in EU agencies

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).

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

4 – SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS’ INPUT INTO POLICY EVALUATION AND OVERSIGHT – 149

Box 4.7. The SAI of Brazil – audit for national development policy (continued)

Outcomes

The main findings (and related recommendations) were:

 The policy had not been assessed since it started.

 The predicted monitoring and evaluation system had not been built.

 There were no appropriate indicators of performance to guide the management and ensure transparency for the citizens.

 The formulation of the policy did not consider mechanisms to fight the major causes of the problems.

 There was no strong alignment between the diagnostic that guided the policy formulation and the regulation for using the majority of finance resources.There was a lack of coordination between the federal agencies concerning the policy.

 There was a lack of co-ordination between the federal, state and local level concerning the policy planning and implementation.

Many measures were adopted after the recommendations, these are listed below:

 The responsible government body promoted an assessment of the policy that covers the time between its formalisation and the year after the first audit recommendations.

 There was a stronger investment in developing the monitoring and evaluation system.

 A new set of indicators is being used and others are being developed by the government agencies.

 A new conception for the policy was formulated after intensive stakeholder participation across the country. This led to a new project of law and regulation for the policy that considers the need to improve the governance of the policy, especially regarding coordination issues.

Good practices used

The TCU adopted a systemic approach to assessing the policy that allowed for the identification of structural issues responsible for the results and the lack of performance.

Recommendations for improvements were made on the governance of the policy and its delivery.

Lessons learned

The capability for providing deeper insights and better foresights concerning a complex public policy depends on knowledge building during at least mid-term work, intensive interaction with experts and policy managers, and usage of a range of appropriate tools.

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