The Office of the Ombudsman has filed a complaint against Commission on Higher Education (CHED) Chairperson Shirley C. Agrupis and four other CHED officials for administrative misconduct and graft in relation to the termination of multiple degree programs at campuses that are part of a significant private higher education network.
Agrupis is named in the complaint along with her chief of staff and three regional directors who are in charge of CHED operations across the nation. They are accused in the complaint of serious misconduct, oppression, and behavior that is detrimental to the service's best interests, in addition to violating Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
The complaint claims that in early March 2026, CHED issued resolutions directing the closure or phase-out of multiple degree programs on three network campuses, citing non-compliance with regulations pertaining to faculty, facilities, and program administration. The organization in charge of the impacted campuses claims that it did not challenge the closures. The complaint focuses on CHED's handling of the public rollout, specifically a series of advisories that were posted on CHED's official website and Facebook pages, naming the impacted campuses directly and allowing public comments.
The complaint claims that the advisories were misinterpreted by the public as indicating a shutdown of the entire institution nationwide, rather than just a few programs at three of its approximately 150 campuses, because the campuses operate under a single, well-known brand. Students, parents, and partner institutions who thought the entire system was closing reportedly called campus administrators in other parts of the network in a panic.
The complaint further claims that between late April and early May 2026, the institution, through its representative, sent three different written appeals to Chairperson Agrupis, requesting that CHED coordinate an orderly transition and postpone further public dissemination while the issue was resolved. There was reportedly no meaningful response to any of the letters—just an automated acknowledgment. The complaint claims that in spite of these requests, CHED re-published the advisories on Facebook in the middle of May, this time with comments enabled, worsening what the organization claims to be financial and reputational harm during a crucial enrollment period.
According to the complaint, the ensuing harm was substantial enough to prompt the institution's bank to inquire, garner media attention, and result in missed enrollment opportunities that might be challenging to fully recover.
The complaint makes a more general claim that CHED has applied its regulatory standards inconsistently, going beyond how it handled its own case. It cites a lawmaker's public remarks and earlier news reports showing that hundreds of teacher education programs across the country were marked for closure due to their performance on the licensing exam, but they did not receive the same prompt, public attention as the campuses at the heart of this complaint. The complainant contends that the public, forceful action in one instance and the relative inaction in others are proof of bias in and of themselves.
The institution has taken legal action in addition to the Ombudsman complaint. In addition, it has filed a separate complaint with the Anti-Red Tape Authority regarding CHED's purported failure to reply to its appeals. It has also filed an injunction case in a trial court in Quezon City in an attempt to halt the advisories' continued distribution and obtain ₱20 million in moral damages.










.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)








