EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction - coa.gov.ph nbsp;· Vice-Mayor – Hon. Walfredo R. Dimaguila, Jr. Members of the Sanggunian: 1. Hon. Angelo B. Alonte 2. Hon. Cookie Yatco 3. Hon. Vicente Tan Gana 4. Hon

Download EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction - coa.gov.ph nbsp;· Vice-Mayor – Hon. Walfredo R. Dimaguila, Jr. Members of the Sanggunian: 1. Hon. Angelo B. Alonte 2. Hon. Cookie Yatco 3. Hon. Vicente Tan Gana 4. Hon

Post on 30-Jan-2018

213 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

<ul><li><p>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY </p><p>Introduction </p><p> The City of Bian in the Province of Laguna was once a portion of Sta. Rosa. It became </p><p>an independent town sometime in the year 1771 and became a City on February 2, 2010 under </p><p>Republic Act No. 9740. The City is located 35 kilometers south of Manila with a land area of </p><p>4,350 hectares divided into 24 barangays. </p><p> The City maintains three funds namely: General Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust </p><p>Fund. </p><p> The City maintains special account in the General Fund for 20% Local Development </p><p>Fund, Hospital, Market, and Cemetery. </p><p>Organizational Structure </p><p>The Organizational Structure of the City is as follows: </p><p>a. Key Officials </p><p>City Mayor Hon. Marlyn B. Alonte-Naguiat </p><p>Vice-Mayor Hon. Walfredo R. Dimaguila, Jr. </p><p>Members of the Sanggunian: </p><p>1. Hon. Angelo B. Alonte 2. Hon. Cookie Yatco 3. Hon. Vicente Tan Gana 4. Hon. Marielle Therese Micor 5. Hon. Liza Cardeo 6. Hon. JM Carait 7. Hon. Gener Romantigue 8. Hon. Jaime Salandanan 9. Hon. Echit Desuasido 10. Hon. Wilfredo Bejasa 11. Hon. Jay Sauza </p><p>City Treasurer Severina A. Alonalon </p><p>City Accountant Virgilio M. Dimaranan </p><p>b. No. of Personnel Complement </p><p>Permanent 545 </p><p>Temporary 64 </p></li><li><p>Casual 67 </p><p>Contractual 12 </p><p>Elective Officials 13 </p><p>Coterminous 43 </p><p>Job Order 849 __________ </p><p>Total 1,593 </p><p>Financial Highlights </p><p> For the Calendar Year (CY) 2015, the City generated a total income of P1,606,208,543 </p><p>from local taxes, permits and licenses, service and business income and internal revenue </p><p>allotment and subsidy from other funds which is slightly higher by 2.75% over last years total of </p><p>P1,563,150,730. </p><p> The Citys total assets, liabilities, government equity, income and expenses for CY 2015 </p><p>are as follows: </p><p>Total Assets P4,311,867,946 </p><p>Total Liabilities 1,225,098,745 </p><p>Total Equity 3,086,769,201 </p><p>Total Income 1,606,208,543 </p><p>Total Expenses 1,105,171,491 </p><p> The Citys total appropriations, allotments, obligations and unexpended balances for CY </p><p>2015 are as follows: </p><p>Total Appropriations P2,123,171,809 </p><p>Total Allotments 2,196,442,421 </p><p>Total Obligations 1,792,172,316 </p><p>Total Unexpended Balance 404,270,105 </p><p>Scope of Audit </p><p> Financial and compliance audit, as well as value for money audit were conducted on the </p><p>accounts and operations of the City Government of Bian for the CY 2015. The audit consisted </p><p>of interviews with the concerned local officials and employees, tracing account balances with the </p><p>general ledger, verification of disbursements with underlying documents, inspection, analysis </p><p>and reconciliation of accounts and such other procedures considered necessary. </p><p>The audit was conducted to ascertain the propriety of the financial transactions, </p><p>compliance with prescribed rules and regulations and the economical, efficient and effective </p><p>utilization of resources. It was also made to ascertain the accuracy of financial records and </p><p>reports, as well as the fairness of the presentation of the financial statements. </p></li><li><p>Audit Opinion </p><p>The Auditor rendered a qualified opinion on the fairness of the presentation of the </p><p>financial statements of the City of Bian due to the effects of the unreconciled discrepancy of </p><p>P90,144,916.97 between accounting records and inventory report of Land account under the </p><p>General Fund (GF) and Special Education Fund (SEF) totaling P355,971,398.64 and </p><p>P129,698,600.21, respectively. Likewise a discrepancy of P82,373,260.78 of the Property, Plant </p><p>and Equipment account for both the General and Special Education Funds and Infrastructure </p><p>Assets and Equipment purchased during the year totaling P30,289,239.89 were not recorded to </p><p>their appropriate Property, Plant and Equipment (PPE) accounts, resulting in the understatement </p><p>of the PPE and equity accounts. </p><p>Significant Observations and Recommendations </p><p>For the exceptions cited above, we recommended that the City Mayor direct the City </p><p>Accountant and the GSO to reconcile the inventory list of acquired real properties with the </p><p>balance of the Land account in the General Fund and Special Education Fund to account for the </p><p>discrepancy totaling P90,144,916.97. We also recommended that the City Mayor immediately </p><p>direct the City Accountant and the City General Services Officer to thoroughly check, clear and </p><p>reconcile the noted discrepancy amounting to P82,373,260.78 between the physical inventory </p><p>report and book balances of PPE accounts for both General and Special Education Funds to </p><p>ascertain the correctness of PPE account balances in the General Ledger and to establish the </p><p>existence and propriety of the valuation of the property. Likewise, we recommended that City </p><p>Mayor direct the City Accountant to draw Journal Entry Vouchers (JEVs) to transfer the costs of </p><p>completed infrastructure assets and equipment from the books of the Trust Fund to the books of </p><p>the General Fund. </p><p> The following are the other significant observations and recommendations in the audit of </p><p>the City Government of Bian, Laguna for the CY 2015: </p><p>1. Cash Local Treasury and Income accounts at year-end were understated by P1,060,248.91 due to non-inclusion of collections from December 29 to 31, 2015 in </p><p>violation of Sections 29 and 30 of the Manual on the New Government Accounting </p><p>System (MNGAS) for LGUs, Volume I and Section 51 of MNGAS, Volume II, thus, </p><p>exposing the funds to possible risk of loss or misuse. </p><p>We recommended that the City Mayor direct the ICO-City Treasurer to ensure that all </p><p>collections are turned over by the collectors at the end of business day and recorded as </p><p>Cash-Local Treasury at the end of the year. </p><p>2. The City officials failed to fully implement the rules and regulations on the granting, utilization and liquidation of cash advances of government officials and employees as </p><p>provided under COA Circular No. 97-002, resulting in unliquidated cash advances </p><p>totalling P738,497.60 as of December 31, 2015, thus showing ineffective control by </p><p>management over cash advances. </p></li><li><p>We recommended that the City Mayor direct: </p><p>a) the concerned City officials to expedite the immediate processing in the grant of cash advances on a replenishment basis so as not to hamper delivery of </p><p>public services; </p><p>b) all concerned officers and employees to liquidate their cash advances within the prescribed period or immediately after the purposes have been served; </p><p>c) the City Accountant to monitor and strictly enforce the liquidation of cash advances and/or refund of the excess amount granted within the prescribed </p><p>period and see to it that no additional cash advance shall be allowed unless </p><p>the previous ones are settled to prevent the accumulation thereof; </p><p>d) the City Accountant to enforce withholding of salaries of accountable officers who failed to promptly liquidate their cash advances. Otherwise, institute the </p><p>appropriate administrative and/or criminal action against accountable officers </p><p>concerned for their failure to settle their accounts, if warranted. </p><p>3. The Land account under the General Fund and Special Education Fund totaling P355,971,398.64 and P129,698,600.21, respectively, were not all covered by titles in the </p><p>name of the City, contrary to Section 39(2) of PD No. 1445 and Section 449, Volume 1 </p><p>of the Government Accounting and Auditing Manual (GAAM), hence, ownership and </p><p>existence could not be ascertained, thus, posing risk to third party claims and illegal </p><p>dispositions. </p><p>We reiterated our recommendation that the City Mayor direct the City Accountant and </p><p>the GSO to establish and reconcile their reports against the titles on hand and to facilitate </p><p>and expedite the immediate transfer of ownership of those lots without titles to protect the </p><p>interest of the government. </p><p>4. The warranty security from the contract awardee was not required in the procurement of goods, contrary to Section 62.1 of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of </p><p>Republic Act (RA) No. 9184, thus, corrections of manufacturing defects could not be </p><p>assured. Also, retention monies deducted from some procurement were claimed even </p><p>before the lapse of the warranty period. </p><p>We recommended that the City Mayor direct the City Accountant to deduct the retention </p><p>monies from all claims of suppliers of goods and to release them after the lapse of </p><p>warranty period. In case of claims for retention monies, only the special bank guaranty </p><p>should be required from the supplier. </p><p>5. Accountable Forms (AFs) totaling P837,625.00 were procured from private printer, Ready Forms Incorporated, contrary to Section 33 of COA Circular No. 2012-003 dated </p><p>October 29, 2012 and Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) </p><p>Memorandum Circular No. 2012-32 dated February 15, 2012, resulting in irregular </p><p>expenditures. This may also result in the lack of control over the assignment of series of </p></li><li><p>numbers which could lead to possible duplication of serial numbers of AFs printed with </p><p>recognized government printers. </p><p>We recommended that the City Mayor direct the concerned City Officials and Ready </p><p>Forms Inc. to refund the cost of accountable forms purchased from RFI totaling </p><p>P837,625.00. Also, ensure that the City engage the services of recognized government </p><p>printer in the printing of its AFs and that Management adhere strictly to the </p><p>aforementioned provisions. </p><p>6. The necessity of the City Government for hiring 849 Job Order (JO) personnel for CY 2015, which is more than 114% of the regular employees which cost the City of </p><p>P71,342,778.75 for salaries, could not be established due to failure to comply with the </p><p>rules and regulations in the employment and payment of salaries and wages for these JO </p><p>personnel, as required under Civil Service Commission (CSC) Resolution No. 02-1480 </p><p>dated November 12, 2002 and COA Circular No. 2012-001 dated June 14, 2012. </p><p>We recommended that the City Mayor direct: </p><p> the CHRDO to submit the individual statement of duties and responsibilities per assigned office and the related accomplishment reports of the JO personnel in </p><p>order to further evaluate the necessity of the services employed and regularity of </p><p>the amount paid by the City Government. </p><p> the CHRDO to evaluate the manpower requirements for each department/offices and project/programs to justify the necessity and legality in hiring JOs to avoid </p><p>duplication of functions. Also, the CHRDO comply strictly with the rules and </p><p>regulations set in the employment for a period not exceeding six months and the </p><p>City officials to require the proper and complete documentation upon payment of </p><p>salaries and wages for JOs. </p><p>7. Forty (40) Disbursement Vouchers (DVs) totaling P1,478,605.80 were not submitted to the Office of the Auditor for audit, in violation of COA Circular Nos. 2009-006 and 95-</p><p>006 dated September 15, 2009 and May 18, 1995, respectively, and Section 100 of </p><p>Presidential Decree (PD) No. 1445; hence, accuracy, validity and reliability of </p><p>transactions could not be determined. </p><p>We recommended that the City Mayor direct the City Accountant to strictly comply with </p><p>the provisions of COA Circular Nos. 2009-006 and 95-006 dated September 15, 2009 and </p><p>May 18, 1995, respectively, and Section 100 of Presidential Decree No. 1445 in the </p><p>submission of the reports and paid vouchers. </p><p>8. The City Government failed to fully implement/comply with the Environmental Code of the City in its solid waste management plan in establishing Materials Recovery Facilities </p><p>(MRF), contrary to Republic Act No. 9003, thus, may result in increasing problems on </p><p>solid waste which would affect the protection of public health, safety and environment. </p></li><li><p>We recommended that the CSWMB headed by the City Mayor to strictly comply with the </p><p>provisions of RA No. 9003 in the establishment of MRFs for the barangays. Likewise, </p><p>the City Government and the concerned barangay should strictly adhere with the </p><p>provisions in the MOU for the two existing MRFs. The City Mayor direct the officials </p><p>concerned to submit documents to justify the private use of the City Centralized MRF at </p><p>Barangay Timbao or impose appropriate action against those involved in the operation. </p><p>9. Various programs and projects implemented during the year under the 20% Development Fund totaling P97,715,326.98 were utilized more on the agencys economic development </p><p>and environment management while the project for improvement of barangay hall/day </p><p>care center in the amount of P921,915.79 considered for social development was not in </p><p>accordance with the Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2011-1 of the Department of </p><p>Interior and Local Government (DILG) and the Department of Budget and Management </p><p>(DBM), thus, the complete attainment of the purposes for which the funds are to be </p><p>appropriated and utilized were not achieved. </p><p>We recommended that the City Mayor direct the City Planning and Development Office </p><p>and the Budget Office to strictly comply with the guidelines specified in Joint </p><p>Memorandum Circular No. 2011-1 and to prioritize PPAs that are in the nature of </p><p>investment or capital expenditures, classified under social development, economic </p><p>development and environmental management for the attainment of socio-economic and </p><p>ecosystem well-being in their jurisdictions. </p><p>10. Prior years unexpended balances of Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (LDRRMF) for Quick Response Fund (QRF) and the LDRRMF- MOOE were not </p><p>transferred to the Special Trust Fund in the Trust Fund books, thus, the risk that the </p><p>unexpended balance may be appropriated for purposes other than those for which it was </p><p>intended. </p><p>We recommended that City Mayor direct the City Accountant to compute and account for </p><p>the accurate amount for the transfer of prior years unexpended balances to TF-DRRM </p><p>account in accordance with the pertinent provisions of COA Circular No. 2012-002 in </p><p>order to ensure that the fund is used for LDRRMF purposes only. </p><p>11. The City failed to submit a copy of the Gender and Development (GAD) Plan and Budget and corresponding accomplishment report to the Philippine Commission for Women </p><p>(PCW) and DBM. Further, out of P120,667,000.00 allotted for the implementation of </p><p>GAD, only P2,230,000.00 or 1.85% have been utilized in CY 2015, contrary with the </p><p>provisions of the General Appropriations Act (GAA) for FY 2015 and Joint Circular No. </p><p>2012-01 of the DBM-NEDA-NCRFW, thus, the intent of GAD on promoting gender-</p><p>responsive governance, protecting and fulfilling womens human rights, and promoting </p><p>womens empowerment were not fully achieved. </p></li><li><p>We recommended that the City Mayor direct: </p><p> the Chairperson, GAD Focal Point Officer and the Budget Officer to provide the NCRFW and the DBM with a copy of the approved Annual Gender and </p><p>Development (GAD) Plan and Budget and corresponding Accomplishment </p><p>Report on GAD. </p><p> the GAD Focal Point Officer to fully implement the GAD Plan so that the intent of GAD on promoting gender-responsive governance, protecting and fulfilling </p><p>womens human rights,...</p></li></ul>