FORMER National Housing Authority (NHA) general manager Chiot Cruz and rank-and-file employees of the shelter agency have failed to convince the Commission on Audit to lift notices of disallowance (NDs) issued against in 2014 against their cash rewards totaling P58.61 million in January 2013 to June 2014.
The COA Commission Proper denied the petition for review filed by the NHA personnel seeking reversal of the June 2, 2015 ruling of the COA Corporate Government Sector that affirmed the NDs.
Other than Cruz, also held liable by the audit team were Assistant General manager Froilan Kampitan, Human Resource manager Elvira Sabado, Accounting manager head Prudencia Gugol, Finance manager Wilma Hernandez, and Treasury manager Fe Valenzuela.
The appellants argued that the grant of “program administration fee (PAF)” was allowed under the Administrative Code of 1987 as an incentive to government employees who have performed extraordinary acts or services in the interest of the public.
Likewise, they said the payout was part of NHA’s implementation of its Program on Awards and Incentives for Service Excellence (PRAISE) under the Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) between the management and the employees’ union.
They also invoked good faith, saying they honestly believed they were receiving what is due them under the rules hence there should be no requirement for them to refund the cash incentives.
The COA said the petition for review has no merit.
It pointed out that the Administrative Code of 1987 was very clear that PRAISE should only be given in recognition of employees whose work contributed to the efficiency, economy and improvement of government operations through extraordinary effort or performance of service.
But since the NHA gave the same reward to all of its personnel, including non-permanent hires, it could not justify the payment as part of PRAISE.
Since the payment of cash rewards was not limited to who rendered exemplary service, the cash stipend took the form of additional benefit that required prior approval of the Office of the President.
Furthermore, it was contrary to the guidelines that CNA should be sourced only from savings generated from the agency’s Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE).
“NHA divided the CNA incentives into several allowances and granted the benefits in varying dates without showing that these were sourced from the savings of the released MOOE,” the COA pointed out.
Sweeping aside the claim of good faith, the COA insisted that all who received sums from the program administration fee must refund the sum in full as required by law.
“The obligation to refund the payment received falls upon both those directly responsible, i.e., the approving officers, and those who actually received the disallowed benefit,” it stressed.
The commission, however, cleared disbursing officers Raymond Abad, Danilo Gonzales, Alejandro Nuevas, Evelyn Balais, Avelina Lleva, Julieta San Gabriel, and Ma. Melani Abasola, who were originally included in the list of NHA executives held liable. They are only required to return the amount received as stipends.
