TRANSPARATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN FRAUD PREVENTION IN GOVERNMENT AGENCY (CASE STUDY OF CIWIDEY DISTRICT OFFICE)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59820/emba.v2i1.110Keywords:
Transparency, Accountability, Fraud, Government AgenciesAbstract
This research analyzes the level of transparency, accountability practices, and effectiveness of the fraud prevention system at the Ciwidey District Office with the aim of evaluating administrative integrity and government efforts to provide quality public services. The method used is a qualitative approach through case studies with in-depth interviews with staff and office officials. The research results highlight a lack of transparency in information related to policy and finance, accompanied by a decision-making process that is not always clear. The accountability system is also not optimal in ensuring accountability for actions taken. Documentation analysis shows that the internal control system is not fully effective in preventing cases of fraud. From the results of this research, it was concluded that urgent improvements are needed in increasing information transparency, strengthening accountability practices, and optimizing fraud prevention systems. Recommendations include increasing the availability of open information, increasing awareness of responsible actions, and implementing concrete steps to strengthen internal control. Implementation of these recommendations is expected to improve the quality of public services, improve the image of government institutions, and provide a stronger foundation for the Ciwidey District Office and other government institutions in maintaining the integrity and trust of the public.
Downloads
References
A. Schick. (2016). Public Financial Management and Its Emerging Architecture. Oxford University Press.
Albrecht, W. S., Albrecht, C. O., Albrecht, C. C., & Zimbelman, M. F. (2011). Fraud Examination (4th ed.) (4 ed.). Mason.
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework 1.
Dimas Bayu. (2023). ICW: Penindakan Kasus Korupsi Meningkat pada 2022.
Hood, C. (2006). Transparency in Historical Perspective. Cambridge University Press.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.
Laudon, K. C., & Laudon, J. P. (2016). . Management Information Systems: Managing the Digital Firm. Pearson.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2018). OECD Principles of Corporate Governance. OECD Publishing.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice (4 ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.,.
Rahayu, F., Dina Ekasari, L., & mukoffi, A. (2021). Upaya Pencegahan Kecurangan Dalam Mengelola Dana Desa Sesuai Dengan Prinsip Akuntabilitas dan Transparansi. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 8(2). http://ejournal.bsi.ac.id/ejurnal/index.php/moneter
Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Information and the Change in the Paradigm in Economics. Nobel Prize Lecture.
SURVEI FRAUD INDONESIA. (2019).
Transparency International. (2021). Corruption Perceptions Index 2021.
Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2016). Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk about How to Do It Right. John Wiley & Sons.
Warren, M. E. (2014). The meaning of transparency. Political Philosophy, 22(3), 259–279.
World Bank. (2020). Trading for Development in the Age of Global Value Chains.
