AUDITORÍA COORDINADA DE ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS (2ª edición) - RESUMEN EJECUTIVO

Report ID: 382

La Comisión Técnica Especial de Medio Ambiente (COMTEMA) de la Organización de Entidades Fiscalizadoras Superiores de América Latina y el Caribe (OLACEFS) realizó la segunda edición de la Auditoría Coordinada sobre Áreas Protegidas entre 2019 y 2020. ( véase el resumen de la primera edición: https://intosai-cooperativeaudits.org/catalog/report/coordinated-audit-of-protected-areas-1st-edition-executive-summary).

La auditoría fue coordinada por el Tribunal Federal de Cuentas (TCU-Brasil) y contó con la participación de Entidades Fiscalizadoras Superiores (EFS) de 17 países: 15 de América Latina y el Caribe y 2 de Europa: Argentina, Bolivia, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, El Salvador, Ecuador, España, Guatemala, Honduras, México, Paraguay, Perú, Portugal y República Dominicana. Además, participaron en la fiscalización 9 entidades fiscalizadoras subnacionales: 8 tribunales de cuentas estatales brasileños de la región amazónica y un tribunal de cuentas provincial argentino.

La auditoría contó con el apoyo del Comité de Creación de Capacidades (CCC) de la OLACEFS para el ciclo de formación, y también contó con el apoyo de la Cooperación Alemana a través de la GIZ, en el marco del Proyecto Regional de Fortalecimiento del Control Externo en el Área Ambiental.

Esta segunda edición de la Auditoría Coordinada de Áreas Protegidas (ACAP), tuvo como objetivo evaluar el nivel de implementación y gestión de las áreas protegidas en los países de América Latina, el Caribe y la Península Ibérica, así como el progreso de estos países en el cumplimiento de la Meta 11 de Aichi del Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica (CDB) y los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) 14 y 15 de la Agenda 2030 para el Desarrollo Sostenible. 

Se utilizó el Índice de Implantación y Gestión de Áreas Protegidas (Indimapa). Este permite evaluar las áreas protegidas en tres escalas de implementación y gestión (baja, media y alta) mediante 13 indicadores, que se evalúan según una escala de 0 a 3.

De los 17 países participantes, 11 también participaron en la primera edición de la auditoría coordinada, realizada en 2014 y 2015, que proporcionó los datos de referencia para el análisis comparativo de los avances y retrocesos en la implantación y gestión de las áreas protegidas.

Fuente: https://portal.tcu.gov.br/biblioteca-digital/auditoria-coordenada-em-areas-protegidas-2-edicao.htm
 

Coordinated Audit For Assessment of the Infrastructure of Fundamental Education Public Schools

Report ID: 384

The  Court of Accounts of Brazil, with the participation of nineteen (19) Subnational Courts of Audit and eight (8) TCU external control secretariats in the states, conducted a coordinated audit, the objective of which was to assess the quality and availability of facilities and equipment in public basic education schools. They examined, in the period 2011-2015, the resources of the Money Direct at School Programme (PDDE) and the Articulated Action Plan (PAR-infrastructure), as well as the administrative controls for these programmes, also rating the information provided by the schools visited to the 2014 Basic Education School Census.

They visited 679 public schools in the different regions of the country. By means of a methodology for the Calculation of the Weighted Score of the Schools, the index “Average Score of the School Infrastructure was created”, which classifies the infrastructure of the schools as good, acceptable, bad or precarious, taking into account both the availability and the conservation of the facilities. When grouping the scores of the schools visited per geographical region, it was observed that the majority of the schools classified as precarious and bad is located in the North and Northeast of the country. So far as the location within the same state is concerned, it was observed that the majority of the schools of the capital cities enjoy a better situation, with lower incidence of schools being classified as precarious and a higher number of schools in an acceptable situation.

Source: https://pesquisa.apps.tcu.gov.br/#/documento/acordao-completo/*/NUMACORDAO:1007%20ANOACORDAO:2016%20COLEGIADO:'Plen%C3%A1rio'/DTRELEVANCIA%20desc,%20NUMACORDAOINT%20desc/0

**El informe aparece como parte del Acuerdo Plenario 1007/2016-TCU-Plenário

Coordinated Audit of the Brazilian Penitentiary System 2017

Report ID: 385

Although prison management is the main function of the federated states in Brazil, taking into account the balance of the National Penitentiary Fund and in order to examine the most relevant aspects of the operational management and infrastructure of prisons in Brazil,  the Court of Audit of the Union of Brazil, together with 22 Courts of Audit, and the support of the Association of Members of the Courts of Audit (Atricon), the Rui Barbosa Institute (IRB) and the National Council of Attorneys General (CNPGC), conducted a coordinated audit on this topic.

The audit addressed issues related to the emergency measures taken to address the recent rebellions (January / 2017) that occurred in several Brazilian criminal court establishments, the electronic system of monitoring the execution of sentences, the adequacy of the allocation of prisoners, the provision of services to those in need by the Public Defender's Office and the monthly cost of the prisoner. 

The following questions were addressed in the audit:

(a) Are the strategies adopted by the Union and the states / FD sufficient or adequate to prevent or contain rebellions in prisons?

b) Is the monitoring of the execution of sentences in accordance with the provisions of Law 12.714 / 2012?

c) Does the allocation of inmates in penitentiary establishments comply with the provisions of articles 82, §1, 84, 85, 87, 91, 93 and 102 of the LEP?

d) Does the Public Defender's Office provide a full and free service inside and outside prisons in accordance with articles 16, 81-A and 81-B of the LEP?

e) To what extent do the managers responsible for the management and implementation of public policies aimed at the penitentiary system know the monthly cost of each inmate in order to evaluate the management of the system?

The study covered the Federal District and 17 other states: Acre, Amazonas, Bahia, Maranhão, Minas Gerais, Mato Grosso do Sul, Mato Grosso, Pará, Paraíba, Piauí, Paraná, Rio Grande do Norte, Rondônia, Roraima, Rio Grande do Sul. Sergipe, Tocantins.

The audit found, among others, that 59% of the 17 states inspected had not calculated the monthly cost of the prisoner in the last three years. Also with data from the last three years, no state analysed sent the monthly cost of the inmate to the National Penitentiary Department (Depen). Although the National Council of Penal and Penitentiary Policy (CNPCP) has established parameters for the calculation of this cost, 83% of the respondents do not follow these criteria.

Another fact that stands out is the fact that 11 out of the 18 units of the federation (UF), including the Federal District, therefore 61%, faced some kind of rebellion between October 2016 and May 2017. It was also verified that the majority of rebellions during this period took place in establishments with a shortage of space: 18 of the 23 penitentiary units that had a record of rebellions. In other words, 78% of the cases of rebellion took place in overcrowded prisons.

Source: https://portal.tcu.gov.br/imprensa/noticias/realidade-prisional-auditoria-mostra-que-o-custo-mensal-do-preso-e-desconhecido-em-varios-estados.htm  

** The summary of the audit is part of Ruling 2643/2017 - TCU Plenary (Process: 003.673 / 2017-0).

COORDINATED AUDIT ON THE PRISON SYSTEM IN BRAZIL - PHASE 2.

Report ID: 387

In view of the difficulties that many audit courts would have in maintaining an audit team focused exclusively on auditing prisons that started in 2017, for two years; it was decided to resize the work to address it entirely in two stages. (The Stage 1 report is available at: https://intosai-cooperativeaudits.org/catalog/report/coordinated-audit-of-the-brazilian-penitentiary-system-2017).

In the first stage, the topics 'electronic system for monitoring the execution of sentences', 'allocation of prisoners' and 'monthly prisoner cost' were addressed. In the second stage it was decided to deepen the analysis of mandatory fund-by-fund transfers, the governance of the prison system (integration and coordination) and the implementation of electronic monitoring systems.

The questions addressed in this second phase of the audit were:

1) Is the control exercised over the resources of the National Penitentiary Fund (Funpen) transferred to the State and Federal District funds in compliance with the requirements established by Complementary Law 79/1994 and by the rules issued by the National Penitentiary Department?

2) Is the technological resource of the electronic monitoring solution adequately implemented and available in the states and the Federal District?

3) Does the governance structure of the public policy of the penitentiary system adhere to the "coordination" and "institutionalisation" components?

4) Does the audit of the penitentiary system carried out by the criminal enforcement bodies comply with the objectives established by the Criminal Enforcement Law?

The participants in the coordinated audit were 22 courts of accounts, namely: Court of Accounts of the Federal District, the Municipalities of the State of Pará, State of Bahia, States of Acre, Alagoas, Amazonas, Amapá, Bahia, Maranhão, Minas Gerais, Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Pará, Paraíba, Piauí, Paraná, Rio Grande do Norte, Rio Grande do Sul, Rondônia, Roraima, Sergipe, and Tocantins.

Source: https://tcu.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/574057393/relatorio-de-auditoria-ra-ra-2609620170 ,https://legis.senado.leg.br/sdleg-getter/documento?dm=7733520&disposition=inline

Auditoría Coordinada sobre Obras Viales - Resumen Ejecutivo

Report ID: 388

El documento consolida los principales resultados y oportunidades de mejora identificadas en la Auditoría Coordinada sobre Obras Viales realizada en el marco del Grupo de Trabajo de Auditoría de Obras Públicas (GTOP) de la Organización Latinoamericana y del Caribe de Entidades Fiscalizadoras Superiores (OLACEFS). Esta auditoría se realizó con el propósito de evaluar, por medio de auditorías de cumplimiento, la calidad de obras viales de construcción y mantenimiento de once países: Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, México, Paraguay, Perú y República Dominicana.

La auditoría coordinada tuvo como objetivo evaluar, por medio de revisiones de cumplimiento, la calidad de las obras viales de construcción y mantenimiento bajo la administración directa del gobierno, abarcando desde los estudios preliminares hasta la ejecución de la obra. Debido de la participación de diversos países en la auditoría, fue necesario emplear criterios de auditoría que fueran transversales y comunes al objeto auditado. Además, se observó que la legislación y las normas técnicas aplicables
a las obras viales en los diversos países, aun cuando tienen muchas similitudes entre ellas, también son ricas en diferencias.

El informe consolidado completo también está disponible en: https://intosai-cooperativeaudits.org/catalog/report/auditora-coordinada-de-obras-viales

Fuente: www.olacefs.com/auditorias-coordinadas/