Office of the President of the Philippines

PRESIDENTIAL ANTI-GRAFT COMMISSION

THE INTEGRITY
DEVELOPMENT ACTION
PLAN
REALITY
CHECK
REALITY CHECK
THE FIGHT
AGAINST √ Corruption is a problem
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION √ No government is spared
from the sting of corruption
THE IDAP
√ Corruption is one of the
biggest problems of the
IMPLEMENTIN Philippines since time
G THE IDAP immemorial
√ The Government is doing its
MONITORING part in trying to
THE IDAP
solve/eradicate this problem
PAGC-RDC I √ The Government cannot
PARTNERSHI solve this problem overnight
P nor can it solve the problem
REALITY
CHECK
GOVERNMENT
THE FIGHT
AGAINST INITIATIVES TO FIGHT
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
GRAFT AND CORRUPTION
 Administrative Controls
THE IDAP and
Procedural Reforms
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP  Increased funds for
anti-graft
MONITORING
THE IDAP  Internal audit controls
and streamlining of
PAGC-RDC I systems
PARTNERSHI
P
 Procurement reforms
REALITY
CHECK

THE FIGHT
Ch 21: MTPDP 2004-
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
2010
CORRUPTION ANTI-CORRUPTION
“Anti-corruption efforts
will focus on three areas of
THE IDAP
reform: (1) Punitive
IMPLEMENTIN measures that include
G THE IDAP effective enforcement of
anti-corruption laws…; (2)
MONITORING Preventive measures that
THE IDAP include the strengthening
of anti-corruption laws,
PAGC-RDC I improvement of integrity
PARTNERSHI
P systems, conduct of
REALITY
CHECK

THE FIGHT
THE INTEGRITY
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
DEVELOPMENT ACTION
CORRUPTION PLAN
National anti-corruption
framework of the Executive
THE IDAP Branch
IMPLEMENTIN Holistic approach in
G THE IDAP fighting corruption
composed of 22 specific
MONITORING anti-corruption measures
THE IDAP
(“doables”) clustered into
the strategies of
PAGC-RDC I Prevention, Education,
PARTNERSHI Investigation and
P
Enforcement (Deterrence),
The 22 “Doables”

 Easy to implement

 No requirements for additional budget

 Do not require
amendments of related
laws
REALITY
CHECK

THE FIGHT
IDAP STRATEGIES
AGAINST
GRAFT AND PREVENTION – systems reforms
CORRUPTION to minimize opportunities for
graft and corruption
THE IDAP EDUCATION – informing the
public on the ills of corruption
IMPLEMENTIN through advocacy, values
G THE IDAP
formation and educating the
public servants on the dos and
MONITORING don’ts of public service
THE IDAP
INVESTIGATION AND
ENFORCEMENT – making
PAGC-RDC I corruption a high-risk, low-
PARTNERSHI
P reward activity
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST 1. Strengthening of internal control
GRAFT AND through the institutionalization of
CORRUPTION internal audit service
2. Conduct of Integrity Development
Review
THE IDAP
3. Adoption of e-NGAS and fast
tracking of e-bidding
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP 4. Incorporating integrity check in
recruitment and promotion of
government personnel.
MONITORING
THE IDAP 5. Institutionalization of a multi-
stakeholder personnel and
organizational performance
PAGC-RDC I evaluation system
PARTNERSHI
P
6. Protection of meager income of
government employees
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION 1) Strengthening of internal
controls through the
institutionalization of
THE IDAP
internal audit unit
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP OUTCOME: Revival and
strengthening
MONITORING
THE IDAP
of systems integrity in all
agencies in the Executive
PAGC-RDC I Department
PARTNERSHI
P
REALITY
CHECK
PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST HOW CAN INTERNAL AUDIT
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
HELP PREVENT CORRUPTION?
 Internal Auditors…
THE IDAP
 Examine control procedure to
IMPLEMENTIN determine their adequacy and
G THE IDAP propriety
 Verify reliability and integrity of
MONITORING
THE IDAP financial and operating
information
PAGC-RDC I  Review the systems established
PARTNERSHI to ensure compliance with
P
existing policies, regulations,
REALITY
CHECK
PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST HOW CAN INTERNAL AUDIT
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
HELP PREVENT CORRUPTION?
(2)
 Internal Auditors…
THE IDAP
Review the means of
IMPLEMENTIN safeguarding assets
G THE IDAP Appraise the quality of
performance in carrying out
MONITORING
THE IDAP
assigned responsibilities
Review operations or
PAGC-RDC I programs to ascertain whether
PARTNERSHI the operations or programs are
P
being carried out as planned
INDICATORS:
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Audit findings are available to the public (except those concerning



national security)
Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt

practices and in assisting management in achieving more effective

governance regularly assessed

4 Random audits are carried out with reports and recommendations



for action provided to the head of the agency

Appropriate follow-up action are taken on any findings as maybe

necessary

3 Internal Audit Unit already operationalized



Internal Audit Unit has a manual of procedures

IAU has already complied with the International Standard for the

Professional Practice of Internal Auditing and the Code of Ethics

promulgated by the Association of Government Internal Auditors
(AGIA)

2 Department Order already disseminated to the employees



Orientation and discussion on the Department Order held

Training of Internal Auditors

1 Department Order creating the Internal Audit Unit, charter,



structure and function of which are in accordance with

Administrative Order No. 70 and DBM Circular 2004-04, already
approved
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST 1) Strengthening of internal control
GRAFT AND through the institutionalization of
CORRUPTIO internal audit unit
N
MILESTONES:

THE IDAP
 Issuance of OP Memorandum
Circular No. 89
IMPLEMENTIN  Creation of the Committee on the
G THE IDAP Institutionalization of Internal Audit
Units
MONITORIN  RSP per EO 366
G THE IDAP
 US$300,000 WB-IDF Grant for the
PAGC-RDC Strengthening of Internal Audit
PARTNERSHI Units for Effective Procurement
P
Monitoring and Enforcement
US$300,000 WB-IDF Grant for the
Strengthening of Internal Audit Units
for Effective Procurement Monitoring
and Enforcement
 Development of a Quality Assurance Program
on internal auditing functions
 Development of a Generic Internal Audit
Manual
 Operationalization of a National Training
Program for Internal Auditors
 Study on Certification/Accreditation of
Internal Auditors
 Development of a Procurement Monitoring
Pilot Agencies:

•Department of •Department of
Agriculture Transportation and
Communication
•Department of Education •Department of Finance
•DBM-Procurement Service •Land Bank of the
Philippines
•Department of the •National Power
Interior and Local Corporation
Government
•Department of Social •Province of Bulacan
Welfare and Development

•Department of Health •City of Marikina

•Department of Public •Municipality of Cainta
Works and Highways
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 2) Conduct of Integrity
CORRUPTION Development Review (IDR)
OUTCOME:
THE IDAP Institutionalization
of a structured,
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
comprehensive,
systematic, and continuous
MONITORING
assessment and
THE IDAP improvement
in all agencies.
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
P
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST WHAT IS IDR?
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
 A preventive measure
against corruption
THE IDAP that aims to build
institutional
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
foundations to
prevent corruption
MONITORING
before it occurs.
THE IDAP
 Entails a systemic
PAGC-RDC I
diagnosis of the
PARTNERSHI corruption resistance
P in place in an agency
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
OBJECTIVES OF IDR
GRAFT AND • Determines the level of
CORRUPTION integrity development
within the agency
• Identifies the agency’s
THE IDAP
vulnerability to
corruption
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP • Assesses the adequacy
of agency’s safeguards
to forestall corruption
MONITORING
THE IDAP • Prepares a Corruption
Prevention and
Integrity Enhancement
PAGC-RDC I Plan
PARTNERSHI
P • Establishes
benchmarks by which
 INTEGRITY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FRAMEWORK

Individual

Human Performance
Resource Management
Development
• Leadership
Organizational •Code of Ethics Financial
Procurement• Gifts and Management
Management Benefits
Policy
Whistleblowing,
Corruption
Internal Reporting
Risk
& Investigation
Management
Environment
Managing Interface with
External Environment
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5
IDR findings already presented and validated with the
management/head of agency
Agency already prepared an agency anticorruption/integrity

development plan (Roadmap)

Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt

practices regularly assessed

4 Corruption Vulnerability Assessment already conducted which



includes:
o Preparation of a Site Visit Plan
o Process map
o Risk Assessment
o Evaluation of controls and safeguards

3
Corruption Resistance Review (CRR) already conducted which
includes:
o Integrity Development Assessment (IDA)
o Survey of Employees
o Analysis of Results

2 Assessors to constitute IDR team identified and trained



IDR implementation plan for the agency already prepared

1 MOA among the agency, service provider and PAGC or OMB already


signed (should include the scope of the IDR and the terms of
reference, timeframe, resource and manpower requirements for the
conduct of the IDR)
Agencies covered by IDR:

DOH DENR
AFP NIA
BFP LRA
DPWH BOC
LTO DND-PVAO
BUCOR PNP
DAR BIR
LRTA DBM-PS
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 3) Fast tracking of e-
CORRUPTION
NGAS and e-bidding
for the procurement
THE IDAP
of goods services and
infrastructure
IMPLEMENTIN projects
G THE IDAP
OUTCOME: greater
transparency, correct,
MONITORING reliable, complete and
THE IDAP
timely recording of
government financial
PAGC-RDC I transactions and
PARTNERSHI financial reports
P
INDICATORS *e-bidding indicators subject to the
guidelines yet to be released by GPPB
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt



practices regularly assessed

4 e-NGAS in place and operational



3 Concerned personnel already trained on e-NGAS



2 MOA between COA (Government Accounting and Finance



Management Information System) and the head of agency on e-NGAS

implementation already signed
Employees already oriented on the MOA

1 Agency already complied with all the E-NGAS requirements which



include:
o Server System Requirements
o Workstation requirements
o People ware requirements
o Local Area Network (LAN)
o Existing System
Milestones:

E-NGAS installed in 412

agencies nationwide (250
NGAs, 147 LGUs, 15 GOCCs)
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 4) Incorporate
CORRUPTION
integrity check in
recruitment and
THE IDAP promotion of
IMPLEMENTIN government
G THE IDAP
personnel
MONITORING OUTCOME: greater
THE IDAP
awareness on the role of
integrity check in the
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI reduction of opportunities
P for abuse of discretion in
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST 4) Incorporate integrity check in
GRAFT AND recruitment and promotion of
CORRUPTION government personnel

 Section 27, Article II

THE IDAP (Declaration of State Policies
and Principles), 1987
IMPLEMENTIN Constitution
G THE IDAP “The state shall maintain honesty and
integrity in the public service and
take positive and effective
MONITORING measures against graft and
THE IDAP corruption”

PAGC-RDC I  IDAP Circular No. 01-2005

PARTNERSHI “The components of integrity check
P shall include lifestyle check and
  Name of Applicant: Position:
I
N 1. Subject states that he has been employed with your company from ________ to _____. His last
salary was ___________. Is this correct? _____ Yes _____ No
T 2. What was the nature of his / her work?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
E _________________________
3. How would you rate his / her job performance?__________ Very Satisfactory _________
G Satisfactory ________ Poor

R 4. Why did he / she leave? _____Laid-off _________ Resigned Reason: __________________________

Terminated ____________ Others Specify : ________________
I 5. Would you re-hire him / her? _______ Yes ______ No I
f not, why? _______________________________________________________
T 6. Did he lose any time because of poor health? _______ Yes ______ No
Y 7. Would you trust him / her with money matters? ______ Yes ______ No
8. How would you rate his / her relationship with his / her:
Superior: Co-workers:
C ______ Very Satisfactory ______ Very Satisfactory
H ______ Satisfactory ______ Satisfactory

E ______ Poor ______ Poor

9. What is your opinion regarding his / her:
C Work Attitude: _____ Positive ____ Average ____ Poor
K Character : _____ Very Good ____ Good ____ Poor
Dependability: _____ Very Dependable ____ Dependable ____ Not Dependable
10. Any additional information which you feel will help us in considering him / her for the
F position? ___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
O ___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

R
Accomplished by: ___________________ Signature : ___________________
M Position: _________________________ Company: _________________________
Telephone No.: ______________________ Date accomplished : __________________
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Impact as to its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt



practices regularly assessed

Results of the review used to enhance the recruitment and

promotion process

4 Performance of the personnel selection/promotion review board



regularly reviewed

3 Integrity check incorporated during the recruitment and promotion



process based on the approved guidelines

2 Written guidelines for the inclusion of integrity check in the



recruitment and promotion process communicated to all employees

Agency has a functioning personnel selection/promotion review

board
HRD personnel and members of the selection/promotion review

board trained in conducting integrity check

1 Department Order and written guidelines for the inclusion of



integrity check in its recruitment and promotion process in

accordance with CSC guidelines approved
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 5) Institutionalize
CORRUPTION
multi-stakeholder
performance
THE IDAP
evaluation system
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP OUTCOME:
Establishment of a
MONITORING
THE IDAP more objective
assessment of
PAGC-RDC I individual employee
PARTNERSHI
P performance
Institutionalize multi-stakeholder performance evaluation system

CROSS RATING
360-degree evaluation process
which involves multi-raters:
Percentage
Weight
Client Rater

Subordinate
Rater
P eer Rater

Self Rater

Supervisor
Rater Each rater is assigned
specific percentage
weight.
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Results of the review used to promote good behavior and



performance of employees
Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt

practices regularly assessed

4 System for rewarding good performance and sanctioning poor



performance in place
Multi-stakeholder performance evaluation system regularly reviewed

and improved

3 Multi-stakeholder performance evaluation system conducted



regularly

2 Orientation of the employees on the multi-stakeholder performance



evaluation system conducted

Composition of the Performance Evaluation Review Committee

(PERC) already identified

1 Department Order and written guidelines to implement a multi-



stakeholder performance evaluation system in accordance with

CSC Memorandum Circular No. 13, s. 1999 approved and
disseminated
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST 6) Protection of
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
meager income
of employees
THE IDAP OUTCOME: agency
officials are more
IMPLEMENTIN discerning in
G THE IDAP
entertaining credit
schemes offered to
MONITORING employees and public
THE IDAP
servants with enough
income to sustain at
PAGC-RDC I least their basic needs
PARTNERSHI
P (both food and non-
food) to lessen the risk
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
6) Protection of meager income of
GRAFT AND
employees
CORRUPTION  Indicator
Section 40 of the General
THE IDAP Appropriations Act (GAA)
states that “…deductions shall
IMPLEMENTIN not reduce the employee’s
G THE IDAP monthly net take home pay to
an amount lower than P3,000
after all authorized
MONITORING deductions…”
THE IDAP
 Milestone:
PAGC-RDC I
Executive Order No. 462 “Adopting
Measures and Safety Nets to Protect
PARTNERSHI
Government Employees, Creating
P
the Committee on Protection of
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST 6) Protection of meager income of
GRAFT AND employees
CORRUPTION
 Updates:
 Signed Executive Order No.
THE IDAP
641, “Authorizing the
IMPLEMENTIN
Establishment and
G THE IDAP Administration of Provident
Funds in the Government”
MONITORING
(dated 25 July 2007)
THE IDAP
 For approval:
PAGC-RDC I
 Leave credits as payment for
PARTNERSHI loans
P  Additional Special Privilege
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Impact as to its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt



practices regularly assessed

4 Level of implementation of the Department Order and guidelines



regularly reviewed

3 Amount of take-home pay of employees in accordance with the D.O.



and guidelines (D.O. operationalized)

2 Orientation on the Department Order and guidelines conducted



to all employees

1 Department Order and written guidelines in accordance with



GAA provision on the minimum amount of take-home pay of the

employees approved and disseminated
REALITY
CHECK PREVENTION
THE FIGHT 7) Adoption of a single ID
AGAINST system for government
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
officials and employees
 On April 19, 2006, the Philippine
THE IDAP
Supreme Court decided with
finality that the UM-ID System is
constitutional.
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
 Benefits of the UM-ID :
1)streamlining and harmonizing the
MONITORING
THE IDAP various ID systems and databases
can translate to millions of savings
for the government
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI 2)identity theft and fraudulent
P claims shall be prevented
REALITY
CHECK
EDUCATION
THE FIGHT
AGAINST 1. Dissemination of
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION compendium of
anticorruption laws, rules
and regulations.
THE IDAP
2. Preparation of agency-
IMPLEMENTIN specific code of ethical
G THE IDAP standards.
3. Conduct of ethics
MONITORING
THE IDAP
training, spiritual formation,
and moral recovery program
for agencies and
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI stakeholders.
P
4. Integration of anti-
REALITY
CHECK EDUCATION

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 1) Disseminate
CORRUPTION compendium of
anti-corruption
THE IDAP
laws, rules and
regulations
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP OUTCOME:
increased
MONITORING awareness of anti-
THE IDAP corruption laws,
rules and
PAGC-RDC I regulations among
PARTNERSHI government
P
employees
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt



practices regularly assessed

4 All computers in the agency have anti-corruption laws, rules and



regulations that could be downloaded and printed

Anti-corruption laws, rules and regulations displayed in conspicuous

places

3 Orientation on anti-corruption laws, rules and regulations with the



employees conducted

2 Department Order for the compilation of anti-corruption laws,



rules and regulations (applicable to the agency) approved and

disseminated

1 Research, compilation and coordination with an anti-corruption



agency like PAGC or Ombudsman done

Compiled anti-corruption laws, rules and regulations approved for

dissemination
REALITY
CHECK EDUCATION

THE FIGHT
AGAINST 2) Prepare agency-
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION specific code of
ethical
standards/guideli
THE IDAP
nes for adoption
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP OUTCOME: strict
adherence of
MONITORING employees to an
THE IDAP
agency-specific
PAGC-RDC I
code of ethical
PARTNERSHI standards
P
REALITY
CHECK EDUCATION

THE FIGHT PAGC PROJECT ON THE CODE OF

AGAINST CONDUCT
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION Promoting the Formulation and
Enforcement of Code of Conduct
by Government Agencies in the
THE IDAP Philippines (July – November 2008)
IMPLEMENTIN aims to promote the development
G THE IDAP
and implementation of codes of
conduct in the Philippines to
MONITORING improve the integrity of the public
THE IDAP
sector.
intended outcome is to reduce the
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI incidence of corruption at the
P department/ agency/ bureau/
Agencies covered by the
project:
ASSESSMENT & DEVELOPMENT OF
IMPROVEMENT OF AGENCY CODE OF
EXISTING CODES OF CONDUCT
CONDUCT
BOC DA
DPWH DENR
DOH PDEA
BI DepED
NLRC DILG
DSWD NIA
DFA
PAGC
What should be considered
in the code?
A. Policy Environment
1. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019), Approved on
17 August 1960
2. Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials
and Employees (R.A. 6713), Approved on 20 February 1989
3. Article XI Accountability of Public Officers, Sections 1 and 2,
The 1987 Constitution

A. The Code of Conduct

a. Purpose and Scope
b. Elements and Features
c. Form, Style, and Content
d. Drafting the Code
What should be considered
in the code?
C. Ethics and Accountability
1. Mission Statement
2. Values Statement
3. Code of Ethics Policy
4. Conflict of Interest Policy
5. Confidentiality Policy
6. Whistleblower Protection Policy
7. Record Retention and Document Destruction Policy

D. Board and Board Members (if applicable to the agency)

1. Role of the Board Policy
2. Board Member Agreement
3. Compensation of Board Members Policy
4. Board Member Expense Reimbursement Policy
5. Board Self-Assessment Policy
What should be considered
in the code?
E. Head of Agency
1. Chief Executive Job Description
2. Chief Executive Performance Evaluation Policy
3. Executive Compensation Policy
4. Executive Transition Policy

F. Finance and Investments

1. Budgeting Policy
2. Capital Expenditures Policy
3. Financial Controls Policy
4. Investments Policy
5. Financial Audits Policy
6. Risk Management Policy

G. Customer Relations
1. Gift Acceptance Policy
2. Complaints Handling Policy
What should be considered
in the code?
H. Personnel
1. Responsibility for Human Resource Policy
2. Equal Employment Opportunity Policy
3. Nepotism Policy
4. Sexual Harassment Policy
5. Workplace Environment Policy
6. Complaints Policy
7. Performance Review Policy

I. Communications
1. Media Relations Policy
2. Crisis Communications Policy
3. Electronic Media Policy
4. Political Activity Policy
What should be considered
in the code?
J. Committees
1. Governance Committee Policy
2. Financial Committees: Finance, Audit
and Investment Policy
3. Development Committee Policy
4. Executive Committee Policy
5. Management Committee Policy
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 The agency code of ethical standards regularly reviewed for



effectiveness in specifying and promoting desired behavior of

employees
The code of ethical standards integrated in all operating systems of

the agency (e.g. human resource management, procurement)

Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt

practices regularly assessed

4
Employees’ record of adherence to or violation of the agency code of
ethical standards used as one of the considerations for promotion
Rewards given to officials and employees who consistently exhibit

behavior consistent with the agency code of ethical standards

3 Agency-specific code of ethical standards consistently enforced, with



managers having clear tasks of promoting and monitoring

compliance
Applicable provisions of the code of ethical standards included in

contracts with external parties (e.g. suppliers)

2 Agency-specific code of ethical standards and reward and sanction



guidelines approved and disseminated

Employees oriented and made to sign a sworn commitment to

comply with the code of ethical standards

1 Department Order creating an agency-specific code of ethical



standards consistent with RA 6713 approved and disseminated

REALITY
CHECK EDUCATION

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
3) Provide ethics
training, spiritual
formation, moral
THE IDAP
recovery program
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
OUTCOME:
MONITORING
Government
THE IDAP employees with
renewed sense of
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
idealism
P
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt



practices regularly assessed

4 Trainings conducted reviewed and evaluated



Trainers evaluated

3 Trainings conducted in accordance with the training plan



2 Trainings to be conducted yearly and pool of trainers identified



 Training program plan approved

1
Department Order prioritizing ethics training spiritual formation and
moral recovery program approved and disseminated
Discussions, studies and coordination with agencies on appropriate

trainings on values formation conducted

REALITY
CHECK EDUCATION

THE FIGHT
AGAINST 4) Mandate
GRAFT AND integration of anti-
CORRUPTION
corruption in
elementary and
secondary
THE IDAP
education modules
IMPLEMENTIN - For DepEd only
G THE IDAP
 Corruption Prevention
MONITORING Teaching Exemplars
THE IDAP
 Affirm the
indispensability of
PAGC-RDC I values education
PARTNERSHI programs that focus on
P building personal
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND
THE FIGHT ENFORCEMENT
1. Development of agency Internal
AGAINST
Complaint Unit.
GRAFT AND 2. Setting up/strengthening of
CORRUPTION agency Internal Affairs Unit.
3. Publication of blacklisted
offenders and on-line database
THE IDAP for public access.
IMPLEMENTIN 4. Holding superiors accountable
G THE IDAP for corrupt activities of
subordinates.
5. Advocacy for the submission of
MONITORING
Income Tax Returns as
THE IDAP
attachment to the SALN.
6. Effective use of existing agency
PAGC-RDC I administrative disciplinary
PARTNERSHI machinery and publication of
P results
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
1) Develop agency
Internal
Complaint Unit
THE IDAP (including
IMPLEMENTIN
protection of
G THE IDAP whistleblowers)
\

MONITORING OUTCOME:
THE IDAP
Increase number of
informants willing
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
to come out and
P expose graft and
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST 1) Develop agency Internal Complaint
GRAFT AND Unit (including protection of
CORRUPTION
whistleblowers)

THE IDAP  Internal Complaints

Unit
IMPLEMENTIN  receive all complaints
G THE IDAP
 accountable for ensuring
MONITORING
that proper documentation
THE IDAP is effected, sources are
protected and initial
PAGC-RDC I screening is done
PARTNERSHI  acts on complaints involving
P
violation/s of the
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5
The agency regularly assesses whether the internal reporting system being used
is an effective mechanism to prevent corrupt practices
Results of the assessment used to improve and enhance the internal reporting

process

4 The agency protects and rewards employees who report corrupt behavior


3
The agency has an internal reporting system which follows a standard processing
time and specifies roles and responsibilities for accepting reports and giving
advice to employees who want to report corruption
The agency records steps taken on complaints and provide feedback to

complainants
Coordination with Internal Affairs Unit on-going

2 Employees oriented on the procedures for reporting corrupt incidents



Relevant personnel trained on the handling of complaints and reports of



corruption

Department Order creating ICU and guidelines (which specify what

1


constitutes corrupt and unethical behavior and the responsibilities for

reporting) approved and disseminated
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
2) Set-
up/strengthen
internal affairs
THE IDAP
unit
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
OUTCOME:
MONITORING
Stronger
THE IDAP investigative
capability within
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
the agency and
P faster resolution
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 2) Set-up/strengthen internal affairs unit
CORRUPTION
 Internal Affairs Unit
THE IDAP  Act and investigate
IMPLEMENTIN complaints involving
G THE IDAP violations of the Code of
Conduct and Anti-Graft
MONITORING
THE IDAP Law
 May conduct motu
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
proprio investigation
P
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 The agency regularly assesses whether the investigation system



being used is an effective mechanism to prevent corrupt practices

Results of the assessment used to improve and enhance the

investigation process

4 Coordination with other anti-corruption body (e.g. PAGC and OMB)



on-going
The agency imposes appropriate sanctions to erring employees and

officials

3 The agency has an investigation system which follows a standard



processing time and specifies roles and responsibilities for

conducting investigations

2 The agency regularly disseminates information on the disposition of



cases
Relevant personnel trained on investigation

1 Department Order creating IAU and guidelines approved and



disseminated
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION 3) Publish blacklisted
offenders and
maintain on-line
THE IDAP
central database
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP OUTCOME:
Greater
MONITORING
THE IDAP
perception of
corruption being a
PAGC-RDC I
high-risk, low-
PARTNERSHI reward activity
P
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST IDAP CIRCULAR NO. 01 – 2005
GRAFT AND  For blacklisting:
CORRUPTION
 A supplier who violated
the Procurement Law
THE IDAP
 Employees who are found
IMPLEMENTIN guilty of violations and
G THE IDAP
whose sanction involves
dismissal with perpetual
MONITORING
THE IDAP
disqualification from
public office
PAGC-RDC I  this measure shall only
PARTNERSHI apply to cases whose
P
decisions are final and
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt



practices regularly assessed

Results of the assessment used to improve or modify the measure

4 Policies on blacklisting regularly reviewed and improved



3 Blacklisted offenders published in agency publication, in the website



and made available to the public

2 Employee orientation on the publishing of blacklisted offenders held



1 Department Order and guidelines (with consideration on the



legal implications) directing the publish of blacklisted offenders

approved and disseminated
75
 PAGC (no. of officials ordered to be penalized)

75

500+
538%
%
134 presidential appointees:

Undersecretary (DPWH), Dep Dir Gen (TESDA), Asst Secretaries (OP,

ATO, DND, DSWD, DOST), Chairman of the Board (LWUA), Board
Members (NTA, PEA, NBDB), Presidents (State University, PNOC, PADC),
Chairman (PEA, KWF, PHILRACOM, PRC), Commissioners (BI, PCUP,
NLRC), Asst Commissioner (SEC), Administrators (NTA, NIA, CDA, IA,
FIDA, NDA, MWSS, LWUA, NIA), Dep Administrator (NTA), Gen Managers
(PEA, DFP, LLDA), Asst Gen Manager (PEA), Dep Gen Manger (PEA),
Regional Directors (DECS, TESDA, DA, LTO, BIR, DPWH, NCIP, DPWH,
DSWD, NBI, BIR, CHED), Executive Directors (DOF, OSCC, LCP, NWRB),
Deputy Executive Directors (CHED, TESDA), Directors (CHED, DA, DBM,
PHILVOCS, DOST, DOH, NCC, DPWH, NPO, OPA, EMB, TESDA, DSWD),
Deputy Director (DOST), Regional Directors (BLGF, DOLE, DAR, DEPED,
DTI), Assistant Regional Directors (DA, DSWD, DTI), Provincial Director
(DTI), Customs Collector, Prosecutors, Regional Adjudicators, Assistant
Prosecutors, Labor Arbiter (NLRC), Senior Corporate Attorney (PEA),
Attorney (POEA, TESDA), Chief Administrative Officer (TESDA),
Accountant II (CHED), Schools Division Superintendent
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTIO
N
4) Hold superiors
accountable for
corrupt activities
THE IDAP of subordinates
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP OUTCOME:
MONITORIN
Superiors are
G THE IDAP conscientious in
preventing corrupt
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
activities of their
P subordinates
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT 4) Hold superiors accountable for corrupt activities of

AGAINST subordinates
GRAFT AND IDAP Circular No. 02-2006, re: Legal bases
CORRUPTION on Command Responsibility

 The rules governing the liability of public officers

in general as laid down in Sec. 38, Chapter 9,
Book I of the Administrative Code of 1987,
THE IDAP to wit;
 A public officer shall not be civilly liable for
IMPLEMENTIN acts done in the performance of his official
G THE IDAP duties unless there is a clear showing of bad
faith, malice or gross negligence.
 Any public officer who, without just cause,
neglects to perform a duty within a fixed
MONITORING period by law or regulation, or within a
THE IDAP reasonable period if none is fixed, shall be
liable for damages to the private party
concerned without prejudice to such other
liability as may be prescribed by law.
PAGC-RDC I
 A head of a department or a superior officer
PARTNERSHI shall not be civilly liable for the wrongful acts,
P omissions of duty, negligence, or misfeasance
of his subordinates, unless he has actually
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT 4) Hold superiors accountable for corrupt

AGAINST activities of subordinates
GRAFT AND  Mechem (Cruz, Liability of Public
CORRUPTION Officers 2003 Edition) noted several
exceptions and suggests that the
superior officer may be held liable:
 where, being charged with the duty of
THE IDAP employing or retaining his subordinates,
he negligently or willfully employs or
IMPLEMENTIN retains unfit or improper persons;
G THE IDAP  where, being charged with the duty to
see that they are appointed and qualified
in a proper manner, he negligently or
MONITORING willfully fails to require of them the due
conformity to the prescribed regulations;
THE IDAP
 where he so carelessly or negligently
oversees, conducts or carries on the
PAGC-RDC I business of his office as to furnish the
opportunity for the default; and,
PARTNERSHI
P  a fortiori where he has directed,
authorized or cooperated in the wrong.
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5
Guidelines and rules of procedures regularly reviewed and
improved
Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt

practices regularly assessed

Results of the assessment used to improve or enhance the measure

4 Superiors are held accountable/sanctioned for corrupt activities of



their subordinates in accordance with the guidelines

3 System in holding superiors accountable for corrupt activities



of subordinates in place and operational

2 Employees and heads oriented on the doctrine of command



responsibility

1 Department Order holding superiors accountable for corrupt



activities of subordinates and guidelines in accordance with

E.O. 292 approved and disseminated
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
5) Advocate for the
GRAFT AND submission of
CORRUPTION
ITR as
attachment to
THE IDAP the SALN
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
OUTCOME:
increased
MONITORING
transparency of
THE IDAP the income and
net worth of
PAGC-RDC I government
PARTNERSHI
P employees
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Copies of the ITRs as attachment to the SALN of presidential



appointees submitted for PAGC datebase

Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt

practices regularly assessed

4 The agency rewards employees who attached their ITR to their SALN


3 ITRs of personnel with other sources of income attached to their



SALN

2 Employee orientation on the relevance of attaching the ITR to



the SALN held

1 Department Order advocating submission of ITR as attachment to the



SALN
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 6) Use effectively
CORRUPTION existing agency
administrative
THE IDAP disciplinary
machinery and
IMPLEMENTIN publish results
G THE IDAP

OUTCOME: Greater
MONITORING adherence to and a
THE IDAP
more proactive
implementation of
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI the administrative
P disciplinary
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt



practices regularly assessed

4 Existing agency administrative disciplinary machinery regularly



reviewed and improved

3 Reports on the implementation of existing agency



administrative disciplinary machinery regularly submitted to the

agency head

2 Orientation/reorientation of employees on existing agency



administrative disciplinary machinery conducted

1 Department Order reinforcing the use of existing agency



administrative disciplinary machinery approved and

disseminated
REALITY
CHECK INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 7) PAGC to carry out
CORRUPTION independent survey to
check anti-graft and
corruption programs
THE IDAP and effectiveness
IMPLEMENTIN  Development of IDAP
G THE IDAP indicators (1-5 levels of
achievement)
MONITORING  to measure efficiency
THE IDAP (process-based)
 Development of the Anti-
PAGC-RDC I Corruption Scorecard
PARTNERSHI
P
(ACS)
 to measure effectiveness/
REALITY
CHECK
ANTI-CORRUPTION SCORECARD
THE FIGHT (ACS)
AGAINST  aims to assess the impact or
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
effectiveness of existing anti-
corruption reforms, with special
focus on the IDAP (results-
THE IDAP focused).

IMPLEMENTING  adopts a holistic approach in

THE IDAP
assessment that includes the
following assessors/respondents:
MONITORING  Accountable persons (persons in-
THE IDAP charge of implementing the IDAP
measures)
PAGC-PMA  Select rank and file employees of the
PARTNERSHIP agency being assessed
 Stakeholders (Government and Non-
REALITY
CHECK STRATEGIC
THE FIGHT
AGAINST
PARTNERSHIP
1. Linking of databases of
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION complementary agencies
and sharing of information.

THE IDAP
2. Enhancement of the private
sector and civil society
IMPLEMENTIN participation in various
G THE IDAP areas of governance.
3. Tapping of international
MONITORING
THE IDAP development agencies and
private sector for support.
PAGC-RDC I 4. Institutionalization of the
PARTNERSHI
P
participation of
stakeholders in agency
REALITY
CHECK STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

THE FIGHT
AGAINST 1) Linking of
GRAFT AND existing
CORRUPTION databases of
complementary
agencies and
THE IDAP sharing of
information
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP OUTCOME: Greater
sharing of
MONITORING
information and
THE IDAP increased
evidences of
collaborative
PAGC-RDC I undertakings
PARTNERSHI among agencies in
P
education,
INDICATORS

RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt



practices regularly assessed

4 Report on the utilization of the information shared



Linking of existing databases to complementary agencies regularly

reviewed and improved

3 Sharing of databases and information between/among agencies on-



going

2 Employee orientation on sharing of information with other



agencies conducted

1 Department Order and guidelines on sharing of information



approved and disseminated

REALITY
CHECK STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 2) Enlist or
CORRUPTION enhance
participation of
THE IDAP private sector
and civil society
IMPLEMENTIN in various areas
G THE IDAP
of governance
MONITORING OUTCOME: Greater
THE IDAP
vigilance and
PAGC-RDC I
strategic
PARTNERSHI investments in
P various forms by
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Regular review and study of the involvement of private sector



and civil society conducted

Results of the review used to improve partnership

Impact regularly assessed if it is an effective mechanism to

prevent corrupt practices

4 Operational process where inputs from private sector and civil



society are taken into consideration--in place

3 Private sector and civil society involved in various agency-



activities related to the promotion of good governance

2 Employee orientation on the signed MOA conducted



1 MOA (with guidelines specifying the extent of participation)



formalizing private sector and civil society participation

signed/approved and disseminated
REALITY
CHECK STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 3) Tap international
CORRUPTION development
agencies and
THE IDAP private sector for
support
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
OUTCOME: Greater
MONITORING
external resources
THE IDAP mobilized and
improved perception
PAGC-RDC I on the resolve to
PARTNERSHI
P fight graft and
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Partnerships with various partner agencies and the private sector



assessed as regards effectiveness in attaining agency goals.

New donors support agency activities

4 Process of implementation of each project reviewed and evaluated



for improvement
Monitoring system in place and operational

3 Employees oriented on the agreement/s with partner agencies



Approval and implementation of the project

2 Project proposal submitted for approval



Official communication from partner agencies and private sector

signifying approval of request for support for particular

projects/activities released (e.g. Grant or Cooperative
Agreements)

1 Areas requiring support and possible providers of the support from



the international community identified

REALITY
CHECK STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

THE FIGHT
AGAINST
GRAFT AND 4) Institutionalize
CORRUPTION
stakeholder
participation
THE IDAP

IMPLEMENTIN OUTCOME:
G THE IDAP
Greater
involvement by
MONITORING
THE IDAP the
stakeholders
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
guided by the
P principles of
INDICATORS
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5 Regular review and study of the involvement of stakeholder



conducted
Results of the review used to improve partnership

4 Feed back mechanism where stakeholder inputs are taken into



consideration in place and operational

3 Stakeholder participates in various agency-activities



2 Employee orientation on the signed MOA conducted



1 MOA (with guidelines specifying the extent of participation)



formalizing stakeholder participation signed/approved and

disseminated (e.g. Employees’ Union)
REALITY
CHECK
IMPLEMENTING THE IDAP
THE FIGHT
AGAINST There are 156 IDAP-covered government
GRAFT AND Agencies in the Executive Branch
CORRUPTION
Departments
Bureaus
THE IDAP Attached Agencies
Regional Offices
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
GOCC
GFI
MONITORING What is the goal of PAGC?
THE IDAP
Ensure that ALL agencies
in the Executive Branch are
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI implementing the IDAP
P
REALITY
CHECK
5 STEPS IN IMPLEMENTING THE
THE FIGHT IDAP
AGAINST
GRAFT AND Step 1. Create an IDAP
CORRUPTION Committee
Identify Define
the Head, functions, Make it
THE IDAP the responsibilities, official
members accountabilities

IMPLEMENTIN To get

G THE IDAP •Values? •clear? commitment of
agency head
•Integrity?
•specific? To
•Commitment? institutionalize
MONITORING •doable? it
THE IDAP •Dedication?
To streamline
•Proactive? the
implementation
PAGC-RDC I of all anti-
corruption
PARTNERSHI programs
P
REALITY
CHECK
5 STEPS IN IMPLEMENTING THE
THE FIGHT IDAP
AGAINST
GRAFT AND Step 2. Prepare your IDAP
CORRUPTION plan of action
 What are the measures…
THE IDAP
 already in place?
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP  That can be set up
immediately?
MONITORING  That need intensive staff
THE IDAP
work before
implementation?
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
P * Based on the IDAP indicators
REALITY
CHECK
5 STEPS IN IMPLEMENTING THE
THE FIGHT IDAP
AGAINST
GRAFT AND Step 3. Prepare your IDAP
CORRUPTION
work program

THE IDAP  Set targets

IMPLEMENTIN  Plan specific activities vis-

G THE IDAP
à-vis accountable person
MONITORING  Identify assistance
THE IDAP
needed
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
(if any)
P
 IDAP WORK PROGRAM FORM
IDAP ACTIVITIE OUTPUT/ TARGET ACCOUN ISSUES/
MEASURE S MOV DATE TABLE CONCERN/
PERSON PROBLEM
DESCRIP ACTION
TION TO BE
TAKEN
REALITY
CHECK
5 STEPS IN IMPLEMENTING THE
THE FIGHT IDAP
AGAINST Step 4. Regularly monitor
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION
and assess your
implementation
 Regular meeting of IDAP
THE IDAP Committee members
- What are the next steps?
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP  Regular evaluation
- are activities done as
MONITORING scheduled?
THE IDAP - are the strategies for
implementation effective?
PAGC-RDC I - are the accomplishments
PARTNERSHI indicators of efficiency or
P effectiveness?
REALITY
CHECK
5 STEPS IN IMPLEMENTING THE
THE FIGHT IDAP
AGAINST
GRAFT AND Step 5. Report
CORRUPTION
accomplishments

THE IDAP  Agency Head

IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP  PAGC

MONITORING  Media
THE IDAP

PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
P
REALITY
CHECK
MONITORING AND REPORTING THE
THE FIGHT IDAP
AGAINST
GRAFT AND  IDAP Progress Report
CORRUPTION
 Measures (Doables)

THE IDAP  Action taken

IMPLEMENTIN  Means of Verification

G THE IDAP
 Remarks
MONITORING
THE IDAP

PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
P
IDAP PROGRESS REPORT FORM
Prevention
AGENCY NAME:
IDAP PROGRESS REPORT
As of ____________ 2007

  IDAP MEASURE – STATUS / ACTION TAKEN AS OF MEANS OF REMARKS*

PREVENTION ABOVE DATE VERIFICATION

1 Strengthen internal control      

through
institutionalization of
Internal Audit Unit
2 Conduct of Integrity      
Development Review
3 Fast-tract e-NGAS and e-      
bidding for the
procurement of goods
& services

Reviewed by: Approved by:

 
Prepared by:
 
REALITY
CHECK
MONITORING AND REPORTING THE
THE FIGHT IDAP
AGAINST
GRAFT AND  IDAP Rating Report
CORRUPTION
 Measures (Doables)
 Agency self-assessment
THE IDAP
Remember:
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP 1) Use the set of IDAP
indicators (5-pt level of
achievement) as basis.
MONITORING
THE IDAP 2) Lower level indicators are
pre-requisites of higher level
PAGC-RDC I indicators
PARTNERSHI 3) All the requirements of a
P
particular level should be
SAMPLE SET OF INDICATORS, re: Code of
Conduct
RATING LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT

5
The agency code of ethical standards regularly reviewed for
effectiveness in specifying and promoting desired behavior of
employees
The code of ethical standards integrated in all operating systems of the
agency (e.g. human resource management, procurement)
Impact of its effectiveness as a mechanism to prevent corrupt
practices regularly assessed

4
Employees’ record of adherence to or violation of the agency code of
ethical standards used as one of the considerations for promotion
Rewards given to officials and employees who consistently exhibit
behavior consistent with the agency code of ethical standards

3
Agency-specific code of ethical standards consistently enforced, with
managers having clear tasks of promoting and monitoring compliance
Applicable provisions of the code of ethical standards included in
contracts with external parties (e.g. suppliers)

2
Agency-specific code of ethical standards and reward and sanction
guidelines approved and disseminated
Employees oriented and made to sign a sworn commitment to comply
with the code of ethical standards

1
Department Order creating an agency-specific code of ethical
standards consistent with RA 6713 approved and disseminated
AGENCY NAME

IDAP RATING REPORT

AS OF ________________________

  IDAP MEASURE - PREVENTION RATIN   IDAP MEASURE - DETERRENCE RATIN

G G

1Strengthen internal control through  1Develop agency internal complaint unit 

institutionalization of Internal Audit Unit (including protection of internal
whistleblowers)

2Conduct of Integrity Development Review   2Set-up/strengthen agency internal affairs unit 

(cooperate w/ PAGC &OMB in the proactive
conduct of lifestyle checks)

3Fast-track e-NNGAS and e-bidding for the  3Publish blacklisted offenders & maintain on- 
procurement of goods & services line central database for public access

4Incorporate integrity check in recruitment &   4Hold superiors accountable for corrupt 
promotion of government personnel activities of subordinates

5Institutionalize multi-stakeholder personnel &   5Advocate for the submission of ITR as 
organizational performance evaluation system attachment to the SALN

6Protect the meager income of government  6Use effectively existing agency administrative 
employees disciplinary machinery and publish results

7Adopt single ID system for government  7PAGC to carry out independent survey to 
officials & employees check anti-graft and corruption program
effectiveness
REALITY
CHECK
HOW TO GET THE AVERAGE
THE FIGHT RATING?
AGAINST
P1 – n/a Prevention (P) – 2.83
GRAFT AND + Deterrence (D) – 3.00
CORRUPTION + P2 – 3
Education (E) – 4.20
P3 – 2 Strategic
P4 – 3 Partnership (SP) – 3.00
P5 – 4
THE IDAP = 13.03
P6 – 3
P7 – 2 4
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
________ = 3.26
= 17 = 2.83 (average rating
(average
6 of the agency)
MONITORING rating for
THE IDAP
Prevention)

PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI
P
REALITY
CHECK

THE FIGHT PAGC COMMITMENTS

AGAINST
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION  Mentor Local
Government Units of
THE IDAP Region I in IDAP
IMPLEMENTING
implementation
THE IDAP

 Ensure that all concerns

MONITORING
THE IDAP related to the promotion
of good governance
PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHIP
raised by the Local
Government Units of
REALITY
CHECK

THE FIGHT
PAGC REQUESTS
AGAINST
GRAFT AND
CORRUPTION  Adoption of the IDAP by
Local Government Units
THE IDAP of Region I
IMPLEMENTIN
G THE IDAP
 Reporting of observed
MONITORING
irregularities
THE IDAP

 Support to all anti-

PAGC-RDC I
PARTNERSHI corruption activities
P
 IDAP IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU
TO…

 Be able to “WALK THE TALK”

 Be an ACTIVE PARTICIPANT rather than

a mere spectator of a positive revolution

 Start making a DIFFERENCE rather than

expecting others to take the lead

 Serve like CANDLES in the dark

 For our fight
against
corruption - the
hardest battle of
our lives...
May we get
inspiration from
the story of
“David and
Goliath”

POLITICAL WILL
 PRESIDENTIAL ANTI-GRAFT COMMISSION

ADDRESS: SAAC Building Commonwealth Avenue

Diliman, Quezon City
TEL. NO.: 924 1311/ 924 1312
FAX NO.: 925 8928
SMS NO.: 0917 TXT PAGC
898 7242
E-MAIL: mail@pagc.gov.ph
WEBSITE: www.pagc.gov.ph