Road signs or disaster prep? State auditor, town clash

ILOILO CITY — The Commission on Audit (COA) has questioned the local government of Anilao, Iloilo, for using its disaster funds for the fabrication and installation of at least 22 traffic safety signs, saying the expenditure should have been funded through the town’s general fund.

In its 2025 audit findings, state auditors said the project was not directly related to disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM) activities and could deplete resources intended for critical disaster preparedness and emergency response.

Anilao included an allocation of PHP 300,000 in its Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (MDRRMP) for “Additional Early Warning/Hazard Signages.”

Audit records show that actual disbursements reached PHP 288,390 across three transactions in 2025.

These included PHP 248,920 paid on June 25 for the fabrication of the signs, PHP 22,870 disbursed on Sept. 8 for construction materials, and PHP 16,600 paid on Oct. 8 for installation labor.

The audit team examined supporting documents covering 22 sets of installed signs, including “Slow Down School Zone Ahead,” “Slow Down Pedestrian Crossing Ahead,” and “Slow Down Blind Curve Ahead.”

COA declared the inclusion of the signage project in the MDRRMP improper, citing Section 21 of Republic Act 10121, or the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010, and Joint Memorandum Circular 2013-1 of the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council, the Department of Budget and Management, and the Department of the Interior and Local Government.

Section 21 of the 2010 law renamed the local calamity fund as the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (LDRRMF).

The joint guidelines mandate that local disaster funds be strictly allocated among four thematic areas: disaster prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response, and rehabilitation and recovery.

COA said that while early warning systems qualify under disaster prevention and mitigation, standard traffic signs are routine traffic control devices regulated under Department of Public Works and Highways and Land Transportation Office standards.

It noted that these signs do not detect or communicate impending disaster events and therefore fail to serve as a genuine early warning system contemplated by disaster management laws.

COA ruled that the project should have been funded through the town’s general fund rather than its LDRRMF.

“The inclusion of [projects] outside the prescribed thematic areas of DRRM, as well as the charging of non-disaster-related expenditures against the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (LDRRMF), reduced the funds available for legitimate disaster preparedness and response initiatives,” COA said.

“Better planning and prioritization of eligible DRRM activities would have enabled more effective use of the LDRRMF in strengthening community resilience and disaster preparedness,” it added.

The LDRRMF finances the activities detailed in the MDRRMP.

Local government units are required to set aside not less than 5% of their estimated regular revenues for the LDRRMF.