p–ISSN: 2723 - 6609 e-ISSN: 2745-5254

Vol. 5, No. 8 August 2024 http://jist.publikasiindonesia.id/

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3017

Evaluation of Corruption Prevention Programs

Case Study on the Corruption Prevention Network Program

(JAGA)

Chrisna Adhitama Surya Nugraha

, Machmudin Eka Prasetya

losses and will indirectly result in a decrease in the level of public welfare (Buana, 2018).

Therefore, efforts to handle corruption are needed strategically, comprehensively,

effectively, and efficiently (Suryantoro, 2019). In Indonesia, the government conducts

and initiates various efforts to improve the system to prevent corruption such as

bureaucratic reform, integrity zones, Monitoring Corruption for Prevention (MCP), and

various other programs (Pertiwi & Setyawan, 2020).

As a medium to measure the success of corruption prevention efforts in Indonesia,

the KPK developed the Integrity Assessment Survey (SPI). SPI is carried out in all

ministries/agencies, provincial governments, and district/city governments in Indonesia

vulnerable category of corruption. When compared to the previous year, this value has

always decreased for the last 3 (three) years considering that in 2021 the SPI value was

at a score of 72.94 then decreased to 71.9 in 2022 (Sinaga, 2017).

Specifically, the results of the 2023 SPI show that all agencies in Indonesia have a

high risk of corruption because the quality of transparency in public services is still

considered very poor by respondents and needs immediate attention and handling (Susim

& Darujati, 2021). (KPK, 2023). One of the efforts made to encourage transparency in

public services is the Corruption Prevention Network (Jaga) program initiated by the

KPK. The Jaga program encourages government agencies to manage and transparent

public service information so that it is easily accessible to the public that it can prevent

villages, ports, licensing, and handling COVID-19. (KPK, 2023). The public service

sector intervention in the Jaga program is based on the consideration of the high risk of

corruption in the sector. (KPK, 2016). However, the 2022 Jaga user survey stated that

Jaga has not reached all public service sectors that have a high risk of corruption. (KPK,

2022). Based on the survey, only 23.3% of respondents stated that currently, the sector in

Jaga has covered all sectors that are prone to corruption. Meanwhile, the remaining 76.7%

stated that there are still other sectors that are prone to corruption but have not been

covered by the Jaga program (Hambali, 2020).

In terms of handling complaints, based on the 2020 KPK Annual Report, the

complaint settlement rate in the Jaga program is still low, which is only 31.02% of the

type of fraud in the Fraud Tree concept and states that corruption is the most common

and most common category of fraud in all countries in the world with a median loss of

$150,000. (ACFE, 2023). Therefore, every organization must develop a system that can

identify, assess, and mitigate corruption risks. (Johnson, 2015). The best way to minimize

The guide contains a comprehensive explanation of efforts to develop anti-fraud policies

that can be used to prevent and detect fraud in every organization (Sumarno, 2023). FRM

is a fraud risk control guideline that can be implemented in all types of organizations,

both private and government organizations and is suitable for implementation in all sizes

of organizations. (ACFE, 2023). FRM consists of 5 (five) components, namely fraud risk

governance, fraud risk assessment, fraud control activities, fraud investigation and

corrective action, and fraud monitoring activities.

The lack of reach for all public service sectors that are prone to corruption in the

Jaga program as the results of the 2022 Jaga user survey indicate that there are weaknesses

in the implementation of the FRM framework in the fraud risk assessment component.

This research uses a case study research strategy with a single case study and a

(Creswell et al., 2018) explained that qualitative research aims to explore and understand

the meaning of several individuals or groups of social or humanitarian problems.

Qualitative research aims to provide a deep understanding of the conditions and

contextual background of individuals and/or organizations that are the object of research,

explain individual behaviour and interactions between individuals, evaluate the

effectiveness of strategies, and assist in the development of theories and strategies.

(Wahyuni, 2015). The qualitative approach in this study aims to gain a deep

understanding of the suitability of the Jaga program with the Fraud Risk Management

framework.

This study uses primary data obtained directly through an interview process with

information related to the root causes of problems in the Jaga program is obtained.

Structured interviews are carried out using components in Fraud Risk Management issued

by COSO and ACFE.

In addition, this study uses secondary data in the form of documents related to the

Jaga program obtained from the KPK. Some of the types of documents used in this study

are regulations and policies related to the Jaga program, standard operating procedures,

activity implementation reports, annual reports, and other relevant documents. The data

in the form of data text are then analyzed descriptively to be able to know and understand

the research phenomenon so that it can answer the problem formulation in this study.

In carrying out the analysis, this study uses content analysis and descriptive

Management framework can be obtained. Meanwhile, qualitative descriptive analysis is

carried out through grouping and organizing data into relevant categories or themes, as

well as a deep understanding of the meaning and relationship between these categories.

The results of this analysis are then interpreted to produce findings that provide new

understandings or contributions to existing understandings (Creswell et al., 2018).

Fraud Risk Governance encourages organizations to commit to and support the

development of anti-fraud policies and communicate these policies to all units and levels

of the organization. The analysis of the components of Fraud Risk Governance in the Jaga

program is as follows.

Organizational Commitment and Support for the Implementation of Jaga

The implementation of the Jaga program as a form of effort to prevent and detect

corruption in the public service sector has received support and commitment from the

Corruption Eradication Commission through the stipulation of Corruption Eradication

Commission Regulation Number 7 of 2020 concerning the Organization and Work

Procedures of the Corruption Eradication Commission. In the regulation, it is stated that

of Gratification and Public Services. In addition, a form of commitment to the

implementation of the Jaga program is also obtained from other agencies involved in the

implementation of the Jaga program through the signing of a commitment to follow up

on complaints and the appointment of a person in charge of handling complaints received

through the Jaga.id platform.

Development of a Comprehensive FRM program

The Jaga program is designed comprehensively to be able to prevent and detect

corruption in the public service sector. In terms of preventing corruption in the public

service sector, the Jaga program focuses on increasing the transparency of public services

both in terms of increasing the disclosure of service data and service information.

and Technology, the Ministry of Health, and BPJS Kesehatan.

Determination of Roles and Responsibilities in the Implementation of FRM

The Directorate of Gratification and Public Services has established roles and

responsibilities in the implementation of the Jaga program through the establishment of

the organizational structure of the Directorate of Gratification and Public Services. In the

organizational structure, the Directorate of Gratification and Public Services appoints a

Task Force responsible for the implementation of the Jaga. In addition, the determination

of roles and responsibilities for the implementation of the Jaga program is also carried

out through the determination of the Unit in Charge and Observer in the follow-up of

complaints of indications of corruption received through the Jaga platform. The Unit in

been formalized as an official document of the organization. Explanations and

documentation related to the formal Jaga program can be found in the KPK's annual report

and the annual report of the Jaga program.

FRM Communication to All Stakeholders

program known not only by agencies but also by the community.

Komponen 2 – Fraud Risk Assessment

The Fraud Risk Assessment component encourages organizations to

comprehensively identify fraud risks and schemes. The results of the identification of

fraud risk risk are the basis for the organization to determine appropriate prevention and

detection efforts. The implementation of the Fraud Risk Assessment component in the

Jaga program is as follows.

Identification of Corruption Risks in the Public Service Sector

The Jaga program is designed to prevent corruption in the public service sector.

Given the breadth of the public service area, the Jaga program sets the focus of the area

vulnerability and designated it as a sector that is an intervention area for the Jaga program.

Identification of Availability and Effectiveness of Control in Managing Fraud Risk

Identification of existing controls is an important step in the fraud risk assessment

process. Information related to the availability of control is the basis for the formulation

of appropriate policies to prevent and detect fraud in the organization. In the development

of the Jaga, the control identification process that has been developed in each sector is

carried out by assessing the quality of transparency of public services in the intervened

sector. Transparency of public services is the main control that is identified and assessed

because it is the key to preventing corruption in public services.

In addition to identifying the quality of service transparency, the reliability of

sectors.

Assessing and Responding to Residual Fraud Risks

Response to residual risk is an important effort in the framework of FRM

considering that this response acts as an antidote to fraud and as a mechanism to find

the Jaga Task Force then formulated the mitigation measures needed to close the gaps in

corruption in each sector. Included in the formulation of the mitigation measures is the

determination of the person in charge of implementing the mitigation measures.

Reassessment, Documentation, and Reporting on Fraud Risk

The process of reassessing the risk of corruption in the service sector is carried out

based on the urgency or needs of the Guard Task Force and the Directorate of

Gratification and Public Services. The reassessment process is carried out through the

collection of relevant information related to the public service sector from other work

units and based on the analysis of public service data that has been available in the Jaga

program. This is done in the education and village sectors but has not been implemented

Development of preventive control

Preventive control in the Jaga program is focused on efforts to increase transparency

in public services. This is based on the consideration that transparency is a very important

aspect of efforts to prevent corruption in the public service sector. Efforts to increase

transparency are also carried out to close the gap in corruption based on the identification

of corruption risks carried out in the previous stage. In addition to the provision of data,

information, and regulations, the development of corruption prevention activities in the

Jaga program is also carried out through the provision of recommendations for improving

public service systems and mechanisms in the sectors in Jaga. This is done in the village

and education sectors through the provision of recommendations for improving public

complaint and the authority of the agency that handles it.

Komponen 4 - Fraud Investigation and Corrective Action

The Fraud Investigation and Corrective Action component is related to the

mechanism for collecting information related to potential corruption and efforts to detect,

public services to convey the findings through the Jaga.id platform. Furthermore, the

indication of corruption will be followed up through the process of verifying the

completeness of information first before then forwarding it to the Unit in Charge or the

unit responsible for resolving complaints. The unit in Charge is responsible for following

up on the complaint by the mechanism that applies in each agency. In addition to being

forwarded to the Unit in Charge, the results of verification of complaints submitted by

the community can be followed up directly by the Guard Task Force based on certain

considerations. However, the complaint handling mechanism has not been established in

the business process of the Directorate of Gratification and Public Services even though

it has been agreed as a procedure for handling complaints received through the Jaga.id

and analysis of the use of village funds in XYZ Regency. The data used as analysis

material includes public service data published on the platform Jaga. id combined with

other data such as public complaint data.

Communication and Follow-up of Investigation Results

Communication of the results of investigations on indications of corruption in the

public service sector submitted through the Jaga.id platform is carried out through the

provision of explanations and information on the status of complaint follow-up on the

Jaga.id platform. The explanation can be accessed by all users of the Jaga.id platform,

including reporters, observers, and other users. This also serves as a control over the

follow-up investigation carried out on each complaint received. For investigations carried

Evaluation of the investigation process carried out in the Jaga program is carried

out through the preparation of a recapitulation of complaint status and identification of

the cause of the non-resolution of complaints by the Unit in Charge. However, the

evaluation process of the implementation of the investigation has not been carried out

addition, organizations must also respond to deficiencies from the application of FRM

principles by establishing corrective actions and appropriate responsible units. So far, the

monitoring process of the Jaga program as part of the implementation of FRM on the risk

of corruption in public services has not been carried out comprehensively to see the

suitability of the implementation of the five components of FRM. Monitoring of the Jaga

Baru program is limited to the validity of the data provided in the Jaga platform as well

as monitoring the total access to the Jaga platform. The Jaga Task Force annually assesses

the validity of the data displayed in the Jaga.id platform and updates the data through

coordination with the data owner (Walidata).

the Jaga program has not been supported with adequate documentation because the

concept, strategic plan, and road map of Jaga have not been recorded in a formal

document. In the Fraud Risk Assessment component, the process of reassessing

corruption risks has not been carried out thoroughly in all public service sectors that are

intervened in the Jaga program and has not been carried out periodically.

The Fraud Control Activities component has been fulfilled in the Jaga program

because the Jaga program has established a form of preventive and detective control

activities to prevent corruption in the public service sector. However, the Jaga program

been formalized in the business process of the Directorate of Gratification and Public

Services so the Fraud Investigation and Corrective Action component has not been fully

fulfilled. In the Fraud Monitoring Activities component, the Jaga program has not

established a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation mechanism to determine the

components that need to be corrected so that it has a good impact on the prevention of

corruption in the public service sector.