OECD Public Governance Reviews Supreme Audit Institutions And Good Governance by Perpustakaan_Integriti

OECD Public Governance Reviews Supreme Audit Institutions And Good Governance

148 – 4 – SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS’ INPUT INTO POLICY EVALUATION AND OVERSIGHT

Box 4.6. The SAI of South Africa – auditing for accountability and inclusivity (continued) Further reading Audit Outcomes in the Education Sector: www.agsa.co.za/Documents/Auditreports/PFMA20 112012/PFMAreportsandpressrelease/tabid/220/ArticleID/76/Audit-outcomes-of-the-EducationSector.aspx. Sources: OECD Survey of Peer Supreme Audit Institutions; further reading link above.

Box 4.7. The SAI of Brazil – audit for national development policy Objective A series of audits took place between 2009 and 2013 that focused on national policy for regional development and aimed to understand and identify structural features that may be responsible for any successes and performance gaps. The dedication of effort and time in these audits was justified by the amount of public resources invested in the national policy for regional development (around BRL ten billion annually) and the importance of the issue to national development.

Types Compliance audit, guidance.

Scope and methodology The scope included the whole governance structure for managing the national policy for regional development, including its formulation, rules, actors, monitoring and evaluations systems, transparency, plans and finance resources - as public funds dedicated to loans for entrepreneurships with favourable interest rates, tax expenditures and budget expenses. To capture a systemic view of the policy, the TCU included the following: Usage of many teams for auditing the various public agencies and finance tools, distributed by the Brazilian regions elected by the policy, coordinated by a common guidance and audit questions provided by the preliminary audit; assessment of compliance between the actions and the legal conception of the policy; usage of many performance audit tools (indicators analysis; problem tree method; mapping the logical model of the policy; stakeholder analysis; survey; consultation to experts); a study of international models, together with the executive bodies and agents responsible for the policy management ; and a strong interaction and open debate with the executive bodies and agents responsible for the policy management

Criteria Country laws, key national indicators, entity objectives, International standards, other.

Resources This comprehensive work involved six audits and 214 business days at a cost of BRL 988 000 (approximately USD 325 000).

OECD Public Governance Reviews Supreme Audit Institutions And Good Governance

Articles inside

References

Notes

in EU agencies

4.7. The SAI of Brazil – audit for national development policy

4.6. The SAI of South Africa – auditing for accountability and inclusivity

4.5. The SAI of the Netherlands – auditing for accountability and inclusivity

4.4. The SAI of Korea – auditing for accountability and inclusivity

4.3. The SAI of Canada – auditing for accountability and inclusivity

systems (iSA-Gov

4.3. SAI activities in assessing policy evaluation and oversight

Taking stock: SAI activities in supporting policy evaluation and oversight

4.1. Key elements of evaluating for results and performance improvement

Notes

References

Chapter 4 Supreme Audit Institutions’ input into policy evaluation and oversight

Government

3.3. The SAI of the Netherlands – assessing financial risk exposure of government

3.2. The SAI of Poland – the annual state budget execution audit

3.1. Level of SAI activity in assessing key elements of policy implementation, by country

3.5. SAI activities in assessing policy implementation

3.4. Key elements in the exercise of internal control and risk management

Taking stock: SAI activities in supporting implementation

Key Function 8: Exercise of internal control and risk management

3.1. Key elements of co-ordinating and communicating

Chapter 3 Supreme Audit Institutions’ input into policy implementation

References

Notes

2.10.The SAI of Portugal – strengthening controls in state owned enterprises

workforce sustainability and population ageing

2.8. The SAI of South Africa – budget and strategic plan review

regulatory reform in Korea

Congress and the Executive

2.5. The SAI of the Netherlands – linking evidence-based decisions with efficiency gains

2.6. Types of assessment of key functions of policy formulation, by 10 surveyed SAIs

2.5. SAI activities in assessing policy formulation

Taking Stock: SAI activities in supporting policy formulation

2.3. Key elements of establishing regulatory policy

Key Function 3: Establishing regulatory policy

Key Function 4: Exercise of internal control and risk management

2.3. Spending reviews: Australia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

2.4. Key elements of setting internal control policy and managing risk

2.2. Innovative and joint approaches to policy-making: Peru’s “Edu-Lab”

2.1. The Government of Finland’s OHRA “Steering System Reform Effort”

2.1. Key elements of strategic whole-of-government steering and planning

References

Chapter 2 Supreme Audit Institutions’ input into policy formulation

Notes

Key messages to SAIs: Being aware and prepared

Key Function 1: Strategic whole-of-government steering and planning

The outcome: Considerations for all governance actors

1.2. Select SAI activities across the policy cycle

Chapter 1 Supreme Audit Institutions’ input into the policy cycle

Why is the OECD undertaking this work? Integrating evidence into the policy cycle

Executive summary

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms and Abbreviations

1.1. Key functions of the policy cycle in a strategic and open state

The report’s main findings: SAIs are active in assessing functions of the entire policy cycle

TABLE OF CONTENTS