds actually available as certified by the National Treasurer, or by a corresponding revenue proposal included in the measure. The Administrative Code of 1987 likewise provides that the President may transmit to Congress supplemental or deficiency appropriations only when necessary due to new laws or in the public interest.

In short, a supplemental budget is possible but lengthy and procedural. It requires time, debate, and certification of fund availability. That makes it less responsive to fast-moving emergencies such as typhoons, pandemics, or global economic shocks. In the last fifteen years, Congress has passed a supplemental budget only three times: first, during Typhoon Ondoy in 2009; second, under the Bayanihan to Heal as One Act; and third, under the Bayanihan to Recover as One Act. Each of these measures was extraordinary in nature and required explicit presidential certification.

The UA, on the other hand, provides the government with lawful flexibility to act swiftly while still upholding full accountability. It allows immediate response within the existing budget framework—no shortcuts, no skipping of checks and balances, and no need to pass a new law every time an unexpected crisis arises.

Let’s also put this plainly: the UA is not a pork barrel. The pork barrel system was struck down by the Supreme Court because it allowed legislators to identify projects after budget approval—a clear violation of checks and balances. The UA, on the other hand, is part of the national budget law, debated, reviewed, and passed by Congress. Every purpose is listed, every peso is accounted for, and every release follows the law.

In fact, the Supreme Court, through Belgica v. Executive Secretary, has upheld the constitutionality of the UA, affirming that it passes the singular correspondence test: it has one clear purpose—to serve as a standby appropriation funded by excess revenues for programs enumerated in the GAA.

Public accountability is the core of the UA process. All items are legislated, all releases are documented, and all transactions are audited. There are no “shadow projects” or hidden funds—only lawful, transparent, and conditional releases made in accordance with the GAA.

The Unprogrammed Appropriations is not a loophole—it’s a fiscal safety valve. It is what allows the government to respond swiftly, lawfully, and compassionately to the needs of its people. Because governance, like life itself, is unpredictable. And good budgeting requires not just precision but preparation.

Every peso has a paper trail. Every release has a reason.

And that is why, amid all the noise, there is hope—in the rule of law, in the power of transparency, and in a government that plans not just for today, but for the unexpected tomorrows ahead.