​A study commissioned by the Second Congressional Commission on Education (Edcom 2) found that while many higher education institutions have adopted affirmative action policies, implementation remains uneven, and support continues to be inconsistent across student groups. ​Affirmative action—defined as proactive measures such as quota systems, reserved slots, bridging programs, or adjusted admissions criteria—plays a critical role in leveling the playing field for students from low-income households, Indigenous communities, persons with disabilities, and other marginalized groups, particularly in an increasingly competitive higher education system. ​The study, authored by JC Punongbayan and Jefferson Arapoc and titled “Affirmative Action in Philippine Higher Education Institutions: Evidence from a New Survey,” found that 77 percent of state universities and colleges (SUCs) report having at least one affirmative action policy. In comparison, 45 percent of private higher education institutions (HEIs) report similar policies, while only 43 percent of local universities and colleges (LUCs) report implementing such measures. ​The findings are based on a survey of 529 higher education institutions nationwide. While Republic Act 10931, or the Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act (UAQTEA), has successfully removed tuition barriers, the study found that several disadvantaged groups continue to face deterrents in accessing college, especially students who face historical, social, and structural disadvantages that shape who gains entry into higher education. ​Under Section 7 of RA 10931’s implementing rules and regulations, all SUCs and LUCs are mandated to “formulate and implement affirmative action programs to enhance access of disadvantaged students,” despite the absence of clear implementation guidelines from UniFAST since 2018. ​The study noted that across all institution types, socioeconomic disadvantage remains the most common basis for affirmative action. However, it underscored that inclusivity sharply declines for other marginalized groups. ​“Particularly, policies and programs intended to support learners with disabilities, and those affected by conflict and disasters, in their pursuit of higher education, remain limited. Likewise, support for gender minorities remains below 50 percent coverage across most institution types,” Edcom 2 said. ​The findings, Edcom added, point to a system where affirmative action exists largely in principle, but coverage and depth remain uneven, leaving many vulnerable groups with limited support. ​The study also found that 78 percent of SUCs and 74 percent of LUCs report conducting outreach to disadvantaged students prior to admission. However, student awareness of affirmative action policies remains low. Only 55 percent of SUCs reported that most students are aware of such policies, with awareness declining to 40 percent in LUCs and 45 percent in private HEIs. ​It also noted the role of entrance examinations, which are nearly universal in public HEIs but required by only about half of private institutions. The study found that institutions requiring entrance exams are more likely to implement affirmative action policies, as formal gatekeeping mechanisms create the need for equity measures such as adjusted cutoff scores or reserved slots. ​“However, the study also warns that entrance exams may be a double-edged sword, often serving as major barriers for disadvantaged students who lack access to test preparation and academic support,” Edcom added. ​The study identified weaknesses in long-term support and monitoring, as well as the lack of outcome tracking. More than half of the surveyed institutions do not monitor graduation or labor market outcomes of students admitted through affirmative action, making it difficult to assess whether these policies lead to completion, employment, and upward social mobility. ​Edcom 2 Executive Director Karol Mark Yee called on the Commission on Higher Education and the Unified Student Financial Assistance System for Tertiary Education to develop a comprehensive policy on affirmative action. ​He urged them to regularly collect data focusing on transitions and available pathways for these learners, and to work with public and private colleges and universities to ensure programs are in place so students with disabilities, those from ethnic minorities, and those affected by conflict and disasters are not left out. ​“As we improve participation and completion in higher education, it is imperative to ensure that no learner is left behind—especially students who have faced multiple hurdles to complete high school and now access higher education,” Yee said.