PERFORMANCE AUDIT AND PUBLIC POLICY EVALUATION: THE CASE OF SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS

Viana, Luís Cracel; Carpinteiro, José Palma

doi:10.12660/cgpc.v30.91309

home Sumário navigate_before Anterior Atual Seguinte navigate_next

home Sumário

FORUM – PUBLIC MANAGEMENT CONTROL AND SUSTAINABILITY: DYNAMICS, EXPERIENCES, AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES IN PORTUGUESE SPEAKING COUNTRIES • Cad. Gest. Pública Cid. 30 • 2025 • https://doi.org/10.12660/cgpc.v30.91309 linkcopy

PERFORMANCE AUDIT AND PUBLIC POLICY EVALUATION: THE CASE OF SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

This paper presents two public governance instruments at the disposal of Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs), performance audit and policy evaluation, aimed at promoting accountability and learning in public policy development. Respective definitions and types are provided, and in relation to performance audit the paper elaborates on the pervasive tension between independence and relevance of audit practices, associated with the stylized functions of watchdog and sheepdog. The regulatory environment for the development of policy evaluation by SAIs is briefly described. The contribution of the paper is the design of a set of parameters and associated content for each of the two instruments that allows their comparison and evolution, contrasting with the trend in the literature to identify similarities and differences between them.

Keywords:
accountability; performance audit; public policy evaluation; public management; supreme audit institutions

TYPE	DESCRIPTION
Economy audit	Focuses on examining inputs in order to assess whether costs are being minimized, ensuring the level of quality
Efficiency audit	Analyzes the relationship between outputs and resources used in the production of public goods and services
Program effectiveness audit	Focuses on assessing whether outcomes have been achieved
Performance management capacity audit	Assesses whether the auditee has the conditions and skills to manage processes and programs efficiently and effectively
Performance information audit	The information disclosed by the auditees on performance is audited by reference to a set of attributes (e.g. reliability, relevance, timeliness)
Risk assessment audit	Aims to alert those responsible to risks that may jeopardize the success of a public policy
Best practice review	The aim is, through research methodologies, identify the factors that explain the best practices found, contributing to define criteria for other types of audits
General management review	An assessment is made of an organization rather than a policy or program, seeking to identify the causes of any performance problems within the organization

TYPE	DESCRIPTION
Process evaluation (or implementation)	The evaluation has a formative purpose; that is, it seeks to examine the extent to which a policy (or program) is being implemented as intended, produces the expected results, and follows the requirements, design, standards, or expectations of stakeholders. Aims to answer the question: What can be learned from the implementation of the public policy?
Evaluation of outcomes	The evaluation has a summative purpose, insofar as it seeks to assess whether a given policy (or program) achieved its outcomes and how they were (or were not) achieved Aims to answer the question: Did the public policy work?
Impact evaluation	The evaluation serves a summative purpose aimed at measuring the effects of a policy (or program) by estimating what would have occurred in the absence of that policy (or program). Aims to answer the question: What difference did the public policy make?
Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis	Cost-benefit analysis seeks to identify all the qualitative and quantitative costs and benefits associated with a policy (or program), typically expressed in monetary units. Cost-effectiveness analysis aims to identify all costs to achieve a goal or objective, and can be used to identify the lowest cost alternative to achieve that goal or objective Aims to answer the question: Does the public policy justify the resources consumed?

PARAMETER	PERFORMANCE AUDIT	PUBLIC POLICY EVALUATION
Focus	Policy administration	Policy conceptualization
Criteria	Economy, efficiency, effectiveness	Economy, efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, utility Identify the unforeseen consequences of the policy as well
Object	Entities and programs	Programs
Actors independency	SAIs are largely independent of the audited entities or programs and of political power. The PA topics are chosen by the SAI and may take into account requests from political power.	The evaluation entities are usually dependent on political power Third parties usually indicate the evaluation topics
Methodology	Follows standards and guidelines associated with audit objectives. More descriptive in nature, establishing facts rather than their causes (what)	Originating from the social sciences, it aims to answer questions related to the efficiency and effectiveness of policy programs. More explanatory in nature, oriented towards the causes of a given effect (the why)
Approach	Emphasizes the identification of issues rather than providing advice for improving governance and management of public policies	Emphasizes the improvement of governance and management of public policies, with a learning objective. It can also serve reward and punishment purposes (accountability)
Institutional positioning	Developed by SAI, distant from the political process	Developed by the entity implementing the public policy, by public administration agencies and/or consultants (e.g., companies, academia) It can be part of the mandate of the SAIs. It is part of the political process, being better positioned to advise on the design of policies.
Timeframe	More short-term, being able to detect problems earlier, but drawing premature conclusions about the usefulness of a public intervention	Due to the need to assess impacts (see Figure 1), it requires a long time for, in addition to the outcomes, produce impacts in society. Often incorporates the perspectives of those who were affected by the public intervention.
Recipients of reports	The general public, the legislative branch (parliament), and the executive branch (government)	Typically, the executive branch (government)

vertical_align_top show_chart

more_horiz close
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

Fundação Getulio Vargas, Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo Cep: 01313-902, +55 (11) 3799-7898 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: cadernosgpc-redacao@fgv.br

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS