Illustration by Tintin P. Lontoc

“AB/BS Org, Minor in Course” is a common joke among many Ateneans—such means that one commits more time and energy to extracurricular activities than to academics. There is truth to this adage. It is said that the college experience is not complete without membership in a student organization. Certainly, students are able to learn in orgs what normally cannot be taught within the confines of a classroom.

Although students form the core of an organization, an org’s finances dictate the activities that it can or cannot do. Student organizations recognized by the university are financed through the Student Activities Fund (SAF), which is handled by the Office of Student Affairs (OSA). The SAF is collected from students at the beginning of every semester as part of the basic fees during enrollment. This semester’s SAF currently stands at P462.45.

One would be mistaken to think, though, that an organization’s source of finances is solely its semestral budget allocation. OSA Director Christopher Castillo explained in a previous interview with The GUIDON that his office’s Financial Management System provides at least six other avenues for the sustainment of an organization’s financial needs.

Such avenues include subsidies for an organization’s publication projects, seminars, external conferences and competitions, and even emergency funding. Although a lack of funding has not necessarily been a problem for organizations, there is a growing clamor among students for greater transparency with regard to the SAF.

Disclosure

In an article previously published in The GUIDON, Christian Union for Socialist and Democratic Advancement (Crusada) Premier Brian Llamanzares brought up his concern that “the OSA never fully discloses to [students] how much is in the SAF,” and that there should be consultations held to increase the budget for orgs.

Student legislators from Crusada had recently filed a resolution called the “Freedom of Information Bill,” which would compel the Sanggunian to ask for a full disclosure of the details of the SAF, including the exact amount.

Sanggunian Finance Officer Billie Dumaliang says that it is likely the offices responsible are willing to cooperate. “I think this [is] the norm… [to maintain confidentiality], but from recent talks I believe the administration is willing to disclose the SAF details within the school year.”

“I think it might be the other offices who handle the budget who have not been giving us the breakdown of SAF,” says School of Social Sciences Chair Toni Potenciano, who is also a member of Crusada. “But as per my opinion on the matter, I do believe that OSA should come up with some kind of public statement in response to the students’ requests regarding the SAF.”

Sufficiency

So far, the Sanggunian has not received direct complaints from org finance officers, or any concern regarding a lack of funds.

Dumaliang says that “the question here is not of wants, but of needs,” and that there is no information yet to conclude that orgs have less money than what is needed. She continues, “[This second] semester, I propose that we conduct a study with stakeholders to find out if this need really exists. If yes, then we shall discuss and implement SAF redistribution mechanisms which the disclosure of SAF details will allow.”

“The ‘complaints’ I’ve received were never formal in nature, but were mostly my friends griping about the mad rush to find sponsors and other ways of getting money, especially with the SEI issue dampening everyone’s day,” says Potenciano, bringing in the issue of the Student Entrepreneurship Initiative—a policy put forth by the administration that implements a ban on non-student-owned enterprises in Loyola Schools bazaars.

Last June 23, a discussion about the SEI was held, presided over by Council of Organizations of the Ateneo (COA) President Gigi de Villa, about possible recommendations on the policy.

Ateneo Musicians’ Pool (AMP)’s Finance Officer Michael Avendano shares the logistics behind spending for projects and the difficulties that come with such responsibilities. He says that money was not a big issue three years ago, when AMP was undergoing a rebuilding period.

“But now, since we’re trying to expand the scales of our projects, an increase in subsidy is needed to ensure quality events,” he says.

Sanggunian cap

Another proposal by Llamanzares is for the implementation of a cap on the Sanggunian budget so that, ideally, more funds can be distributed to orgs. Dumaliang’s stand on the matter is that the proposal is reasonable only “if [the Sangguinian is] able to conclude that the orgs really do need a base-level budget increase.”

However, Llamanzares asserts that the orgs can better utilize the funds than the Sanggunian. “We believe that the organizations do indeed put their funding to better use by specifically addressing the concerns of their niche constituencies.” He elaborates on how many orgs handle more projects than the Sanggunian and yet the SAF is not as accessible to them as it is to the student government.

“The bill in itself was a wake-up call asking [the Sanggunian] to uphold their duty to create more socially relevant projects and be more efficient with their ability to access funds readily. If not, then the organizations of Ateneo have a right to those funds.”

Potenciano clarifies that there are already caps on many of the Sanggunian’s expenses, but adds that if putting a cap on the Sanggunian’s budget is to push through, the issue must return to disclosure of the SAF.

“If [putting a budget cap] would ultimately lead to OSA redistributing money to organizations, then definitely, [it should be done]. However, there is no assurance—if one caps the Sanggunian budget—that the money will be redistributed, which is why we need to see the breakdown of funds,” she explains.

Criticisms of Boost

Llamanzares has also previously criticized Boost, another financial support system launched last July, stating that it would put financial officers through further unnecessary hassle. Boost weaves together the subsidy and grant systems of the OSA, the Sanggunian and COA.

“Pragmatically speaking, Boost is highly inefficient because it delays and even endangers the execution of org activities because of all the red tape involved in it, such as the rigorous application process, the time needed for the application period, and different ‘steps,’” Llamanzares says. “Moreover, it is highly inconsistent. What if a big project is 100% subsidized this year, and then the following year other projects will be preferred to it and subsidized instead? What will happen to the project?”

Potenciano, as both a Sanggunian officer and a member of Crusada, says that she knows of the rationale of both sides.

“While I do agree with my premier [that], perhaps, this red tape to access funds is unnecessary, I do maintain that the grant system, albeit not the best, is there to ensure that we do not just give money to anyone. To make it clearer, I do believe that organizations deserve more funding, but the current system of the grant is in place so that we don’t give money (which is still part of the same SAF) to just any group of people requesting money.”

Dumaliang responds to the criticisms made against the grant system by saying that Boost was launched in order to ultimately protect the best interests of the students.

She says that the Boost system was made to cater specifically to orgs that need financial support more than others. “So the premise of the Boost system is that not all orgs need additional financial assistance, but some definitely do.”

She continues, “Given the data that we currently have, I believe the Boost system is the proper response to urgent financial issues. It’s not perfect, and yes, there are processes to go through, but that is the only way to ensure that the money goes precisely to who needs it the most.”

“Again, if we conclude after data-gathering and analysis that all orgs do really need a base-level budget increase, then I’m sure the Sanggunian will be willing to participate in redistribution and even capping discussions,” she says.

Dumaliang assures that once there is conclusive research showing that all orgs across the board need a base-level budget increase, then the Sanggunian would be more open to discuss fund redistribution and budget capping.

Welfare

Amidst the different arguments offered by Crusada and the Sanggunian regarding the Boost system and the proposed budget cap, it is clear that the primary concern will always be that of the orgs.

“After all, we only want what is best for our constituents, most of whom are part of orgs,” says Dumaliang.

Llamanzares clarifies that his main concern is transparency and redistribution, and not simply increasing the SAF.

“Our point is not to increase the SAF but to know how much is in it so that we could be able to work with what we have. Knowing how much is in the SAF will help us push for a plan that would increase the budget of organizations.”