Janos Bertok Presentation - Contraloría General de la República

LA CONTRALORIA
GENERAL DE LA
REPUBLICA DE CHILE
Progress on reforms, outreach and impact
Janos Bertok, Head of Division, Public Sector Integrity,
Gobernanza Pública y Desarrollo Territorial, OECD
Santiago de Chile, 7 abril, 2015
Presenta/on Outline   The OECD: Suppor/ng trust and inclusive growth   The 2012-­‐2013 Public Governance Review of the CGR   The 2015 Progress Report key findings:   Impact   Challenges OECD: forum for evidence-­‐ based policy debate   The OECD •  Forum for interna/onal governmental co-­‐opera/on since establishment in 1961 •  34 member countries, 2500 staff in the Secretariat, over 250 reports per year   Work on governance •  Policy dialogue through networks of policymakers (Public Governance CommiSee); Data (Government at a Glance 2013); Analy/cal work (OECD agenda on trust); specialized networks and reviews (Integrity); Interna/onal Standards (ethics, whistleblowing, public procurement); Country in-­‐depth studies (Public Governance Reviews in 12 countries since 2010), partnerships with interna/onal organisa/ons and networks •  Current undertaking -­‐ “Supreme Audit Ins/tu/ons and Good Governance”-­‐ led by Brazil with 12 peer SAIs: Canada, Chile, the European Court of Auditors, France, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, South Africa, South Korea, United States of America •  ‘Ci/zen’s Engagement and Supreme Audit Ins/tu/ons’ under the Development Co-­‐
opera/on Directorate   Collabora/on with interna/onal bodies •  INTOSAI; developing key na/onal indicators of social and economic development strategy and societal progress and on a Performance Measurement Framework •  INCOSAI observer Chile – an ac/ve OECD member Chile’s accession to OECD (2010) Corporate Governance in Chile 2010 Evalua3ng Laws and Regula3ons: The Case of the Chilean Chamber of Depu3es (2012) OECD Urban Policy Reviews, Chile 2013 Mee/ng on internal control and internal audit (2012) OECD est. (1961) SAIs and Ci/zen’s Engagement Project (2014 – 2015) OECD Territorial Reviews: Antofagasta, 2013 Review of TCU’s audit of year-­‐end government report (2012) OECD at OLACEF mee/ng (2013) Chile’s Supreme Audit Ins3tu3on: leveraging strategic agility and public trust (2012 -­‐2014) New Educa3on Policy Outlook Series: Chile (2014) OECD Economic Surveys: Chile 2014 2014 + CGR : Progress Report (2015) 2014 + Audit session in the Public Sector Integrity Network Mee/ng (June 16-­‐17, 2014, Paris) Interna/onal study: SAIs and Good Governance (2013 – 2016) Peer Review of ASF 100
age points
% in 2014 (right axis)
Russia
Indonesia
Latvia
Brazil
India
South Africa
Germany
Israel
Iceland
Slovak Republic
Japan
Switzerland
Korea
Hungary
Czech Republic
Poland
United Kingdom
New Zealand
Norway
Italy
Turkey
Sweden
Estonia
OECD average
United States
Australia
Mexico
Austria
France
Chile
Netherlands
Belgium
Denmark
Luxembourg
Ireland
Canada
Greece
Portugal
Spain
Finland
Slovenia
Context -­‐ Trust in Government Figure: Confidence in na<onal government in 2014 and its change since 2007 Percentage points change since 2007 (left axis)
100
%
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
0
-20
-20
-40
-40
Source: OECD’s Government at a Glance (forthcoming) Trust in Government and corrup/on Confidence in na<onal government versus percep<on of government corrup<on (2014) 100
90
GRCPRT ITA
ESP
CZE
SVN
POL
KOR
USA
SVK
HUN
FRA MEX
Government corruption
80
70
60
CHL
50
ISR
OECD ISL
GBR
AUT
JPN
EST
BEL
AIRL
US
CAN
40
TUR
NLD
DEU
30
NOR
NZL
CHE
LUX
FIN
20
DNK
SWE
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Confidence in national government
R² = 0,70325
Source: OECD’s Government at a Glance (forthcoming) 90
100
Trust in Ins/tu/ons Source: “Encuesta de Corrupción 2014” -­‐ Libertad y Desarrollo The OECD Public Governance Review (2012-­‐2014) •  The Public Governance Review: •  Provided guidance on how the CGR can support good governance through its audit and counselling work •  Shaped debates on trends in SAI work •  Provided guidance for all SAIs, par/cularly the 11 other peers •  Benefits of review •  Build strategic agility to iden/fy emerging challenges and capacity to respond – help restore trust in government •  Linking opera/ons to whole-­‐of-­‐government issues •  Iden/fy opportuni/es and pressures for SAIs to increase relevance and impact The OECD Peer Review methodology •  The Peer Review uses evidence gathering through inclusive par/cipa/on •  Demonstra/ng impact: the OECD Progress Report (2015) •  Methodology:  
 
Stocktake offered in Reporte estratégico: Estado de la implementación de las principales recomendaciones realizadas por la OCDE a la Contraloría General de la República de Chile Survey of CGR Officials and external stakeholders from the Legislature, the Execu/ve and civil society (January 2015) •  Focused on changes in 2014 in 3 key areas: I. 
II. 
III. 
The CGR’s engagement strategy The CGR’s support to internal control The CGR’s alignment and balance of the porkolio Progress on reforms, outreach and impact I. 
Engagement strategy II. 
Support to internal control III. 
Alignment and balance of the porkolio I. Public Governance Review (2013) Highlights CGR Engagement Table 4.3 Existence of auditee strategies by the supreme audit ins<tu<on Yes No Australia, Denmark, European Court of Auditors, Italy, Portugal, South Africa, Spain Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Israel, Korea Table 4.1. Communica<on with auditees at the beginning of an audit engagement by the supreme audit ins<tu<on Country Responsibili/es Audit plan Lead SAI of SAI and and Audit subject contact for the and scope auditee for audit /metable for audit work work audit work Informa/on and access needed for audit work When SAI will share preliminary audit report Australia ● ● ● ● ● ● Brazil .. ● ● ● ● ● Chile ● o ● o ● o Costa Rica ● ● ● ● ● ● Denmark .. ● ● ● ● ● European Court of Auditors ● ● ● ● ● ● Israel ● o ● o ● o Italy .. ● ● ● ● ● Korea ● ● ● ● ● ● Portugal ● ● ● ● ● ● South Africa .. ● ● ● ● ● Spain ● ● ● ● ● ● Total yes 8 10 12 10 12 10 Main recommenda<ons from 2013 Peer Review: •  Strengthen the communica/on strategy and enhance communica/on with all stakeholders •  Engaging auditees to develop a more construc/ve working rela/onship Progress Report (2015) Changes to the CGR’s engagement strategy Main ini/a/ves of 2014: •  Redesigning the communica/on strategy: •  External Control Func/on Integrated Improvement Project (32 ini/a/ves) •  Mapping groups of stakeholders and needs •  Providing new opportuni/es for engagement • 
• 
• 
• 
MOU signed with Congress Establishment of the Civil Society Council Development of a Ci/zens’ App for mobile phones (later 2015) Ongoing trainings and workshops •  Launched the new audit regula/ons: •  Publish audit plans, provide informa/on on origin, aim, /meline… Impact in enhancing strategic engagement? CGR officials’ feedback on changes in 2014? Impact for CGR staff? What is the extent of the changes in this What impact have these changes (if area in 2014? any) to the CGR’s engagement strategy had on the understanding and use of None: 0 CGR’s work by stakeholders? Limited: 6% Moderate: 42% None: 0 Substan/al: 53% Limited: 26% No comment: 0 Moderate: 42% Substan/al: 32% What did these changes entail? No comment: 0 Both consolida/on of exis/ng and development of new processes Impact for external stakeholders? In 2014, to what extent did your understanding and use of CGR’s audit work increase? None: 20% Limited: 10% Moderate: 50% Substan/al: 20% No comment: 0 What are the challenges to realising full poten<al of these ongoing ini<a<ves? 1. Lack of buy-­‐in from externals 2. Lack of buy in from internals (CGR officials) 3. Lack of /me II. Public Governance Review (2013) highlights: CGR support to Internal Control Table 1.13. SAIs playing a formal role in na<onal an<-­‐corrup<on strategies
Table 1.11. Role of supreme audit ins<tu<ons in co-­‐ordina<ng public sector internal audit
Yes Chile, Costa Rica, Denmark, Korea, Portugal Yes Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, European Court of Auditors, Italy, South Africa No Australia, Brazil, European Court of Auditors, Italy, South Africa, Spain No Australia, Denmark, Israel, Korea, Portugal, Spain Table 4.5. Modes of co-ordination and co-operation between the supreme audit institution and internal audit in Chile and selected countries
Country Australia Brazil Chile Costa Rica Denmark European Court of Auditors Israel Italy Korea Portugal South Africa Spain Total, Yes Arrangements for the Common training sharing of informa/on Communica/on of programmes, and (including consulta/on reports to each other sharing procedures) of training materials ● o o ● ● o Explora<on ● o o o o ● ● ● Communica/on of annual plans/ strategies Regular mee/ngs ● o o o ● ● ● o o ● ● ● ● ● ● o o ● ● ● ● ● 8 ● o ● ● ● ● 9 ● o ● ● ● ● 9 o ● ● ● o ● 7 o o ● ● o ● 6 o o ● o o o 1 Main recommenda/on from 2013 Peer Review: Proac/vely support efforts to consolidate an independent, capable and efficient system of internal control in the Chilean public sector Development of joint methodologies o o Explora<on o o Progress Report (2015): Changes in support/approach to internal control Main ini/a/ves of 2014: •  Suppor/ng capacity/professionaliza/on of internal audit •  Updated portal shared with internal audit units •  Leading the implementa/on of IPSAS •  Suppor/ng control and an/-­‐corrup/on •  Providing auditees with consolidated reports and communica/ng around recurring issues •  Launched the GEO-­‐CGR portal •  Using ex ante to incen/vise strengthened internal control •  Pilo/ng the SIAPER TRA system for TdR acts related to personnel (20 public sector en//es) •  Cost-­‐benefit analysis undertaken of the TdR Impact in suppor/ng internal control? CGR officials’ feedback of
changes in 2014?
Impact for CGR staff?
What is the extent of the
What impact have any changes to
changes in this area in 2014? the CGR’s approach to internal
control had on reinforcing
None: 0
internal control in Chile?
Limited: 33%
Moderate: 22%
None: 5%
Substantial: 22%
Limited: 26%
No comment: 17%
Moderate: 42%
Substantial: 11%
What did these changes
No comment: 16%
entail?
Impact for external
stakeholders?
What impact does the CGR
have on strengthening
internal control in the public
sector?
None: 9%
Limited: 9%
Moderate: 9%
Substantial: 73%
No comment: 0
Mostly consolidation of existing
activities and processes
What are the challenges to realising full potential of these ongoing
initiatives?
1.  Lack of awareness
2.  Lack of buy-in from externals
3.  Lack of time
III. Public Governance Review (2013) highlights Aligning the porkolio Table 2.4. Audit of government accounts by supreme audit ins<tu<on Year-­‐end accounts of individual public sector en//es Consolidated government year-­‐end accounts Australia ● ● Brazil ● ● Chile o o Denmark ● o European Court of Auditors ● ● Israel o o Italy ● o Korea ● ● Mexico ● ● Portugal ● ● South Africa ● ● Spain ● ● Total yes 11 8 Country Table 2.6. Performance audi<ng by the supreme audit ins<tu<ons Yes No Australia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Denmark, European Court of Auditors, Israel, Italy, Korea, Mexico, Peru, Portugal, South Africa, Spain Chile Main recommendations from 2013 Peer Review:
•  Foster strategic sensitivity of emerging trends and risks affecting
public governance and changing societal expectations
•  Utilise more ex post audit to enhance responsibility over the use
of public resources and to assess the reliability of information
Progress Report (2015): Changes in aligning and balancing the porkolio Main ini/a/ves of 2014: •  Con/nuing the development of performance audit methodology (pilots slated for 2015) •  Providing useful inputs for decision and policy making •  Capacity development: trainings and workshops to gather informa/on to feed into priori/sa/on and audit planning •  Piloted new consolidated summary reports on auditee ac/ons against recommenda/ons, based on newly developed observa/ons and follow-­‐up matrices •  Issued consolidated reports by sector •  Con/nued development of a competency management system, linked to a new performance-­‐evalua/on methodology Impact in aligning and balancing the porkolio? CGR officials’ feedback of changes in 2014? Impact for CGR staff? Impact for external stakeholders? What is the extent of the changes in What is the extent of the changes In 2014, 73% of external this area in 2014? to the alignment and balance of stakeholders interacted with the the CGR’s porXolio in 2014? CGR to discuss issues and trends None: 0 that cut across the public Limited: 5% None: 0 administra<on. Moderate: 53% Limited: 5% Substan/al: 31% Moderate: 53% No comment: 10% Substan/al: 32% No comment: 11% What did these changes entail? Both consolida/on of exis/ng and development of new processes What are the challenges to realising full poten<al of these ongoing ini<a<ves? 1. Lack of buy-­‐in from internal stakeholders (CGR staff) 2. Lack of buy-­‐in from externals 3. Lack of awareness Conclusions: progress in key areas Figure 1. Extent of changes in the 3 key areas in 2014
12
responses
10
8
Engagement
6
Internal
Control
4
Balancing
the
portfolio
2
0
No change
Limited
change
Moderate
change
Substantial
change
Challenges in key areas Figure 2. Challenges to realising the full poten<al of ac<vi<es in the 3 key areas Lack of funding
Lack of awareness
Lack of buy-in from
externals
Engagement
Lack of buy-in from
internals
Internal
Control
Lack of time
Balancing the
portfolio
Lack of capacities/knowhow
Lack of leadership
0
2
4
6
CGR respondents
8
10
12
Stakeholder sugges/ons on moving forward •  Engagement: •  Ensure communica/on is clear and reports are user-­‐friendly •  Con/nue efforts to overcome digital barriers •  Suppor/ng internal control •  Focus on providing guidance that are not necessarily imposi/ons •  Providing rankings of audited en//es, with a focus on en//es that are performing well •  More strategic use of the TdR as posi/ve incen/ve for “gradua/ng” from TdR •  Con/nuing to improve co-­‐opera/on with the CAIGG for greater clarity in their roles and responsibili/es •  Aligning and balancing the porkolio •  Con/nuing to build awareness and competencies internally •  Expand and disseminate new products that familiarise internal and external stakeholders further on principles of effec/veness, efficiency and economy Muchas gracias