Listen to the article
In a recent wave of social media activity, claims that Vice President Sara Duterte’s office has received the “highest Commission on Audit (COA) rating” for three consecutive years have been circulating widely across platforms. However, these assertions have been found to be misleading by fact-checkers who examined the actual audit process and official documentation.
Multiple viral posts, particularly one from a Davao City-based Facebook page called “News Ngayon” that garnered over 41,000 reactions, have framed the Vice President’s office as an exceptional performer in government financial management. The posts typically use definitive headlines such as “VP Sara, top audit performer for three years” and “VP Sara Duterte, recognized with top COA audit rating for three years,” suggesting official recognition of superior governance.
The Commission on Audit, however, does not issue “top ratings” or rank government agencies on any kind of performance scale. According to COA’s audit opinion guide, the commission only issues financial audit opinions that fall into two main categories: modified and unmodified opinions.
An unmodified opinion, sometimes called an “unqualified” or “clean” opinion, simply indicates that an agency’s financial statements are fairly presented as of the audit date. It does not represent a comprehensive evaluation of every aspect of an agency’s operations, program effectiveness, or compliance with all government regulations.
“It is important to note that the financial statements represent only a facet of an agency,” COA stated in a clarification, adding that “an audit opinion does not provide any conclusions on the agency’s level of compliance with laws, rules and regulations, nor the application of the principles of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the agency’s operations.”
While the Office of the Vice President did receive unmodified opinions for calendar years 2022, 2023, and 2024, this outcome is not unusual in government audits. Previous administrations of the OVP have also received clean audit opinions for consecutive years. The current streak does not constitute special recognition or indicate superior performance compared to other government agencies.
On December 4, the OVP released a statement acknowledging that its management officials had met with COA auditors during an exit conference on May 15, 2025, to discuss audit observations and recommendations. The statement emphasized that the audit did not identify any loss or misuse of government funds or property during calendar year 2024, and that “all issues raised were primarily administrative in nature.”
The misleading characterization of these routine audit opinions as “top ratings” creates a false impression of special recognition and potentially influences public perception of the OVP’s performance. Many social media users have been misled into believing these represent exceptional achievement, as evidenced by thousands of supportive comments praising the supposed streak of “top ratings.”
COA conducts various types of audits beyond financial reviews, including compliance and performance audits, which more directly address questions of operational efficiency, effectiveness, and regulatory compliance. These separate evaluations provide a more comprehensive picture of agency performance than the financial audit opinions alone.
The Annual Audit Reports for all national government agencies are publicly available on COA’s official website, allowing citizens to review the actual findings rather than relying on potentially misleading social media interpretations.
As social media continues to serve as a primary news source for many Filipinos, the mischaracterization of technical government processes like audits highlights the importance of media literacy and fact-checking in the public discourse surrounding government performance.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
14 Comments
This situation highlights the importance of scrutinizing claims, even when they come from high-ranking officials. While the VP’s office may have received positive COA assessments, the use of superlative language like “highest rating” seems misleading based on the information provided. Fact-checking is crucial for maintaining transparency and accountability in government.
Well said. No government entity, regardless of political affiliation, should be immune to factual scrutiny. Transparency and accuracy must be the priorities, even when it involves high-profile figures. Fact-checking is an essential safeguard for the public interest.
This situation highlights the need for rigorous, impartial fact-checking, especially when it comes to claims about government performance. While the VP’s office may have received positive audit assessments, the use of superlative language seems problematic. I hope the actual COA findings can be scrutinized and communicated transparently.
Agreed. Fact-checking is essential to counter misleading narratives, regardless of the political affiliations involved. The public deserves access to accurate, unbiased information about the workings of their government.
The discrepancy between the claims made about the VP’s office and the actual COA audit process is concerning. While positive assessments may have been given, the use of language like “highest rating” appears to be an exaggeration. Fact-checking is crucial to ensure transparency and accountability in government.
You’re absolutely right. Accurate, fact-based reporting is essential, especially for high-profile government entities. Inflating or misrepresenting audit results undermines public trust and can have serious consequences. Rigorous scrutiny is needed to uphold integrity.
The details around the COA audit ratings and how they are communicated seem murky. While the VP’s office may have received positive assessments, the use of terms like “highest” or “top performer” appears misleading based on the information provided. Fact-checking is important to ensure transparency.
You make a fair point. Nuance and precision in how audit results are presented is key, as exaggerated claims can undermine public trust. Clarity and accountability should be the priorities here.
It’s interesting to see the debate around the COA audit ratings for the VP’s office. While definitive claims of “top performance” seem misleading, the nuances of government audits can be complex. I wonder what the official COA assessment actually entailed and if there are any transparency issues to address.
You raise a fair point. Transparency around government audits and performance metrics is crucial for accountability. I hope the facts can be clearly established to resolve any confusion.
The discrepancy between the claims made about the VP’s office and the actual COA audit process is concerning. While positive assessments may have been given, the use of language like “highest rating” appears to be an exaggeration. Fact-checking is crucial to ensure transparency and accountability in government.
I agree completely. Accurate, fact-based reporting is essential, especially for high-profile government entities. Inflating or misrepresenting audit results undermines public trust and can have serious consequences. Rigorous scrutiny is needed to uphold integrity.
This seems like a tricky issue with competing narratives. It’s good that fact-checkers are looking into the claims made about the VP’s office and the COA audit process. Accurate and impartial information is important, especially for high-profile government entities.
Agreed. Scrutinizing claims and verifying information, especially around sensitive political topics, is vital for maintaining trust in public institutions. The public deserves clear, factual reporting on these matters.