The Department of Public Works and Highway 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 “(enable) 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’s crafted not so much for the welfare of Filipinos but to advance the interests of lawmakers and high-ranking executive officials who have pocketed hundreds of millions of pesos in kickbacks. The result: Poorly planned and underfunded projects.
While much has been written about the massive payoffs from flood-control projects, there is little clarity on what are called “allocable” funds that the DPWH provides to congressional districts. These funds represent a new form of pork because, in the words of the 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 P1.2 trillion in “allocable” funds have gone to President Marcos’ son Ilocos Norte 1st District Rep. Ferdinand Alexander “Sandro” Marcos and cousin Leyte 1st District Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez.
The younger Marcos had been allotted P15.8 billion and Romualdez, P14.4 billion, for the past three years. In comparison, the remaining 251 district representatives in the previous Congress were each entitled to anywhere from P1 billion to P10 billion in allocables during that period, while some Duterte-allied legislators got nothing at all 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 DPWH undersecretary understands.
This means that Ilocos Norte’s 1st District, with a population of less than 320,000, got almost twice the P7.8-billion allocable of Rizal’s 1st District, the country’s 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 that is premised on poverty alleviation, disaster mitigation, and service provision.
But the truth is that 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 DPWH “pork” for district congressmen called “allocable.” Since 2023, President Marcos’ kin have gotten the bulk of allocable funds.
The term “allocable” has floated in numerous congressional hearings and caused confusion for lawmakers who have been trying to understand the DPWH budget under the Marcos administration.
Former DPWH undersecretary Maria Catalina Cabral explained that it is the “ceiling budget” that each engineering office gets and is based on a “parametric formula” that her chief, former secretary Manuel Bonoan, instructed her to make.
On Nov. 14, retired DPWH undersecretary Roberto Bernardo cut to the chase. Allocables are, in effect, district congressmen’s DPWH pork barrel allocations lodged in the National Expenditure Program or the “president’s budget.”
In the Philippine context, pork barrel refers to government funds over which a legislator has control; they’re intended for projects that in theory would benefit a lawmaker’s constituents. In 2013, in the wake of the Napoles scandal, which involved the funneling of some P10 billion in pork to nonexistent NGOs, the Supreme Court ruled pork barrel funds unconstitutional.
Allocables are the current form of pork barrel but with a difference: The total amounts are determined by the executive, rather than by the legislature, although lawmakers can decide how those amounts should be spent. Moreover, unlike the old pork, “allocables” are itemized and decided on by Congress before the budget is enacted, not after.
DPWH documents obtained and vetted by the PCIJ show that presidential son Sandro Marcos had the highest pork barrel amount among all district congressmen in 2025. His uncle, former House Speaker Rep. Romualdez, is second.
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 former House appropriations committee chair Rep. Elizaldy Co 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—be it roads, flood-control structures, or streetlights—sometimes exceeding the allocable amount, in the hopes 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,” former DPWH official 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 the end of the year, Congress passes the final version for approval by the president. Upon passage, it becomes the General Appropriations Act (GAA).
In the 2025 GAA, the five legislative districts which have the highest allocables in the NEP retained their share even after the 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 that survived in the 2025 GAA amounts to P356 billion from the original “ceiling” of nearly P402 billion.
The original ceiling for 2023 and 2024 were at P393 billion each, but PCIJ was not able to secure documents that provide a breakdown of the final allocable amounts for those years.
2. The “BBM Parametric Formula” supposedly determines the allocable amounts. Former 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. PCIJ obtained the DPWH document that details the so-called “BBM Parametric Formula” that has steered the department’s budget since 2023, the first year the Marcos administration had 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 that 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 Vivencio “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 that he can only do so in the 2027 budget.
“My problem with the 2026 budget is it’s no longer in our hands. And to be quite frank, I had zero part in that budget at all,” he said. “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.
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 which are local in nature.
But testimonies from former public works 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 revealed that they assisted party-list representatives, senators, and executive branch officials in inserting projects in the non-allocable portion of the NEP during the 19th Congress.
Alcantara, in particular, testified in 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.” The former DPWH official further said that 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 Senator Sherwin Gatchalian, who sponsored the DPWH budget in the Senate plenary on Nov. 25.
Navotas Rep. Tiangco, who has been outspoken about anomalies in the DPWH budget, put it this way: “Ang non-allocable, either DPWH yan or may nakabili na,” he told PCIJ.
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 wads of cash worth P579 million and presented to the House on Sept. 9.
This payoff was made by several contractors who were given contracts for DPWH projects that had been “inserted” into the budget by Rep. Elizaldy Co, according to Alcantara.
Still, 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 bicameral meetings—some projects get more, while the department’s “needed” projects get less and the rationale for why is 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 DPWH in the 2025 GAA. These totaled P732 billion, more than twice the amount of allocables.
PCIJ reached out multiple times to the DPWH to ask for a list of project sponsors of non-allocable projects in the past three years. Multiple times, they dodged our requests.
We then turned to lawmakers who have publicly divulged information about lawmakers and executive officials who allegedly inserted projects in the budget.
Tiangco, for instance, has partially shared Co’s insertions in the budgets of different provinces. Batangas Rep. Leandro Leviste said that he obtained the proponent list of all 2025 DPWH projects in the NEP. And in September, Sen. Panfilo “Ping” Lacson boldly claimed that nearly all senators had at least P100-billion worth of insertions in the 2025 GAA.
But all of them either refused to give out their lists or said that they would “have to double check.” Leviste, in particular, has been pressuring the DPWH itself to release proponent lists.
4. After the flood control scandal broke out, Congress proposed a 2026 budget that still has allocables, but no longer for flood control.
Around late August or early September, just weeks after the 2026 NEP was handed over to the House of Representatives and the country was being rocked by the flood-control scandal, there were fears that some P250 billion worth of fund-control projects for districts were going to be eliminated from the NEP.
To allay those fears, the House appropriations committee instructed congressmen how to submit “errata” that would convert their allocable funds to other projects besides flood control. This way, they could keep their allocable funds and avoid the risk of elimination.
Four types of project conversion tactics were suggested.
The first three “errata” options allow congressmen to change DPWH projects assigned to their allocable to other types of DPWH projects. The “type 4 errata” gives them the option to convert their OO2 or flood-control projects to other agencies.
Another slide enumerated these agencies.
Leviste told PCIJ that he has seen this presentation and that “it is the basis of the proposed 2026 budget.” Tiangco also shared that 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, a civil society organization, 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 multi-purpose buildings. Projects in agencies where other allocables were converted also experienced increases.
The Senate is now deliberating the budget and is expected to wrap up next week. In their plenary debate last Nov. 25, Sen. Loren Legarda claimed there are P400 billion worth of allocables, roughly the same amount as in the past three years. In addition, P100 billion worth of non-allocables are in the 2026 budget of the DPWH.
In December, representatives from both chambers are expected to meet at the bicam to reconcile differences in their versions of the 2026 budget. The bicam has historically been a secretive event.
Critics have clamored for an #OpenBicam to avoid surprise decisions on the budget made by legislators, and some lawmakers, including Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III, have expressed their openness to the suggestion.
Will Congress’ commitment to transparency go as far as disclosing how much pork each lawmaker and the executive is entitled 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.
Where can I access the documents used in this story?
We used the documents above to determine the allocables per legislative district in the 19th Congress. For non-allocables, we only used the first document. We have yet to clarify with sources what “New Items” in the first document entail, which is why these data points were not included the story.
Got story tips you want to share?
Got any story tips or documents you’d like to share? Contact us on Facebook (fb.com/pcijdotorg), Twitter (@PCIJdotorg), Instagram (@pcijdotorg), or email us at stories@pcij.org or gwenlatoza@pcij.org.