# DepEd Preliminary Investigation, Formal Charge and Answer

A prima facie finding after investigation leads to a formal charge. DO 49: answer in at least 72 hours, waiver after 5 days; 2025 RACCS: 3 to 10 days.

This is the Markdown copy of [DepEd Preliminary Investigation, Formal Charge and Answer](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-preliminary-investigation-formal-charge), an article on the NASH Reviewer Blog by Mark Anthony Llego, published Oct 31, 2026, updated Nov 4, 2026. Topics: School leadership, Aspiring school heads. NASH Reviewer is an independent practice platform not affiliated with DepEd, BHROD, or NEAP.

Once a sworn complaint against a DepEd teacher or school head is found sufficient, the disciplining authority has it investigated in a preliminary investigation, which [DepEd Order No. 49, s. 2006](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2006/12/12/do-49-s-2006-revised-rules-of-procedure-of-the-department-of-education-in-administrative-cases-amended-by/) (DO 49) also calls a fact-finding investigation (Secs. 8(c) and 9). If the investigation finds a *prima facie* case, a formal charge follows, and the respondent answers it in writing and under oath. DO 49 directs an answer "in not less than seventy-two (72) hours from receipt" (Sec. 10) and treats none "within five (5) days from receipt" as a waiver (Sec. 14); the [2025 Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service](https://csc.gov.ph/phocadownload/userupload/paio/2025_ORAOHRA_AND_RACCS/2025_RACCS_19_September.pdf) (2025 RACCS) allow "not less than three (3) days but not more than ten (10) days from receipt" (Sec. 26). An answer within the period the charge states, and no later than five days from receipt, meets both.

Both texts are in force on October 31, 2026, and DepEd's 2026 orders cite both. [DO 007, s. 2026](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2026/03/25/march-25-2026-do-007-s-2026-media-management-guidelines/) says DO 49 and the 2025 RACCS "also apply" in cases "involving the use of social media" (Sec. VI.2); [DO 018, s. 2026](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2026/07/21/july-21-2026-do-018-s-2026-guidelines-on-the-accreditation-of-civil-society-organizations-or-nongovernment-organizations-for-school-building-construction-projects/) names both for its violators (Sec. VII, item 4.0); and [DO 006, s. 2026](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2026/03/24/march-24-2026-do-006-s-2026-guidelines-on-ensuring-a-safe-and-motivating-learning-environment-esmle/) points investigations of school personnel in adult-to-learner cases to DO 49 (Annex A). No rule or decision says which prevails where they differ. The 2025 RACCS is CSC Resolution No. 2500357, in force since August 4, 2025.

For teachers, including school heads, the disciplining authority is the Regional Director or the Secretary (DO 49, Sec. 1); see [Who Disciplines DepEd Teachers and School Heads?](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-disciplining-authority-teachers-school-heads) The hearing and decision are in [Formal Investigation and Decision in DepEd Cases](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-formal-investigation-decision).

## Key findings

- **The 2025 RACCS has no fact-finding stage;** its preliminary investigation is "a mandatory proceeding" (Sec. 21). DO 49 (Secs. 8(c) and 9), DO 40, s. 2012 (Sec. 16(A)) and DO 006, s. 2026 (Sec. VII.A.2(b)) still speak of fact-finding.
- **Investigation periods.** DO 49: start within 5 days of the investigator's receipt of the appointing order, end within 30 days (Sec. 9(e)); 2025 RACCS: start within 5 days of the disciplining authority's receipt of the complaint, end within 20, extendible (Sec. 23).
- **The counter-affidavit** is due 3 days from receipt of the investigator's order (DO 49, Sec. 9(a)) or 5 days from receipt of the complaint (2025 RACCS, Sec. 22(a)); silence is a waiver under both.
- **The answer:** "not less than seventy-two (72) hours", with a waiver after "five (5) days" (DO 49, Secs. 10 and 14), or 3 to 10 days, paused until requested documents arrive (2025 RACCS, Sec. 26). No rule says which prevails, but a sworn answer within the period the charge states, and no later than five days from receipt, meets both.
- **Motions do not replace an answer.** DO 49 treats a dilatory motion "as an answer" (Sec. 12); the 2025 RACCS notes it "without action" (Sec. 28).
- **Preventive suspension.** DO 49 allows it for listed charges (Sec. 15) or to prevent undue influence (Sec. 16); the 2025 RACCS requires both, "stated and substantiated in the preventive suspension order" (Sec. 34). Only the disciplining authority or, under the RACCS, its authorized representative orders it (DO 49, Sec. 15; 2025 RACCS, Sec. 33), and a CSC appeal within 15 days is the remedy both allow (DO 49, Sec. 19; 2025 RACCS, Sec. 38).

## The early stages at a glance

Table 1 quotes each text. The two often count from different events.

*Table 1. Periods from a sufficient complaint to the answer*

| Step | DO 49, s. 2006 | 2025 RACCS |
|---|---|---|
| Investigator named | "within ten (10) days from receipt of the complaint" (Sec. 8(c)) | No period; the disciplining authority "may create an investigating committee or designate an investigator" (Sec. 15) |
| Investigation starts | "not later than five (5) days from receipt by the investigator(s) of the Order of the disciplining authority appointing him/them" (Sec. 9(e)) | "within a period of five (5) days upon receipt by the disciplining authority of the complaint" (Sec. 23) |
| Counter-affidavit | "within three (3) days from receipt of the said Order" (Sec. 9(a)) | "within five (5) days from receipt of the complaint" (Sec. 22(a)) |
| Investigation ends | "within thirty (30) days thereafter" (Sec. 9(e)) | "within twenty (20) days thereafter"; extendible "in meritorious cases" (Sec. 23) |
| Report | "Within five (5) days from the termination" (Sec. 9(f)) | "Within five (5) days from the termination" (Sec. 24) |
| Formal charge | No period (Sec. 9(g)) | No period (Secs. 25 and 26) |
| Answer | "not less than seventy-two (72) hours from receipt" (Sec. 10); waiver if none "within five (5) days from receipt" (Sec. 14) | "not less than three (3) days but not more than ten (10) days from receipt" (Sec. 26) |

**The investigation periods** (rows 2 and 4). DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS. An investigation that starts within five days of the disciplining authority's receipt of the complaint and ends within 20 days of that receipt meets both texts, before any extension.

**Counting the days.** The 2025 RACCS excludes the first day and includes the last "unless it be a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday or a special non-working day, in which case the period shall run until the end of the next working day" (Sec. 151). DO 49 has no general counting rule; its periods are in "days", except Sec. 10's "seventy-two (72) hours" and Sec. 18's "ninety (90) calendar day period" of preventive suspension.

The [series guide](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-administrative-cases-grievances-guide) charts the whole case under both texts.

## Fact-finding or preliminary investigation?

**Under DO 49, they are one stage with two names.** The investigator appointed under Sec. 8(c) "shall conduct fact-finding investigation or preliminary investigation", every step in Sec. 9 applies under either name, and the investigation begins with an order "requiring the person complained of to submit" a counter-affidavit (Sec. 9(a)).

**Under the 2025 RACCS, there is no fact-finding stage.** The phrase does not appear in it. On a sufficient complaint, "the disciplining authority shall conduct a preliminary investigation to determine the existence of a *prima facie case*", and it "may create an investigating committee or designate an investigator for such purpose" (Sec. 15). The preliminary investigation "is a mandatory proceeding" (Sec. 21). A case the disciplining authority starts itself begins with a show-cause order (Sec. 22); see [How to File an Administrative Complaint in DepEd](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-administrative-complaint-filing).

**DepEd orders still say "fact-finding".**

- [DO 40, s. 2012](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2012/05/14/do-40-s-2012-deped-child-protection-policy/), the Child Protection Policy: the school head or SDS forwards a complaint against personnel to the disciplining authority "within forty-eight (48) hours" of receiving it, and the disciplining authority orders a fact-finding investigation "not later than seventy-two (72) hours from submission" (Sec. 16(A)). That investigation follows DO 49 (Sec. 16(C)).
- DO 006, s. 2026: the fact-finding report reaches the school head "within 10 calendar days" (Sec. VII.A.2(b)), without saying from when, and the order does not settle who conducts the fact-finding when school personnel are complained of. It "does not amend or repeal" DO 40 (Sec. III). See [Sexual Harassment and Child Abuse Complaints in DepEd](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-sexual-harassment-child-abuse-complaints).
- [DO 11, s. 2012](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2012/02/01/do-11-s-2012-authority-and-guidelines-on-the-hiring-of-legal-consultants/) lets Regional Directors and SDSs hire a legal consultant to "assist in fact-finding and/or formal investigation committees" (Enclosure, item 3(b)).

For school personnel, both DO 40 (Sec. 16(C)) and DO 006 (Annex A) send the investigation to DO 49. In [*Gaoiran v. Alcala*](https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/assets/dtSearch/dtSearch_system_files/dtisapi6.dll?cmd=getdoc&DocId=47142&Index=%2a4aeb4dbdcceeda9b59b85ae3fb22cec0), G.R. No. 150178, November 26, 2004 (Second Division), on a head teacher at a state-supervised college, the Supreme Court held that an unsworn letter-complaint "merely triggered a fact-finding investigation", and that a formal charge initiated by the disciplining authority "need not be subscribed and sworn to"; see [Preventive Suspension, Appeals and Back Pay for Principals](https://nash.com.ph/blog/principal-preventive-suspension-appeal-back-pay).

## Counter-affidavit and clarificatory conference

DO 49's steps (Sec. 9(a) to (d)):

1. **The order,** with the complaint attached, to submit a sworn counter-affidavit or comment "within three (3) days from receipt of the said Order". "Failure of the person complained of to submit his Counter-Affidavit shall be considered as a waiver thereof."
2. **A conference,** where the investigator "may propound clarificatory questions", recorded in minutes signed by the parties "and their counsels, if any".
3. **An *ex parte* review** of the parties' documents and "the documents readily available from other government offices".

The 2025 RACCS offers three modes (Sec. 22): a counter-affidavit or comment "within five (5) days from receipt of the complaint which is sufficient in form and substance"; a "Clarificatory meeting with the parties to discuss the merits of the case"; or "*Ex-parte* evaluation of the records." Silence is again "a waiver of the right to submit the same", and "The right to counsel may be exercised even during the preliminary investigation."

**Where they differ.** DO 49 always begins with a counter-affidavit order due in three days from the order (Sec. 9(a)); the RACCS makes the counter-affidavit one of three modes, due in five days from the complaint (Sec. 22). DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS.

An investigator who requires a counter-affidavit uses a mode both texts provide. For the person complained of, a sworn counter-affidavit filed within three days of receiving the investigator's order, which DO 49 requires to carry the complaint (Sec. 9(a)), is also within the RACCS's five days from receipt of the complaint (Sec. 22(a)). If the complaint reached you earlier, count the three days from that earlier date. Write down both dates.

## The investigation report and the prima facie test

Within five days after the investigation ends, the investigator submits the records and a report with findings and recommendations to the disciplining authority (DO 49, Sec. 9(f); 2025 RACCS, Sec. 24). The RACCS adds: "The Investigation Report shall be confidential and in no case shall a copy thereof be given to any other person/party." DO 49 makes no provision for giving the person complained of a copy.

**The test for a formal charge.**

- **DO 49, Sec. 9(g):** "If a prima facie case is established during the investigation, a formal charge shall be issued by the Disciplining Authority. A *prima facie case* shall mean that there is reasonable ground to believe that the respondent is probably guilty of the charge/s against him, and should be investigated accordingly."
- **2025 RACCS, Secs. 4(gg) and 25:** a *prima facie* case is one "where the evidence is sufficient to establish a given fact, or the group or chain of facts constituting the party's claim or defense and which if not rebutted or contradicted, will remain sufficient". If one is established, the disciplining authority "may issue either a formal charge or a notice of charge".

DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS.

**No prima facie case.** "In the absence of a *prima facie case*, the complaint shall be dismissed." (2025 RACCS, Sec. 25; see also Administrative Code, Book V, Sec. 48(2)) Except in sexual harassment cases, that dismissal cannot be appealed to the CSC (Sec. 98(b)).

**No deadline for the charge.** Neither text sets a period between the report and the formal charge (DO 49, Sec. 9(g); 2025 RACCS, Secs. 25 and 26).

**Names change at the charge:** the "person complained of" becomes the "respondent" (2025 RACCS, Sec. 4(ff) and (oo)), and the case is now pending (Sec. 55).

## Formal charge and notice of charge

**Who issues it.** The disciplining authority, for teachers the Regional Director or the Secretary (DO 49, Secs. 1 and 9(g)), or under the RACCS "the disciplining authority or its authorized representative" (Sec. 26); never the school head.

*Table 2. Contents of a formal charge*

| Element | DO 49, Sec. 10 | 2025 RACCS, Sec. 26 ("mandatory requirements") |
|---|---|---|
| The charge | A specification of the charges | A specification of the charges, or the acts or omissions |
| Facts and evidence | A brief statement of facts, with certified true copies of documents and sworn statements, if any | A brief statement of facts, which "may be accompanied by" legible duplicates or certified true copies and affidavits |
| Answer | "not less than seventy-two (72) hours from receipt thereof" | "not less than three (3) days but not more than ten (10) days from receipt thereof" |
| Formal investigation | Advice to say whether one is elected | Advice to say whether one "is demanded" |
| Counsel | Notice of the right to "a counsel of his choice" | Advice that the respondent "may opt to be assisted by a counsel" |

**Documents.** Under the RACCS, the respondent may ask, within the period to answer, for documents behind the charge "which were not previously sent", and "The period to file an answer does not begin to run until the respondent receives a copy of the requested documents." (Sec. 26) DO 49 has no such rule; it lets the respondent "submit additional evidence" (Sec. 11). Where someone other than the disciplining authority filed the complaint, the Administrative Code requires the notice of the charges to attach "copies of the complaint, sworn statements and other documents submitted" (Book V, Sec. 48(2)); ask in writing for any that are missing.

For teachers, [Republic Act No. 4670](https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1966/ra_4670_1966.html), the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, sets a floor: "the right to be informed, in writing, of the charges", "the right to full access to the evidence in the case", and "adequate time being given to the teacher for the preparation of his defense" (Sec. 8(a) to (c)). It sets no number of days.

**Name the offense precisely.** A RACCS suspension needs a charge specifying a Sec. 34(a) offense, such as "Serious Dishonesty"; where a negligence or dishonesty charge does not specify its gravity, "the Commission is not precluded from evaluating the allegations specified in the formal charge for purposes of determining the gravity thereof" (Sec. 35).

**The notice of charge.** The 2025 RACCS adds a document DO 49 does not have. When someone other than the disciplining authority filed the complaint, and a *prima facie* case is found after *ex parte* evaluation of the records, the disciplining authority issues a written notice of the charge (Sec. 27). It states "that a *prima facie case* exists", attaches the supporting documents and "a copy of the complaint", and gives the same 3-to-10-day directive to answer; the clock again waits for requested documents.

## Answering a formal charge: at least 72 hours, 5 days or 3 to 10 days

**The periods, and what silence means.**

- **DO 49, Sec. 10:** the formal charge contains "a directive to answer under oath the charge(s) in writing in not less than seventy-two (72) hours from receipt thereof".
- **DO 49, Sec. 14:** "If the respondent fails or refuse to file his Answer to the Formal Charge within five (5) days from receipt thereof, he shall be considered to have waived his right thereto and the Formal Investigation may commence."
- **2025 RACCS, Sec. 26:** a "Directive to answer the charge in writing, under oath, in not less than three (3) days but not more than ten (10) days from receipt thereof", with the clock paused for requested documents.
- **2025 RACCS, Sec. 31:** failure to answer "within the prescribed period under Rule 5 of these Rules shall be considered as a waiver of the right to submit the same. The case shall then be decided based on available records."

DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS.

Both respect the statute's floor: the respondent "shall be allowed not less than seventy-two hours after receipt of the complaint to answer the charges in writing under oath" ([Administrative Code of 1987](https://lawphil.net/executive/execord/eo1987/eo_292_1987.html), Book V, Sec. 48(2)).

One answer date fits both texts: a sworn answer filed within the period the formal charge states and, in any case, within five days of receipt. DO 49 treats no answer within five days as a waiver (Sec. 14). The RACCS's minimum is three days, and its pause for requested documents only adds time; it does not make an earlier answer late (Sec. 26). Request any missing documents in writing in the same filing (Sec. 28), and note the date and hour you received the charge.

**What the answer contains.** Both texts agree: in writing, under oath and specific, with the facts, defenses, documents, witnesses' statements and laws relied on, and a statement on whether you elect a formal investigation (DO 49, Sec. 13; 2025 RACCS, Sec. 29). Under the RACCS, serve a copy on the complainant with proof of service; without it, an answer may be refused or deemed not filed, and a mailed answer is filed on the date on the envelope, courier pack or registry receipt (Sec. 54).

**What happens next.** A satisfactory answer means "the case shall be dismissed" (2025 RACCS, Sec. 30); the Administrative Code says the disciplining authority "shall dismiss the case" (Book V, Sec. 48(2)); without an election of a formal investigation, "the case may be decided based on available records" (Sec. 30). Under both texts, a formal investigation is still held when the case "cannot be decided judiciously without" one (DO 49, Sec. 20; 2025 RACCS, Sec. 40; Administrative Code, Book V, Sec. 48(3)); see [Formal Investigation and Decision in DepEd Cases](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-formal-investigation-decision).

## Motions you cannot file, and where to raise a forum objection

*Table 3. Prohibited pleadings*

| | DO 49, Sec. 12 | 2025 RACCS, Sec. 28 |
|---|---|---|
| Not entertained | "dilatory requests for clarification, bills of particulars, or motions to suspend proceedings on account of a pending court case in the absence of a temporary restraining order or injunctive writ" | "requests for clarification, bills of particulars, motions to dismiss, motions to quash, motions for reconsideration, motions for extension of time to file answer, or any similar request or motion" |
| Allowed | Not stated | "the respondent's answer and/or request for a copy of the documents referred to in Sections 26 and 27" |
| Effect if filed | "the same shall be considered as an answer and shall be evaluated as such" | "The same shall be noted without action and attached to the records of the case." |

DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS.

One course satisfies both: a sworn answer that contains every defense and objection, and no separate motion. Under DO 49, a request for clarification, a bill of particulars or a motion to suspend for a court case would be evaluated as your answer; under the RACCS, it would be noted without action, and nothing in Sec. 28 stops the answer period.

A pending court case does not stop the administrative case without "a temporary restraining order or injunctive writ" (DO 49, Sec. 12). And except in sexual harassment cases, the "Issuance of a formal charge or other interlocutory orders, except orders placing a respondent under preventive suspension" cannot be appealed to the CSC (2025 RACCS, Sec. 98(c)). Your answer is where you contest the charge.

**Objecting to the forum.** Raise it in your first pleading: in a DepEd case, your counter-affidavit and then your answer, since a motion to dismiss is not entertained (2025 RACCS, Sec. 28); before the Ombudsman, your counter-affidavit. Principals who took part and objected only after losing have been held estopped; see [Can the Ombudsman Discipline a Principal? RA 4670 Cases](https://nash.com.ph/blog/ombudsman-deped-jurisdiction-principals). The RA 4670, Sec. 9 committee is in [Formal Investigation and Decision in DepEd Cases](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-formal-investigation-decision).

## Mediation of light offenses

Some complaints can end before a formal charge.

- **[DO 15, s. 2012](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2012/02/17/do-15-s-2012-deped-policy-framework-for-the-implementation-of-the-alternative-dispute-resolution-adr-system-mediation/)** allows mediation of complaints that "fall under light offenses where the corresponding penalty is reprimand pursuant to Section 58 of DepEd Order No. 49, s. 2006", and lists 17, including willful failure to pay just debts (Enclosure, Sec. 4(1)). It excludes sexual harassment, child abuse and VAWC cases, "Motu propio cases" and "Anonymous complaints" (Sec. 4(2)).
- **The 2025 RACCS** allows settlement "only in complaints for light offenses where the act is purely personal" and with "no apparent injury to the government", and names two: "Borrowing Money By Superior Officers From Subordinate" and "Willful Failure to Pay Just Debts". "Complaints for sexual harassment shall not be subject to mediation and settlement." (Sec. 75) The preliminary investigation "shall be suspended during the mediation" (Sec. 77).

DO 006, s. 2026 still lists DO 15 among the issuances school investigation protocols must follow (Sec. VII.A.4). DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS.

Mediation of a first complaint for one of the two offenses the RACCS names fits both texts when a private complainant filed it (not an anonymous or *motu proprio* complaint) and the act is purely personal, with no apparent injury to the government. Neither text allows mediation of sexual harassment. Settlement of unpaid loans is in [Can a Teacher Be Charged for Unpaid Loans in DepEd?](https://nash.com.ph/blog/teacher-unpaid-loans-just-debts-administrative-case)

## Preventive suspension after the formal charge

Preventive suspension "is not a punishment or penalty, but a measure of precaution" (2025 RACCS, Sec. 32). It comes only with or immediately after a formal charge or, under the RACCS, a notice of charge (DO 49, Sec. 15; 2025 RACCS, Sec. 34) and lasts at most 90 days in a national agency such as DepEd (2025 RACCS, Sec. 37; DO 49, Sec. 18; Administrative Code, Book V, Sec. 52). Reinstatement, pay, back wages and the cases are in [Preventive Suspension, Appeals and Back Pay for Principals](https://nash.com.ph/blog/principal-preventive-suspension-appeal-back-pay); this section covers procedure.

### Who may order it

- **DO 49, Sec. 15:** "Upon motion of the complainant or Motu Proprio, the proper Disciplining Authority may issue an Order of Preventive Suspension". For teachers and school heads, that is the Regional Director or the Secretary (Sec. 1).
- **2025 RACCS, Sec. 33:** "the proper disciplining authority or its authorized representative, upon motion or *motu proprio*". A delegation should be in an "Office/Board Resolution or Order and duly signed by the disciplining authority". In sexual harassment cases, the disciplining authority "may delegate its power to the CODI"; see [Sexual Harassment and Child Abuse Complaints in DepEd](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-sexual-harassment-child-abuse-complaints).

A complainant may ask for a suspension by motion under both texts, and an order signed by the disciplining authority itself meets both. A school head does not issue one.

### The grounds under each text

- **DO 49, Sec. 15:** charges involving "a. Dishonesty", "b. Oppression", "c. Grave Misconduct", "d. Neglect in the Performance of Duty; or" "e. If there are reasons to believe that the respondent is guilty of charges which would warrant his removal from the service." **Sec. 16:** "An Order of Preventive Suspension may also be issued by the Disciplining Authority to temporarily remove the respondent from the scene of his misfeasance or malfeasance and to preclude the possibility of exerting undue influence or pressure on the witnesses against him or tampering of documentary evidence on file with his Office."
- **2025 RACCS, Sec. 34:** a charge involving "Serious Dishonesty", "Oppression", "Grave Misconduct", "Gross Neglect in the Performance of Duty", "Other offenses punishable by dismissal from the service", or a dismissal-level second or third offense; **and** "The respondent is in a position to exert undue influence or pressure on the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence", as where the respondent "has employees under his or her direct supervision whom he or she could influence and utilize in his or her favor". Then: "Thus, in order for a preventive suspension order to be valid, the following must concur: (1) the formal charge or notice of charge must specify any of the offenses in Item (a); and (2) the appropriate circumstance or justification in Item (b) must be stated and substantiated in the preventive suspension order."

DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS.

An order that rests on a charge listed in RACCS Sec. 34(a), and that states and substantiates an undue-influence circumstance, satisfies both; each offense in Sec. 34(a) has a counterpart in DO 49's Sec. 15. The gap runs the other way: simple neglect of duty fits DO 49's "Neglect in the Performance of Duty" but not the RACCS's "Gross Neglect in the Performance of Duty".

DO 40, s. 2012 adds a ground for child-abuse cases: 90 days "if the injury or abuse committed against a child is so grave, as to render the child unable to attend his or her classes" (Sec. 16(C)). It is not among the RACCS Sec. 34 grounds; see [Sexual Harassment and Child Abuse Complaints in DepEd](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-sexual-harassment-child-abuse-complaints).

### What the order must state

DO 49 prescribes no contents. Under the RACCS, the order states and substantiates the undue-influence circumstance (Sec. 34), and it is invalid if issued "by one who is not authorized by law", "without a formal charge or notice of charge, or with a defective formal charge or notice of charge", or if "not premised on any of the conditions under Section 34" (Sec. 39(a)). The RACCS also bars a second order after a shorter one lapses: the disciplining authority "is precluded from imposing another preventive suspension" (Sec. 37). DO 49 is silent on this.

### Reassignment instead of suspension

- **DO 49, Sec. 17:** "In lieu of Preventive Suspension, for the same purpose, the proper disciplining authority or head of office, may reassign respondent to other units of the agency during the formal hearings."
- **2025 RACCS, Sec. 36:** "the proper disciplining authority or its authorized representative may reassign the respondent to another unit of the agency after the issuance of the formal charge subject to the same periods" as preventive suspension.

DO 49 does not define "head of office". A reassignment ordered by the disciplining authority meets both texts, so a school head who thinks a charged teacher should be moved should write to the disciplining authority, not move the teacher alone. Under the RACCS, a respondent reassigned before the formal charge should not then be suspended "unless the conditions enumerated in Section 34 subsist" (Sec. 36). See also [Can a Principal Be Reassigned to Another School?](https://nash.com.ph/blog/principal-reassignment-transfer-oic-tenure)

### Leave

DO 49 defers the suspension while the respondent is on "Maternity/Paternity Leave" until "said leave has been fully enjoyed" (Sec. 18). The RACCS defers it for any "authorized leave" until "said leave has been fully exhausted" (Sec. 37). Deferring it during maternity or paternity leave satisfies both.

### Challenging the order

- **DO 49, Sec. 19:** "The respondent may file a Motion for Reconsideration with the disciplining authority or may elevate the same to the Civil Service Commission by way of an Appeal within fifteen (15) days from receipt thereof." DO 40 repeats this for child-abuse cases (Sec. 16(C)).
- **2025 RACCS, Sec. 38:** an appeal to the CSC "within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the preventive suspension or reassignment order", or within 15 days from receipt of the decision in the main case. "A motion for reconsideration from the preventive suspension order shall not be allowed." One filed anyway "shall neither stay the execution of the said order nor stop the running of the reglementary period to appeal."

DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS.

An appeal to the CSC filed within 15 days from receipt of the order satisfies both texts; a motion for reconsideration alone does not. Meanwhile the order "is executory unless a Temporary Restraining Order is issued by the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court" (Sec. 38). A complainant cannot appeal a "Denial of a motion to place the respondent under preventive suspension", except in sexual harassment cases (Sec. 98(d)).

### What the school does when an order arrives

1. **Check the order.** It comes from the disciplining authority, or under the RACCS its authorized representative, with or immediately after a formal charge or, under the RACCS, a notice of charge (DO 49, Sec. 15; 2025 RACCS, Secs. 33 and 34). Forward a complainant's motion, or a parent's request, to suspend a teacher to the disciplining authority in writing; the school head does not decide it.
2. **Record the dates** of receipt and service, the period, and any leave the teacher is on; report the leave to the disciplining authority in writing (DO 49, Sec. 18; 2025 RACCS, Sec. 37).
3. **Carry it out as written** and plan coverage for the classes; an appeal or motion does not stop it (2025 RACCS, Sec. 38).
4. **Treat the teacher as not guilty,** and give the case no publicity (2025 RACCS, Sec. 32; RA 4670, Sec. 8; DO 49, Sec. 40).
5. **Watch the end date;** reinstatement and delay are covered in [Preventive Suspension, Appeals and Back Pay for Principals](https://nash.com.ph/blog/principal-preventive-suspension-appeal-back-pay).

## What this means for school heads

**If you are the person complained of, or the respondent:**

1. **Record every date of receipt:** the complaint, the investigator's order, the formal charge (with the hour) and any suspension order.
2. **File a sworn counter-affidavit within three days of receipt,** with affidavits and documents; silence is a waiver (DO 49, Sec. 9(a); 2025 RACCS, Sec. 22).
3. **Answer under oath within the period the charge states and no later than five days from receipt,** with every defense and objection, not in a motion; say whether you elect a formal investigation, and serve a copy with proof of service (DO 49, Secs. 12 to 14; 2025 RACCS, Secs. 26, 28, 29 and 54).
4. **Request missing documents in the same filing, and consult a lawyer early** (2025 RACCS, Secs. 22, 26 and 28).
5. **If suspended, appeal to the CSC within 15 days of receipt,** comply meanwhile, and stay away from the witnesses (DO 49, Sec. 19; 2025 RACCS, Secs. 34 and 38).

**If a teacher in your school is the subject:**

1. **You are not the disciplining authority.** Do not investigate unless appointed (DO 49, Sec. 9(a)), and do not issue charges or suspensions (DO 49, Secs. 1 and 15; 2025 RACCS, Secs. 26 and 33). Nor reassign a charged teacher in lieu of suspension: DO 49, Sec. 17 also names an undefined "head of office", but RACCS Sec. 36 names only the disciplining authority or its authorized representative, so write to the disciplining authority.
2. **Forward complaints.** Send a learner's complaint against personnel to the disciplining authority within 48 hours of receiving it (DO 40, s. 2012, Sec. 16(A)); see [Child Protection and Anti-Bullying for School Heads](https://nash.com.ph/blog/child-protection-anti-bullying-school-heads) and [What a School Head Does When a Complaint Arrives](https://nash.com.ph/blog/school-head-complaint-steps-deped).
3. **Give the investigator what is asked for,** and log what you gave and when.
4. **Keep the case confidential** (RA 4670, Sec. 8; DO 49, Sec. 40), carry out orders as written, and refer questions to your Schools Division Office's legal unit.

Related guides: [school HR management](https://nash.com.ph/blog/school-head-human-resource-management), [ethics and internal control](https://nash.com.ph/blog/school-head-ethics-internal-control), [PPSSH Domain 2](https://nash.com.ph/blog/ppssh-domain-2-managing-school-operations) and [PPSSH Domain 4](https://nash.com.ph/blog/ppssh-domain-4-developing-self-and-others).

## How the NASH may test this

The two items below are original practice items, scored 3 (Relational), 2 (Multistructural), 1 (Unistructural) or 0 (Prestructural). An option that breaks a rule scores 0.

### Question 1

*Indicator 2.4.1, Management of staff. Career Stage 1, Situational, Moderate.*

The Regional Director has formally charged Teacher A, who keeps the reading program's attendance records, with grave misconduct on a co-teacher's complaint. No preventive suspension order has been issued. The co-teacher asks you to stop Teacher A from reporting for work, saying Teacher A might alter the records. What is the most appropriate action?

- **A.** Tell Teacher A to stay home on leave until the case is decided, so that the records are protected.
- **B.** Tell the co-teacher that only the disciplining authority may suspend a charged teacher, and let Teacher A continue working.
- **C.** Explain that a preventive suspension, or a reassignment in its place, is for the disciplining authority, here the Regional Director, to order, not the school head, and that the co-teacher may ask for one by motion; report the concern about the records to the Regional Director in writing; and keep Teacher A at work, with the case confidential, until an order arrives.
- **D.** Tell the co-teacher to file a motion for preventive suspension with the Regional Director, and keep Teacher A at work meanwhile.

**Answer and explanation**

**Best answer: C.** Points: A = 0, B = 1, C = 3, D = 2.

- **A (0 points, Prestructural).** Sending a charged teacher home is a step the rules give to the disciplining authority, not the school head.
- **B (1 point, Unistructural).** It states who may suspend but does nothing about the concern.
- **C (3 points, Relational).** It links who orders a suspension, the complainant's route, the facts the school head knows, and confidentiality.
- **D (2 points, Multistructural).** The route is right, but the school head's own knowledge goes unreported and confidentiality is ignored.

**Why.** This aligns with Career Stage 1 expectations because indicator 2.4.1 asks the aspiring school head to know the laws and issuances on managing school staff. The disciplining authority, for teachers the Regional Director or the Secretary, orders a preventive suspension on a complainant's motion or on its own (DO 49, s. 2006, Secs. 1 and 15), and the 2025 RACCS lets its authorized representative do so (Sec. 33). DO 49 gives a reassignment in place of suspension to "the proper disciplining authority or head of office" without defining "head of office" (Sec. 17), and the RACCS to the disciplining authority or its authorized representative (Sec. 36), so the school head writes to the disciplining authority rather than acting alone. The risk to the evidence must be "stated and substantiated in the preventive suspension order" (Sec. 34), so the facts must reach the Regional Director.

*Indicator 2.4.1: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of laws, policies, guidelines and issuances on managing school staff.*

*Sources: DepEd Order No. 49, s. 2006, Secs. 1, 15 and 17; 2025 RACCS (CSC Resolution No. 2500357), Secs. 33, 34 and 36.*

### Question 2

*Indicator 4.7.1, General welfare of human resources. Career Stage 1, Conceptual, Moderate.*

The Regional Director formally charged Teacher B with grave misconduct and, in a separate order received the same day, placed Teacher B under preventive suspension for 90 days. The order names the charge but gives no reason to believe that Teacher B could influence witnesses or tamper with evidence. Which statement about Teacher B's options is most accurate?

- **A.** Teacher B may return to class at once, because an order that gives no such reason is void and need not be obeyed.
- **B.** Teacher B may appeal the order to the Civil Service Commission within 15 days from receipt.
- **C.** Teacher B may ask the Regional Director to reconsider within 15 days, and wait for the ruling before deciding whether to appeal.
- **D.** Teacher B may appeal to the Civil Service Commission within 15 days from receipt, pointing out that the order does not state and substantiate the undue-influence circumstance the 2025 RACCS requires; the order is carried out meanwhile.

**Answer and explanation**

**Best answer: D.** Points: A = 0, B = 2, C = 1, D = 3.

- **A (0 points, Prestructural).** It breaks the rule: the order is executory pending appeal unless the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court restrains it.
- **B (2 points, Multistructural).** The remedy and period are right, but it names no ground and does not say the order stays in effect.
- **C (1 point, Unistructural).** DO 49 allows the motion, but the RACCS bars it and does not let it stop the 15 days, so waiting for a ruling loses the appeal from the order itself (Sec. 38).
- **D (3 points, Relational).** It uses the remedy both texts allow, ties it to the missing ground, and states the order's effect.

**Why.** This aligns with Career Stage 1 expectations because indicator 4.7.1 asks the aspiring school head to know the rules on the rights of school personnel. DO 49, s. 2006 allows a motion for reconsideration or a CSC appeal within 15 days (Sec. 19). The 2025 RACCS allows the appeal only, says a motion "shall neither stay the execution of the said order nor stop the running of the reglementary period to appeal", and keeps the order executory pending appeal (Sec. 38). It also requires the order to state and substantiate the undue-influence circumstance (Sec. 34).

*Indicator 4.7.1: Display knowledge of laws, policies, guidelines and issuances on the rights, privileges and benefits of school personnel to promote their general welfare.*

*Sources: DepEd Order No. 49, s. 2006, Sec. 19; 2025 RACCS (CSC Resolution No. 2500357), Secs. 34, 38 and 39.*

Nothing in this guide reproduces or predicts examination content.

## Frequently asked questions

### How many days do I have to answer a formal charge in DepEd?

DO 49, s. 2006 directs an answer "in not less than seventy-two (72) hours from receipt" (Sec. 10) and treats no answer within "five (5) days from receipt" as a waiver (Sec. 14); the 2025 RACCS directs one "in not less than three (3) days but not more than ten (10) days from receipt", paused until requested documents arrive (Sec. 26). DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS. An answer filed within the period stated in the charge, and no later than five days from receipt, meets both.

### Is a fact-finding investigation the same as a preliminary investigation?

Under DO 49, yes: Secs. 8(c) and 9 use both names for one stage. The 2025 RACCS has no fact-finding stage; its preliminary investigation is "a mandatory proceeding" (Sec. 21).

### Can I file a motion to dismiss instead of an answer?

The 2025 RACCS notes motions to dismiss, bills of particulars and similar motions "without action" (Sec. 28). DO 49 does not list motions to dismiss but treats dilatory requests for clarification and bills of particulars "as an answer" (Sec. 12). A sworn answer that contains every defense and objection meets both texts.

### Can I ask the Regional Director to reconsider a preventive suspension order?

DO 49 allows a motion for reconsideration or a CSC appeal within 15 days of receipt (Sec. 19), while the 2025 RACCS bars the motion and says it does not stop the appeal period (Sec. 38). DepEd's 2026 orders treat both as in force, and no rule or decision says which prevails. If the case reaches the CSC on appeal, the CSC applies the 2025 RACCS. An appeal to the CSC within 15 days of receipt satisfies both.

## Sources

**DepEd issuances**

- [DepEd Order No. 49, s. 2006](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2006/12/12/do-49-s-2006-revised-rules-of-procedure-of-the-department-of-education-in-administrative-cases-amended-by/), Revised Rules of Procedure of the Department of Education in Administrative Cases, December 12, 2006 (rules dated December 4, 2006), Secs. 1, 8(c), 9 to 20 and 40.
- [DepEd Order No. 11, s. 2012](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2012/02/01/do-11-s-2012-authority-and-guidelines-on-the-hiring-of-legal-consultants/), Authority and Guidelines on the Hiring of Legal Consultants, February 1, 2012, Enclosure, item 3(b).
- [DepEd Order No. 15, s. 2012](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2012/02/17/do-15-s-2012-deped-policy-framework-for-the-implementation-of-the-alternative-dispute-resolution-adr-system-mediation/), DepEd Policy Framework for the Implementation of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) System-Mediation, February 17, 2012, Enclosure, Sec. 4.
- [DepEd Order No. 40, s. 2012](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2012/05/14/do-40-s-2012-deped-child-protection-policy/), DepEd Child Protection Policy, May 14, 2012, Sec. 16(A) and (C).
- [DepEd Order No. 006, s. 2026](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2026/03/24/march-24-2026-do-006-s-2026-guidelines-on-ensuring-a-safe-and-motivating-learning-environment-esmle/), Guidelines on Ensuring a Safe and Motivating Learning Environment, March 24, 2026, Secs. III, VII.A.2(b) and VII.A.4, and Annex A.
- [DepEd Order No. 007, s. 2026](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2026/03/25/march-25-2026-do-007-s-2026-media-management-guidelines/), Media Management Guidelines, March 25, 2026, Sec. VI.2.
- [DepEd Order No. 018, s. 2026](https://www.deped.gov.ph/2026/07/21/july-21-2026-do-018-s-2026-guidelines-on-the-accreditation-of-civil-society-organizations-or-nongovernment-organizations-for-school-building-construction-projects/), Guidelines on the Accreditation of Civil Society Organizations or Nongovernment Organizations for School Building Construction Projects, July 21, 2026, Sec. VII, item 4.0.

**Laws and rules**

- [2025 Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service](https://csc.gov.ph/phocadownload/userupload/paio/2025_ORAOHRA_AND_RACCS/2025_RACCS_19_September.pdf), CSC Resolution No. 2500357, promulgated April 30, 2025, in force August 4, 2025, Secs. 4(ff), 4(gg), 4(oo), 15, 21 to 40, 54, 55, 75 to 77, 98 and 151.
- [Republic Act No. 4670](https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1966/ra_4670_1966.html), Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, June 18, 1966, Sec. 8.
- [Executive Order No. 292](https://lawphil.net/executive/execord/eo1987/eo_292_1987.html), Administrative Code of 1987, Book V, Title I, Subtitle A, Secs. 48(2), 48(3) and 52.

**Supreme Court decision**

- [*Gaoiran v. Alcala*](https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/assets/dtSearch/dtSearch_system_files/dtisapi6.dll?cmd=getdoc&DocId=47142&Index=%2a4aeb4dbdcceeda9b59b85ae3fb22cec0), G.R. No. 150178, November 26, 2004 (Second Division).

*This guide explains DepEd and Civil Service Commission rules for study and professional awareness. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult a lawyer or your Schools Division Office's legal unit.*

## The administrative cases and grievances series

- [DepEd Administrative Cases and Grievances: DO 49 and DO 35](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-administrative-cases-grievances-guide)
- [Who Disciplines DepEd Teachers and School Heads?](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-disciplining-authority-teachers-school-heads)
- [How to File an Administrative Complaint in DepEd](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-administrative-complaint-filing)
- DepEd Preliminary Investigation, Formal Charge and Answer (this post)
- [Formal Investigation and Decision in DepEd Cases](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-formal-investigation-decision)
- [DepEd Administrative Offenses and Penalties in 2026](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-administrative-offenses-penalties)
- [Can a Teacher Be Charged for Unpaid Loans in DepEd?](https://nash.com.ph/blog/teacher-unpaid-loans-just-debts-administrative-case)
- [DepEd Grievance Machinery: Steps and Time Limits](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-grievance-machinery-do-35)
- [Grievance or Administrative Case? Where to File](https://nash.com.ph/blog/grievance-or-administrative-case-deped)
- [Sexual Harassment and Child Abuse Complaints in DepEd](https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-sexual-harassment-child-abuse-complaints)
- [What a School Head Does When a Complaint Arrives](https://nash.com.ph/blog/school-head-complaint-steps-deped)

*Written by Mark Anthony Llego for NASH Reviewer. Sources: DepEd Orders No. 49, s. 2006; No. 11, 15 and 40, s. 2012; No. 006, 007 and 018, s. 2026; 2025 RACCS (CSC Resolution No. 2500357); RA 4670; Administrative Code of 1987; Gaoiran v. Alcala (2004).*

---

© 2026 Mark Anthony Llego, NASH Reviewer. All rights reserved. You may quote up to 100 words from this article with the author's name, its title and a link. In research, cite it as: Llego, M. A. (2026, October 31). *DepEd Preliminary Investigation, Formal Charge and Answer*. NASH Reviewer. https://nash.com.ph/blog/deped-preliminary-investigation-formal-charge. Any other reuse of the article, its charts or its data needs written permission: email support@nash.com.ph. Terms of Service: https://nash.com.ph/terms#website-content-and-data