The Commission on Audit (COA) has tagged the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) for delays, some for almost two years, in the implementation of the more than P167 million Metro Manila Flood Management Project Phase 1 (MMFMP1).

In its 2024 annual audit report (AAR) on the MMDA, the COA said that there were five completed projects worth P80,297,019.70 which were delayed by 13 to 322 days, while four ongoing projects worth P87,206,561.15 experienced delays of 676 days.

"These delays were mainly due to logistical issues, scheduling conflicts, resource constraints, and unforeseen events," the COA report stated.

It said its audit team noted the underutilization of loan funds amounting to P29,574,536.06, which led to the incurrence of commitment fees for 2018 to 2024 of P37,405,299.46.

To recall, the Philippine government, through the Department of Finance (DOF), signed a loan agreement with the World Bank Group - International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) for the MMFMP1 on Sept. 28, 2017.

The loan would assist the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) in improving flood management in selected areas of Metro Manila.

The MMFMP Phase 1 consists of four components -- Modernization of Drainage Areas, Minimizing Dumped Solid Waste in Waterways, Participatory Housing and Resettlement, and Project Management and Coordination. The MMDA is the implementing agency for the second component and the co-implementor of the fourth component.

The COA said its audit team learned that 23 out of the 68 projects under MMFMP1 were completed, while 40 are still ongoing and five were not implemented due to failed bidding.

Among the completed projects, only 18 were finished within their original contract timelines, it said.

"While the justifications for the time extensions highlight a range of external and unforeseen factors, it appears that several of these issues could have been mitigated with more thorough planning and a meticulous evaluation of supplier and contractor capabilities," the COA said.

It also said: "Resource unavailability and scheduling conflicts could have been anticipated with better coordination and contingency planning. Additionally, a more rigorous review of prospective suppliers' and contractors' ability to meet project requirements -- considering factors such as inventory reliability and scheduling flexibility -- might have prevented delays caused by material shortages or conflicting timelines."

The COA said the MMDA should support the remaining phases of the project and pay continued attention to planning. The DPWH and MMDA should have clear communication channels and regular progress tracking as this would help address field-level challenges and support the timely completion of ongoing works, it also said.

At the same time, the COA asked them to define responsibilities, monitor progress, and identify implementation risks early, as well as make full use of the extended loan period so that the project delivers its intended benefits to target communities in a timely and efficient manner.

As for the underutilized funds, the COA said that commitment fees are standard in loan agreements. However, this only reflects "inefficiencies" in project execution.

It said: "This underutilization can be attributed to several factors, including delays in procurement processes and challenges in project planning and coordination among implementing units. These operational inefficiencies contributed to missed opportunities for timely fund utilization."

The COA then asked the MMDA to establish a robust monitoring system to track project progress and cash flow, which would enable quick identification of discrepancies and timely adjustments to timelines of funding requests as needed.