Financing for Equity in the Alternative Learning System: Evidence from the 2026 EDCOM II Reform

Abstract

The Alternative Learning System (ALS) plays a critical role in expanding access to education for out-of-school youth and adults in the Philippines. However, persistent governance and financing constraints continue to challenge the program’s capacity to deliver equitable learning opportunities. This study examines ALS financing within the context of the 2026 EDCOM II reform to understand how national and local funding mechanisms are structured to support program equity and implementation. The study employed a qualitative policy analysis using document review of official policy reports, fiscal allocations, and reform frameworks related to ALS financing. This study does not evaluate implementation outcomes, learner-level effects, or empirically observed program impacts, and is limited to policy-documentary analysis of financing structures and reform intent. Key sources included the FY 2026 proposed national ALS budget, formal EDCOM II reform documents, DEPED-DBM-DILG Joint Circular No. 1 (s. 2025) on the Special Education Fund (SEF), and related governance issues. A results-chain conceptual model was used to analyze the expected and policy derived relationships between financing inputs, intended program outcomes as reflected in policy logic, rather than empirically validated effects. The documentary analysis suggests that a significant portion of the ALS budget is allocated to direct learner subsidies, reflecting a learner-centered and equity-oriented financing design. Policy reforms under EDCOM II also introduce governance and financing mechanisms, such as decentralization, dedicated ALS budget lines, and SEF co-financing, designed to support more equitable resource allocation. However, persistent bottlenecks, including infrastructure gaps, uneven regional access, and service-delivery capacity constraints, may constrain implementation effectiveness. The study concludes that coordinated national and local financing mechanisms may provide enabling conditions for strengthening ALS implementation. Integrating Program Support Funds and SEF allocations may support more responsive resource distribution and locally responsive service delivery. The findings provide policy-documentary analysis that may inform ALS financing reforms and future efforts toward more equitable resource allocation.