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

146 – 4 – SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS’ INPUT INTO POLICY EVALUATION AND OVERSIGHT

Box 4.5. The SAI of the Netherlands – auditing for accountability and inclusivity (continued)

Good practices used

 The audit gave new insight to the parliament about the extent to which government fulfilled their obligations in the area of evaluation. In time of strict budgets, money must be spent wisely and the evaluation of effectiveness of policy is a necessary tool.  The audit was combined with workshops and advice to ministries on how to strengthen their evaluation practice.

Lessons learned

The Court learned that there may be good reasons not to evaluate policies. In the first audit, the Court did not explore this issue, which raised some questions by the ministries. The followup audit included justifications on why a policy had not been previously evaluated. .

Further reading

2012 Audit: www.courtofaudit.nl/english/Publications/Audits/Introductions/2012/05/Evaluati on_of_policy_effectiveness_in_central_government.

The 2013 Follow up: www.courtofaudit.nl/english/Publications/Audits/Introductions/2013/06 /Evaluation_of_Policy_Effectiveness_in_Central_Government_Follow_up_audit. Sources: OECD Survey of Peer Supreme Audit Institutions; further reading links above.

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

The reduction of adult illiteracy is a worldwide objective of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). Their Education for All (EFA) movement is a global commitment to provide quality basic education for all children, youth and adults. At the World Education Forum (Dakar, 2000), 164 governments pledged to achieve EFA and identified six goals to be met by 2015. Goal four specifically relates to illiteracy, and is as follows: “We hereby collectively commit ourselves to the attainment of achieving a 50% improvement in levels of adult literacy by 2015, especially for women, and equitable access to basic and continuing education for all adults.”

The main objective of South Africa’s Kha Ri Gude campaign is to enable 4.7 million functionally illiterate and semi-literate adults, including people with disabilities, to become literate and numerate in one of the 11 official languages by 2015. This is intended to reduce the national rate of illiteracy by 50% by 2015, in line with the government’s EFA commitment made in Dakar in 2000. Millennium Development Goals on poverty reduction, women empowerment, HIV and AIDS eradication, environmental protection, and sustainable democratisation and peace building should also be achieved. A substantial ZAR 2.5 billion (South African rand) had been invested in the campaign by 2012, however, only 2.2 million (47%) of the targeted 4.7 million unschooled adults had completed or passed the tests relating to campaign. Although the average pass rate is 99%, considering the backlog and the average dropout rate of 18%, the planned completion target will only be reached in 2018.

Type

Performance audit.

Objective

ASGA’s audit set out to answer the following question: Was the Kha Ri Gude campaign economically, efficiently and effectively implemented to ensure the reduction of adult illiteracy in South Africa?

SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS AND GOOD GOVERNANCE: OVERSIGHT, INSIGHT AND FORESIGHT © OECD 2016

4 – SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS’ INPUT INTO POLICY EVALUATION AND OVERSIGHT – 147

Box 4.6. The SAI of South Africa – auditing for accountability and inclusivity (continued)

Scope and methodology

The performance audit focused on Kha Ri Gude, and covered the six-year period from 2008 to 2013, with detailed testing focusing on 2009 to 2013. During the audit, ten Kha Ri Gude learning sites were visited. Interviews were held with co-ordinators, supervisors, volunteer educators and learners.

This audit was identified through a strategic planning process where risk and materiality were considered. The topic was approved by the performance audit advisory committee. Detailed planning then took place to identify the audit objective, researchable questions and audit criteria. Stakeholders identified were limited to the ministry concerned, the contractor managing the project, learners of the campaign and the campaign volunteers.

Criteria

Country laws, key national indicators, international standards.

Resources

The budget was ZAR 1.8 million. There were 2 185 man hours for five team members. The team consisted of a senior manager, manager and three lower level staff. All staff members were from an auditing and accounting background. Some of the team members had several years’ experience working in the education sector.

Outcomes

The progress of the campaign has been inaccurately reported. In addition, the following factors also hampered achievement of the 2015 target:

 The government’s treasury department reduced the campaign budget for 2014-15 and 2016-17. This will result in approximately 135 to 215 fewer learners being enrolled over the remaining period, based on the medium term expenditure framework allocations and targets. As the pool of unschooled adults decreases, its geographical spread will increase, making it more difficult to reach the targeted adults. Tackling this would require a change in the campaign strategy and approach and, coupled with inflation, could lead to higher learner costs towards the end of the campaign. The increased expense will ultimately result in fewer learners being enrolled as the total budget is fixed.

The campaign will not achieve its target of enabling 4.7 million unschooled adults to become literate and numerate by 2015.

Good practices used

This audit resulted in a management report that contained findings and recommendations on the audited area. Insights of the audit were also included in the education sector report. Benefits or impacts from supporting the area included: management started with early implementation to address the findings and recommendations before the report was issued; the ministry effected changes to the working methods in order to address the inefficiencies that were identified in reaching the target on time; performance criteria were established.

Lessons learned

As several indicators are reported by each government entity, it is very difficult to check the appropriateness of every indicator. AGSA found it necessary to check the appropriateness and reliability of major indicators that guaranteed the autonomy of each government entity.

SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS AND GOOD GOVERNANCE: OVERSIGHT, INSIGHT AND FORESIGHT © OECD 2016