CHED Faces Structural Challenges in Higher Education Governance
MANILA, Philippines — The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) is currently grappling with significant structural challenges that limit its ability to fulfill its original mandate, the agency’s new leadership revealed during a recent congressional hearing. The key issues include governance gaps, data deficiencies, and organizational constraints that undermine the commission’s oversight of the country’s tertiary education system.
Newly appointed CHEd Chair Shirley Agrupis candidly acknowledged these hurdles before the Second Congressional Commission on Education (Edcom 2). She explained that the complexity of higher education governance stems from the intricate provisions of Republic Act Nos. 7722 and 8292, which outline CHEd’s mandate and the roles of state university and college officials. “The ideal academic setup insists that if, and only if, these laws are properly studied, implemented, and monitored, challenges would be minimal,” Agrupis said.
Data and Coordination Gaps Hamper CHEd’s Role
Agrupis, who assumed office on June 11, admitted that CHEd currently suffers from the lack of demand-driven and nationally coordinated human capital strategies. The commission lacks a centralized database that thoroughly analyzes industry and government needs, which complicates effective policymaking. This shortfall in data management prevents CHEd from aligning higher education outputs with labor market demands.
According to sources involved in the national education sector review, CHEd has not designated any new centers of excellence since 2016. Moreover, it has not provided support for voluntary accreditation programs since 2020, further stalling the advancement of institutional quality standards. Edcom 2 executive director Karol Yee pointed out, “Despite its clear mandate since 1994, many of CHEd’s objectives remain unfulfilled. Excellence is still low, and support to higher education institutions is insufficient.”
Governance and Structural Limitations
Former CHEd Director Amelia Biglete highlighted the commission’s dual role dilemma. “CHED was expected to fulfill both regulatory and developmental functions. The regulatory role was particularly challenging because CHEd is not a quasi-judicial body,” she said. Attempts to impose sanctions often resulted in legal challenges, including cases brought before the Ombudsman and courts.
Biglete also noted the commission’s struggle with monitoring institutions due to a lean organizational structure heavily reliant on contract-based staff. This staffing model limits CHEd’s capacity to conduct thorough oversight and enforcement activities.
Ongoing Charter Review and Future Outlook
The assessment of CHEd forms part of a broader charter review process conducted by Edcom 2 throughout July. The commission, co-chaired by senators and representatives, will also evaluate the charters of the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (Tesda) on July 10 and the Department of Education (DepEd) on July 17.
These evaluations aim to identify gaps and propose reforms to strengthen the country’s education agencies, ensuring they can effectively meet national development goals.
For more news and updates on higher education governance, visit Filipinokami.com.