Methodology — Receipts Or Nothing

If a name shows up in the Flood-Control Corruption List, it is because paper trails exist. We only include individuals or entities tied to official records that a reader can check in five minutes. The standard is simple: receipts, not rumor. This is how we keep government accountability front and center and push real anti-graft reforms, not clout posts.

Scope. A name must meet at least one of the following:

1. A filed case by the Ombudsman, DOJ, or Sandiganbayan.
2. A COA Notice of Disallowance or Notice of Charge explicitly naming responsible officials.
3. An AMLC freeze or seizure order that identifies persons of interest.
4. Inclusion on DPWH or PhilGEPS blacklists.
5. A court decision or plea bargain on related offenses.
6. Sworn testimony given under oath, backed by documents that corroborate the claims.

Language rules. Until a conviction, every person is “alleged” and every peso figure is labeled as “alleged” or “disallowed” per the document type. We cite exact amounts as written in official files, identify the court or agency, and include docket or control numbers. If a party issues a formal response, we summarize it and cite the source, because balanced reporting strengthens government accountability and builds durable anti-graft reforms.

Cutoff date. Each version of this list carries a verification date at the top so readers know how current it is. Entries are updated only after new documents land, like a filed information, a COA finality notice, an AMLC order, or a promulgated decision. If a case is dismissed, acquitted, or reversed on appeal, we mark the status clearly and keep the history visible for transparency.

Sources You Can Trust (And How To Read Them)

If you want receipts, you go straight to the paperwork. These are the places that keep the lights on for transparency and open procurement. Short guide below so you can pull the same files reporters and auditors use.

COA
Start with the Commission on Audit website. Look for the Annual Audit Reports by agency and region, then drill into the “Observations and Recommendations” sections for project variance notes. For cash findings, hunt the Notices of Disallowance or Notices of Charge, which list responsible officials, control numbers, and exact peso amounts. Pro tip: save the PDF, note the year and page number, and screenshot any project tables for your records. That is your baseline for transparency.

Ombudsman, DOJ, Sandiganbayan
The Ombudsman posts press bulletins and case summaries. DOJ carries filing announcements and resolutions. The Sandiganbayan publishes schedules, decisions, and case digests. Learn to read case numbers: they usually encode the year, division, and sequence so you can track progress. Cross-check names and docket numbers between these sites to avoid confusion and to support open procurement reforms with clean citations.

AMLC and BSP
For the money trails, the Anti-Money Laundering Council lists freeze or seizure orders and statistics on suspicious transactions. The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas publishes circulars and memos on cash-withdrawal rules and compliance updates. Note the dates and thresholds in each memo since banks apply those in real time. Pull both AMLC and BSP documents when you reference financial flows to keep your transparency airtight.

DPWH and PhilGEPS
This is where procurement meets reality. DPWH posts blacklists, bid awards, variation orders, and project status updates with contract codes and locations. PhilGEPS holds the bid notices, winning bidder details, and contract amounts. Match contract IDs across DPWH and PhilGEPS, then compare against COA variance notes. If the numbers or timelines do not match, you have a lead that points back to open procurement gaps.

Local courts and official gazettes
For decisions, writs, forfeiture, and settlement details, check the judiciary portals and official gazettes. Decisions spell out facts, exhibits, and amounts in a way audits cannot. Always extract the dispositive portion, date of promulgation, and the case title exactly as written. Archive copies offline so your transparency trail does not vanish if a page moves.

The Cases At A Glance — Matrix Of Names, Charges, Amounts, Status

Below is a receipts-only tracker you can embed as a single view. Keep it tight, factual, and easy to scan. This table updates as new filings land. It gives readers quick Manila protest facts context plus live case updates without drowning them in legalese.

Name	Position/Role	Case/Action	Project/Program	Amount (₱)	Current Status	Source link
[Pending disclosure]	Individuals & companies named in Court of Appeals freeze order	AMLC freeze order granted; assets covered	Flood-control contracts flagged in ongoing probe	—	Assets Frozen/Recovered	Link to CA/AMLC order PDF
[Not publicly named]	Legislators and contractors cited in sworn Senate testimony	Senate investigation referencing alleged 25% cuts	National flood-control packages under scrutiny	—	Investigated	Link to Senate hearing transcript
[To be updated]	Agency or district officials listed in COA ND/NC	COA Notice of Disallowance or Charge issued	Specific contract codes per COA report	[Exact per ND/NC]	Investigated	Link to COA AAR and ND/NC PDF
[To be updated]	Contractor entity on DPWH/PhilGEPS list	DPWH blacklist or show-cause; PhilGEPS award history	Contract ID, district, year	Contract value	Investigated	Link to DPWH blacklist and PhilGEPS entry
[Vacant until docketed]	Named respondent once DOJ files information	Violation of RA 3019 or related offense filed at Sandiganbayan	Contract ID, location	Amount in information	Charged	Link to DOJ filing or Sandiganbayan docket
[Vacant until arraignment]	Same as above	Arraignment scheduled; pre-trial orders issued	As charged	Amount in information	On Trial	Link to court calendar or order
[Vacant until decision]	Any convicted party	Decision promulgated; penalties and restitution stated	As charged	Amount per decision	Convicted	Link to decision PDF
[As applicable]	Any acquitted party	Case dismissed or acquittal rendered	As charged	—	Acquitted	Link to decision or order

Color-coding guide

• Investigated: 🟡
• Charged: 🟠
• On Trial: 🔵
• Convicted: 🔴
• Acquitted: 🟢
• Assets Frozen/Recovered: 🟣

How to keep this clean

• Every row must have at least one verifiable document link.
• Use exact titles from the PDF or court page.
• Copy peso figures exactly as written and note if they are “alleged,” “disallowed,” or “adjudged.”
• When a status changes, update the same row rather than creating a new one, then add a short footnote with the date of change.

Money Trails — From Budget To “Completed” Works

Follow the money like a commuter tracing a flooded shortcut. It starts as a GAA line item, turns into DBM SARO/NCAs, lands in DPWH work plans, then jumps to a contractor after bidding. The contractor mobilizes, sends billing, an office handles inspection, then payment leaves the treasury. On paper, that pipeline should scream open procurement. In real life, this is where ghost projects sneak in if no one is watching.

Leak points show up early. Scope can be sliced oddly so the same circle of firms keeps qualifying. Bid patterns repeat like a broken record, complete with duplicate addresses and identical typos across “competing” bidders. Prices suddenly spike for rebar or aggregates in one district while staying normal next door, hinting at a friendly markup. Later, phantom segments appear in reports, “completed” structures that inspectors cannot find, or lengths and widths that do not match the contract. If acceptance happens fast with a thin punch list, that is another red flag.

You can test the paperwork against the ground. Satellite imagery reveals if a dike or riprap actually exists. Drone surveys verify slope protection and dredging footprints. Geotagged photos show coordinates, dates, and angles that can be compared to plan sheets. COA variance notes add the boring but brutal detail, like quantities billed versus quantities observed. Stack those together and patterns emerge quickly.

Make this a habit. Match the contract ID across PhilGEPS, DPWH status pages, and COA tables. Check if the contractor pops up in nearby districts with the same office number or shared officers. Compare unit costs over time. Simple steps give citizens a clear view, and they push the system toward the open procurement standard we keep talking about. If a line item survives satellite, drone, geotag, and audit, good. If not, you might be staring at another ghost project.

Read next: Philippines Anti-Corruption Rally: What Went Down on Sept 21

Companies And Middlemen — Who Bids, Who Builds, Who Bills

Start with the paper trail. Pull SEC records and you’ll often see a web of shared officers, common addresses, or “sister” bidders that show up in the same tenders. That clustering is your first hint of procurement fraud because competition looks real on paper but fake in practice. When two or three firms share a director or a registered office, flag it and check their award history side by side. If the same cluster wins across districts, the pattern speaks louder than any press release.

Next, zoom into subcontracting. A prime wins the contract, then slices most of the work to subs who were “losing bidders” last week. Responsibility blurs, quality drops, and liquidated damages become a shrug. This is how paper compliance hides real-world failure. If a project goes south, the prime blames the sub while the sub points to the engineer’s variation order. Keep receipts so the contractor blacklist has teeth when regulators finally move.

Watch for the revolving door. Directors hop between companies every quarter, sometimes with identical email formats and reused phone numbers. Shell addresses appear in PO boxes or crowded co-working spaces with no yard, no equipment, no payroll. Pair that with serial lowball bids followed by chunky change orders and you get the classic squeeze: win cheap, bill rich. That combo is textbook procurement fraud.

Your checklist is simple. Map corporate links from SEC, compare bidders across tenders, and match office addresses to actual yards on Street View or site visits. Ask if the prime has equipment consistent with the scope and timeline. Track which names keep landing on the contractor blacklist and whether they quietly reincorporate under fresh paperwork. If the cast changes but the directors and addresses stay the same, alam mo na.

What’s Recovered So Far — Cash, Property, And Frozen Accounts

Let’s talk results, not vibes. The first scoreboard is asset recovery: how much cash is frozen or seized, which properties are under restraint, and what portion has been voluntarily returned. Keep a running tally with dates, the issuing body, and the exact peso amounts so readers see movement, not just noise. The second scoreboard is budget oversight: where the money actually goes once it is clawed back.

Where do recovered funds land. Two lanes usually apply. One, straight to the National Treasury as general revenue, logged with a receipt number and date. Two, into tightly controlled trust accounts earmarked to finish stalled works or repair botched segments. If the public wants outcomes, that second lane needs transparent ledgers: contract IDs, milestones, and periodic progress photos so pesos translate into actual concrete and flood protection.

Watch the gap between what is alleged and what is actually recovered. A headline might shout billions under probe, but the freeze orders and forfeiture judgments could show a much smaller number. Track three figures for clarity: total alleged exposure, total assets under restraint, and total amounts finally forfeited or returned. That simple trio keeps asset recovery honest and gives budget oversight real teeth.

Practical logging tips: list the order date, case number, account or property type, peso amount, and destination of funds. Add monthly updates that show changes in status, like a freeze converting to forfeiture, or a returned amount moving from Treasury to a project trust. If those lines do not budge for weeks, call it out. Pressure works best when the scoreboard is public and precise.

Timeline — Investigations, Indictments, Court Dates

Timelines keep everyone honest. Here’s a clean, no-nonsense chronology you can maintain as filings drop. It tracks the corruption probe from first audit flags to courtroom outcomes and feeds real policy reforms when patterns emerge.

Phase 1: Early Red Flags

• COA variance notes appear in Annual Audit Reports.
• Informal tips reach investigators; whistleblowers compile documents.
• Journalists and watchdogs map odd bid patterns and repeat contractors.

Phase 2: Formal Inquiries

• Senate or House committees open hearings and invite agencies, contractors, and auditors.
• Subpoenas for contracts, progress billings, variation orders, and inspection reports.
• First public testimonies referencing alleged cuts and ghost segments.

Phase 3: Financial Actions

• AMLC develops financial profiles; banks file suspicious transaction reports.
• Court of Appeals issues freeze orders on accounts and policies.
• BSP compliance checks roll out on large-cash withdrawals; banks log enhanced due diligence hits.

Phase 4: Administrative Moves

• DPWH reviews and suspends questionable awards.
• Blacklisting or show-cause orders for firms with repeat anomalies.
• Project audits expand to nearby districts with identical unit-cost spikes.

Phase 5: Case Building

• DOJ evaluates complaints and supporting affidavits.
• Ombudsman resolves fact-finding, upgrades to criminal cases when evidence clears threshold.
• Forensic site checks align geotagged photos, drone surveys, and billing quantities.

Phase 6: Indictments

• Informations filed at Sandiganbayan or regular courts with contract IDs and amounts.
• Warrants and travel hold orders when applicable.
• Press bulletins publish case numbers and scheduled arraignments.

Phase 7: Trial Track

• Arraignment dates set; pre-trial orders identify issues and witness lists.
• Testimony from engineers, accountants, and bidders; cross-exam on quantities and specs.
• Motions on admissibility of satellite imagery, drone footage, and audit worksheets.

Phase 8: Decisions and Recovery

• Decisions promulgated: conviction, acquittal, or dismissal.
• Civil recovery or forfeiture actions finalize; restitution amounts recorded.
• DPWH updates: canceled or rebid projects restart with stricter terms.

Phase 9: Policy Follow-through

• Committees publish reports recommending fixes to procurement rules.
• Agencies deploy open-data portals for contracts, unit costs, and progress photos.
• BSP and AMLC release compliance stats that show whether new controls bite.
• Congress folds lessons into the next GAA as targeted policy reforms.

Milestones to log on your public tracker

• Date of first COA note per district
• Date and number of each subpoena
• Date of each freeze order and peso amount covered
• Filing date of every information, case number, court, and accused
• Arraignment and trial dates
• Decision date and outcome; restitution amounts
• Funds remitted to Treasury or placed in project trust accounts
• Dates of blacklisting orders and rebids
• Release dates of commission reports and implementing circulars

Keep entries timestamped and source-linked. If a week goes by without movement at any phase, note the stall. Silence is a data point too, and that’s how a timeline becomes a tool for real corruption probe oversight and lasting policy reforms.

Red Flags For Readers — Spotting Ghost Projects Near You

You do not need a hard hat to spot sketchy work. Keep a short, savage checklist in your phone so citizen reporting stays tight and useful. These are simple protest tips that turn your walk home into quality control.

Quick checklist

• No project signboard with contract ID, contractor name, budget, and timeline
• Lengths or widths on-site do not match the plan posted on the signboard
• “Completed” works with no visible structure, fresh paint only, or missing sections
• Riprap or slope protection that crumbles after one rain
• Dredging claims with no spoil piles or hauling records nearby
• Identical signboards popping up across barangays with copy-paste details
• Acceptance or turnover ceremony days after mobilization, parang magic
• Safety gear absent, zero site logbook, and workers cannot name the foreman
• Unit costs that neighbors say are double the usual for gravel or rebar
• Fresh asphalt over potholes with no base repair, then cracks in a week

How to file a precise citizen report

1. Photos
   Take wide, medium, and close shots. Include the signboard, the structure, and a reference object like a jeep or school gate for scale.
2. Coordinates
   Open your phone’s map, drop a pin, and copy the latitude and longitude. Screenshot the map view.
3. Dates and time
   Note when each photo was taken. If work is ongoing, visit twice a week for two weeks.
4. Contract details
   Copy the contract ID, contractor name, budget, and target completion from the signboard. If missing, say “no signboard on site” in bold.
5. Measurements
   Pace the length and width or use a simple measuring app. Write your estimate and label it clearly as an estimate.
6. Description of the issue
   One or two sentences only. Example: “Riprap listed as completed but missing along 60 meters of the river bend behind Barangay Hall.”
7. Where to send
   • DPWH district office email or public help desk
   • COA regional office for the agency involved
   • Local government engineering office
   • Ombudsman complaint portal for potential graft
     Keep your tone factual and attach the photos, map screenshot, and a short note with contract ID.

Pro tips for stronger reports

• File once, then follow up after ten working days.
• Save everything in a shared folder so neighbors can add updates.
• If workers are on site, do not interfere. Photograph from a safe distance and public area.
• Blur faces of minors and plate numbers if not essential.
• Post a short community update only after you file through official channels.

These small habits make your report hard to ignore. With clean photos, coordinates, dates, and contract codes, your citizen reporting helps auditors, councils, and honest engineers separate real fixes from staged ribbon cuttings.

FAQs

Why some names aren’t listed yet
Because we only publish what’s backed by documents. If a wire story hints at suspects but the docket or COA Notice is not public, we hold the name. That keeps the piece clean and fair. Readers get Manila protest facts plus verifiable records, not hearsay. When agencies release filings, we add them with links.

What counts as a verified amount
Amounts come from official paperwork. Examples include COA Notices of Disallowance or Charge, informations filed at Sandiganbayan, AMLC freeze or forfeiture orders, and final court decisions. We copy the peso figures exactly as written and label them alleged, disallowed, or adjudged. This protects the integrity of the list and supports real anti-corruption reforms.

How often the list will be updated
We update when new documents drop. That includes fresh COA notices, filed informations, court rulings, AMLC orders, DPWH blacklists, or official commission reports. Each update shows the date of verification at the top. If a case is dismissed or reversed, we mark it clearly and keep the history visible for accountability.

H2: Conclusion — Names Matter, But Evidence Wins

• Remind readers: the goal is accountability, not trial by social media.
• Invite readers to submit verifiable documents and links for review.
  (Keywords: good governance, accountability)

Conclusion — Names Matter, But Evidence Wins

Names get clicks, but accountability needs receipts. The goal is good governance that survives courtrooms, audits, and time. So we publish only what documents can carry, label every peso properly, and update when rulings change the story. That discipline protects innocent people and makes real cases stick. Hype fades; evidence holds.

Help us keep it tight. If you have verifiable documents — COA notices, Ombudsman or DOJ filings, Sandiganbayan decisions, AMLC or BSP orders, DPWH blacklists, PhilGEPS pages — send exact links and PDFs. Include dates, docket or control numbers, and the contract IDs so we can review fast. The cleaner the submission, the faster it lands here. That is how citizens and reporters tag-team accountability without turning justice into a thread fight.

Last ask: share this receipts-only approach with your circles. Demand sources in every convo, resist chismis, and reward outlets that publish documents, not vibes. When readers expect proof by default, good governance stops being a slogan and starts looking like finished projects, clean books, and officials who answer to the public. Receipts or wala.