Being equipped: PPTRP has trained journalists, advocates and ordinary citizens to better understand, monitor and report on transparency issues.

In Zamboanga Del Norte, the provincial council approved a PhP 25 million (USD 595,238) supplemental budget for intelligence funds with barely a month left in the fiscal year. In Iligan City, a councilor barged into the announcer’s booth of a local radio station and attacked the news anchor who had questioned the PhP 14 million (USD 333,333) budget allegedly spent for snacks during committee hearings. The broadcaster had said he never saw any snacks served at the hearings.

In Bicol, a quarry that has been in operation for several years has failed to pay any fees over to the barangay in which it sits. In Misamis Occidental, a fourth class municipality has pegged its salary scale to that of a second class municipality and nobody has complained since employees are all reportedly benefiting. Western Samar meanwhile, has been subsisting on a reenacted budget since 2008 which begs the question what has happened to all the savings made from one-off projects which were continually refunded.

The incidents in the first cases are, at minimum, issues for investigation, indicating possible abuse of authority and misuse of funds. The first two cases in the second paragraph illustrate examples of violations of the Local Government Code. The last, meanwhile could be seen as an abdication by the provincial council of its responsibility.

All highlight issues of public transparency and accountability.

There is an abundance of transparency issues to investigate and cover in the Philippines. While the national media cannot be blamed for its tendency to concentrate on national or major controversies that may feature the executive, national departments or agencies, Congress, the judiciary, police and military -- issues and incidents pertaining to local governance cannot be ignored.

The local government unit (LGU) is the representative body of national government and chief implementer of its programs. Most people’s daily experience of authority is at the local level and so problems with transparency and outright corruption here eat away at the credibility of the sitting administration. The impact of any form of malfeasance at the LGU level is directly felt by the community. Misused funds for health programs, for example, may mean lack of vaccines for infants, higher maternal deaths and a lack, if not absence, of key medical personnel in health centers and local government hospitals. Consequently, the importance of monitoring and reporting on transparency and anti-corruption by local journalists and good governance advocates, cannot be overemphasized.

Yet while local governance issues abound and cry out for coverage, the skills and knowledge needed by journalists and advocates to monitor and report are sadly lacking.

Building the skills and capacity of people to understand so as to better monitor and report on such issues with authority and accuracy has been a key component of the Philippine Public Transparency Reporting Project (PPTRP). Through one of its four implementing partners –the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) -- PPTRP organized and held a total of 22 trainings across the country to build the professional reporting skills of a total of 387 local journalists, activists and public-spirited citizens.

Too much training is given without any kind of plan or thinking intended to measure the benefit of workshops. Consequently, PPTRP required participants to take short pre- and post-training diagnostic tests in a small attempt to measure before and after levels of understanding.

Budget reporting training in Davao City

There were two different trainings. The first focused on basic information such as laws and mechanisms that address corruption and methods of investigating corruption, such as lifestyle checks. The second focused on the LGU budget, thus, all testing questions here pertained to the budget, i.e. when is the deadline for the submission of the proposed budget, which body approves the budget, what do you call the share of the LGU in the national internal taxes, etc.

(Please see Box A for list of questions and percentage of correct answers per questions).

A total of 227 persons joined the first round of workshops and 223 the second round, with 63 persons attending both rounds and completing the two-part course. The 22 workshops were held in 12 areas: seven in Mindanao (Cagayan de Oro, Davao, Kidapawan, Ozamiz, Surigao City, Dipolog and Tawi-Tawi); two in the Visayas (Catbalogan, Bohol); and three in Luzon (Pampanga, Legaspi and Masbate).

In the first round of training, the average pre- workshop score of the participants was 4.54. In the second round, the average score was 4.76. The question that participants found the hardest to answer was, “What law requires public officials to submit sworn statements on their total assets every year?” Only 10 percent got the answer right. Given that they could have cited any of the three laws that contain a provision on this, the score was disappointing.

The other questions that registered a very low percentage of participants providing correct answers were:

• What law defines the conduct of public officials?
  Answer: Republic Act 6713. Correct answers: 33%
  
  
• What term refers to situations wherein a public official’s performance of his duty is affected by his personal interest?
  Answer: Conflict of interest. Correct answers: 38%
  
  
• How many members does your provincial board have? Please give the total number, not just the elected.
  Answer: Depends on the area where the training is being held, i.e. in Surigao del Norte, the answer is 13. Correct answers: 33%
  
  
• Every year, the proposed budget for the ensuing year must be submitted by what date?
  Answer: October 16. Correct answers: 24%
  
  
• What body proposes (the budget)?
  Answer: The executive. Correct answers: 40%
  
  
• Who is the head of this committee in this city?
  Answer: Depends on where the training is being held, i.e. in Tagbilaran City, the head of the Budget and Appropriations Committee is Councilor Nerio “Butchie” Zamora. Correct answers: 15%

The participants themselves admitted the questions were basic and simple. Some said that because they have been covering the local councils for such a long time, its sessions are viewed as boring, routine discussions and reporters no longer closely scrutinize what the council passes.

It must be noted that the participants found the questions in the second round of training, which is all about the budget, more difficult. Not knowing the exact date of the deadline for the proposed budget’s submission, which body proposes the budget, how many comprise the council that decides on the fate of the budget, and the name of the current head of the committee on budget and appropriations all illustrate a lack of appreciation for the relevance of the budget issue and understanding of the budget process.

On the other hand, the workshops where there were significant numbers of advocate participants registered higher percentages of correct answers.

Monitoring and reporting transparency

Monitoring and reporting on issues related to transparency basically employ the same techniques used in investigative reporting. Following the paper and people trails, maximizing online research, and employing different methods of analysis to see patterns and trends and come to unassailable conclusions. They also entail discipline and conviction.

Below are additional basic stuff that a journalist or advocate should consider when monitoring and reporting transparency.

Define corruption

Corruption happens because persons who have been entrusted with power, either through an election or appointment by a governing authority, take liberties and abuse their position.

Corruption has become endemic in the government bureaucracy to the point that it has become confusing for some to identify which are corrupt practices and which are not. It is thus necessary for journalists and advocates to level off on the understanding of when there is direct and indirect bribery, conflict of interest, abuse of authority and other elements that indicate violations of laws on corruption.

The term corruption, according to Prof. Ronnie Amorado, author of several books and articles on the issue, is rooted in the Greek word corruzione and Latin word corruptus. Both refer to the deterioration in the quality of governance. Transparency International provides the current popular definition of the word: the abuse of public office for personal gain.

But while these definitions may seem as clear as day and night if read against the whiteness of a bond paper, in the practical day-to-day reality of the community, several factors can make the picture murky. Factors such as cultural norms and long-time media industry practices are primary.

Leveling off then on the definition, studying the underlying factors and understanding the nuances in various types of situations are necessary to correct misconceptions brought about by long years of wrong and often unethical practice; counter the apathy encouraged by the sense of helplessness and frustration over the political system; and understand the economic and political context that breeds corruption.

Know the laws and mechanisms

Monitoring would be more vigilant and efficient and reporting would have more credibility if journalists and advocates are familiar with the legal bases of the violations. Below are directly relevant laws:

• Republic Act 6713 - Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees
• RA 3019 - Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
• RA 9160 - Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001
• RA 7080 - Anti-Plunder Law
• PD 807 - Civil Service Decree of the Philippines
• RA 6770 - The Ombudsman Act of 1989
• Revised Penal Code (See section on crimes committed by public officers)

Also, get copies of laws related to procurement, auditing manuals and other relevant resource materials.

Meanwhile, the existing mechanisms that seek to address corruption are:

• Office of the Ombudsman

• Sandiganbayan (Anti-graft court, for high-ranking officials)
• Civil Service Commission
• Commission on Audit
• Inter-Agency Anti-Graft Coordinating Council,
• Legislative oversight function through budget appropriation, representation in the commission on appointments and the investigations of the blue ribbon committee

Know the powers and limitations of these mechanisms. The Office of the Ombudsman, for example, is supposed to be autonomous by the Constitutional provision that created the office and the corresponding enabling law. But recent history has shown that its independence can be compromised by the deliberate appointment of the wrong person to head it. The Commission on Audit, on the other hand, is limited to making recommendations, many of which are not followed. It is also common for media and LGUs to make fun of the commission’s name, twisting it to “Commission or audit?” – a clear reference to how some auditors are complicit in bribery and graft.

• Are development needs articulated in the local development plan? Is the plan being formulated in a participatory manner?

• Is there a spending pattern? Is there authorized spending not implemented within the previous fiscal year?
• What are the dispositions of the special funds, i.e. the special education fund, intelligence funds, “miscellaneous and extra-ordinary expenses”?

Study the budget process

PPTRP lead trainer Rowena Paraan: "The budget as a story has strategic values."

The budget is more than computing the funds being held by government. It is more than balancing the sheets and coming up with the right numbers. The budget is a reflection of priorities and direction of government. It reflects the true intent of the administration – i.e., if it is serious in promoting health care as it says, it should be reflected in its expenditure program.

Advocates and journalists must study the five stages in the budget process: preparation, authorization, review, execution and accountability. They must know the key actors in each stage.

Each stage in the process has to be monitored. Although media usually focus attention on the budget during the sexiest part of the process – the authorization stage or when it is being deliberated by the legislative body – there are actually gaps in each stage that have to be monitored.

For example, in the preparation stage, the concerned agency has to conduct consultations before submitting its proposed budget to the chief local executive. Many agencies neglect to do this, often relying on the number of their allies in the Sanggunian (Council) to get their budgets passed unquestioned.

In the authorization stage, the real negotiations happen outside the session hall. Meanwhile, there have been reports wherein the budget submitted to the Department of Budget Management for review is different from the one approved by the legislative body. The execution stage, which runs throughout the year, has of course the most number of vulnerable points. Audit reports on the other hand are sometimes treated like a tightly guarded secret by some LGUs.

Some questions to answer when monitoring the budget process:

• Are development needs articulated in the local development plan? Is the plan being formulated in a participatory manner?
• Is there a spending pattern? Is there authorized spending not implemented within the previous fiscal year?
• What are the dispositions of the special funds, i.e. the special education fund, intelligence funds, “miscellaneous and extra-ordinary expenses”?

To see what are being done wrong, journalists and advocates must know how things are done right. They must compile resources on the functions of the LGU, fiscal administration and other issues related to transparency.

Learn the procurement process

The procurement process is usually quite technical and an expert’s assistance may be necessary at first for journalists and advocates to fully understand it. It is, however, imperative to study the principles upon which provisions of the laws are based. Normally, conflicts of interest, abuse of discretion, fund mismanagement and actual stealing are what the various provisions of the laws seek to minimize.

Notwithstanding the technicalities, it is most important to know when competitive bidding is required and when alternative methods, such as direct contracting, repeat order, shopping and negotiated procurement, are allowed by law.

Know who are allowed to observe the process. Get to know the NGOs that monitor the procurement of goods and services. Develop expert sources and update yourself on recent court rulings and executive decisions that may impact on the procurement system.

The following are some red flags in the procurement process, based on a study released by COA auditor now commissioner Heidi Mendoza:

1. Scanning Contracts for Fraud

• There is usually a vague description of the services/products to be delivered by the contractor.
• The scope of work to be performed is not well-defined.
• Some relevant provisions in the contract are missing, such as provisions for late delivery, poor performance, contractors’ guarantee, etc.
• Copy of the contract is not immediately submitted to the appropriate regulatory offices.
• A government official takes an unusually active interest in whether or not a certain contractor is awarded a contract.
• A government official has close ties with the company that secured a contract. Government officials who selected the contractor join the company shortly after.
• Inconsistent evaluation of contractors relative to previous performance. Contractor capabilities are over-rated or under-rated compared to deficiencies reported in evaluations of previous contract performance
• New contract specifications are developed as a result of consultation with the successful bidder. These specifications result in additional charges by the contractor, over and above those originally specified in the tender call for documentation
• Changes in a contract after it is awarded, resulting in substantially increased costs. The reasons for the changes can hardly be documented. No approval of the changes can be presented.
• Pre-engineering surveys and site inspections do not appear to be appropriate or the reports are incomplete and yet the main contract is still prepared and executed.

2. Questionable Disbursement Vouchers

• Disbursement voucher and supporting documents are undated.
• Vague description of the transaction under the “particulars”
• Absence or incomplete acknowledgement of the payee at the lower portion

3. Questionable Purchase Orders (POs)

• vague specification of items ordered
• undated POs and related documents
• absence of delivery period
• absence of provision for penalties
• absence of acknowledgement of supplier in terms of signature and date

4. Questionable delivery receipt

• absence of date
• absence of any info or any document that will prove withdrawal of stocks from the suppliers’ warehouse
• absence of acknowledgement of receiving party
• No reference document indicated or no reference document attached such as the distribution list

5. Questionable specification requirements

• Specifications for the purchase of good or services have been tailored fit to suit a particular supplier/contractor.
• Requirement specifications are narrow. The requirement specs are stated precisely rather than generically, without reasonable justification. This reduces or eliminates potential competition.

6. Questionable publication of the Invitation to Bid

• Copy of the publication is only a machine copy.
• Has an unusually short closing date without reasonable explanation. The rushed timing may indicate a situation in which only those with advance have information have time to prepare.

7. Questionable awarding of contract Contractor started work even before the award.

• Resolution of award or the Letter to the winning Supplier is undated.
• The award is made prior to the actual conduct of bidding the acknowledgement of the winning bidder is undated.

The SALN as a corruption monitoring tool

Budget reporting training in Dipolog City

The Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth (SALN) is theoretically an effective monitoring tool of malfeasance. It contains information on how much an official has earned and spent in the past year, a list of all his assets and their value, his debts, as well as his relatives in government and the assets and liabilities of the spouse and unmarried children below 18. It thus allows not only scrutiny of the official’s net worth history (by plotting his annual SALN) but possible conflicts of interest as well. It may not be necessary to prove that bribes have been received from an anomalous transaction. Showing unexplainable spikes in wealth and/or conflict-of-interest situations should ideally suffice.

According to law, all government officials and employees are required to submit their SALNs on or before every 30th of April.

The following are the offices where SALNs need to be filed:

• Office of the Ombudsman - Constitutional and national elective officials
• Secretary of Congress - Senators and members of Congress
• Office of the President - National executive officials, high ranking military officers
• Deputy Ombudsman - Regional and local executive personnel, military officers with ranks below captain
• Civil Service Commission - All other public officials and employees

Sadly, many government officials under-declare, if not fail altogether to declare, their real worth. Some officials, such as the justices of the Supreme Court, have declared themselves above the laws that mandate the SALN submission and flatly refuse to release their SALNs to the public.

The Civil Service Commission’s legal counsel Ariel Ronquillo himself admits that the SALN form has problems. Very few details for example are asked regarding properties. Thus, former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s 2008 SALN only had the amount PhP 110 million (USD 2.6 million) as the value of stocks she held – equivalent to 70 percent of her total net worth, acquired during her presidency – and yet no explanation had to be given since the form does not require her to do so, not even which companies they are stocks of.

Ronquillo said that one can only rely on the SALN’s face value. If one wants to find out if what in the form is accurate, one will have to look for other sources.

Although the information that is put in the SALN can actually be used against an official – if, for example, there is an unexplainable increase in wealth, if there are property acquisitions that cannot be explained by the person’s salary scale – no one checks if there has been a misdeclaration. Normally, the collecting agency simply compiles the SALNs. It is only when somebody files a complaint that the concerned agency looks at it.

Conducting lifestyle checks

Lifestyle check became one of the primary projects of the Office of the Ombudsman under Simeon Marcelo. It is an investigative activity that seeks to determine whether a public official, during his incumbency, has accumulated wealth in excess or out of proportion to his lawful income. It is a program that calls for citizen participation or involvement.

Lifestyle check as an anti-corruption measure is based on the Section 15 of RA 6770 (Ombudsman Act of 1989) and Section 4(h) of RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees). It is also provided for in RA 1379 (An Act Declaring Forfeiture in Favor of the State Any Property Found to Have Been Unlawfully Acquired by Any Public Officer or Employee).

Actual checking is done through interviews of resource persons, discreet monitoring of behaviors and habits, ocular inspection of properties, monitoring of media, requesting information from concerned government agencies and following the paper trail, i.e. deed of sales of properties, taxes paid, etc. A profile of the subject is needed, to serve as baseline data. It should include his agency, place of assignment, position being held and salary grade.

The matrix below illustrates examples of red flags that should indicate possible violations, divided according to areas for investigation: behavior, assets, conflict of interest and kin.

Reports can be submitted by filing a verified complaint, sending a signed or unsigned (anonymous) letter-complaint, or reporting through the OMB Lifestyle Check Hotline (02)9274102 or (02)-9272404.

A government employee or official found to have violated the law may find himself facing the following:

• Forfeiture case under Sec. 2, RA 1379
• Criminal charges:

• Perjury under Article 183 of the RPC
• Violation of Section 8 of RA 6713

• Administrative charges:

• Dishonesty
• Grave Misconduct
• Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service

The hurdles to monitoring and reporting on transparency and corruption can be divided into six general areas of concern: access to information, skills, safety, ethics, resources and cultural. The issue of safety has been thoroughly discussed in a section in PPTRP’s recently published handbook on citizen engagement for good governance.

Lack of access to information

Sources refusing to talk and documents being almost impossible to get are the most common of all the problems cited by participants in the 22 workshops on transparency, as well as in other trainings conducted by NUJP, whether it is reporting on elections, human rights, even HIV-AIDS.

Here are some suggestions coming from journalists themselves and compiled by NUJP:

1. First, study why the source refuses to speak. The usual reasons are: fear for his and family’s safety, fear of losing job, pressure from politicians or authorities, does not like the reporter, does not find the network, publication or advocacy group credible, wants to be interviewed by big personalities only, has not made up his mind if he wants to be interviewed, or does not want to be cited/quoted. Then based on your analysis, take the necessary action.

2. If the source is not sure if the interview would be used fairly, establish your credibility by giving him your background or your network/paper’s history, sample reports and assure him that you will be fair.

3. If the reason is safety, you can negotiate the terms of the interview. This is in fact one of the few situations for many news rooms wherein anonymous sources are allowed – if the information is so important but divulging it will put the life of the source in peril. It may also be necessary to link him up with a lawyer, the police or the government’s witness protection program. If the agreement is off-the-record, the source provides information which will serve mainly as indicator of where to investigate next and to help the journalist get a better grasp of the issue. The source may also agree to have his words quoted but with only a very general attribution, i.e. “Sources at the city hall said…” The same goes with fear of losing employment.

4. Some sources may give wrong information or worthless documents just to shut you up. Always check the veracity of information given, either in a document or through interviews: verify the source, validate the information and get corroboration.

5. Look for a bridge – a person who is close to the source or whom he finds credible – and ask that he vouch for you. You may also try to find a way to talk to the source informally and develop rapport outside the interview setting.

6. Multiple sourcing is key. It is a wonderful thing if a journalist is able to easily shift from one source to another if the first refuses or has little knowledge of the issue because he has developed a stable of sources. But you must also prioritize, identifying the persons who are in strategic positions, meaning they handle information that you might need. It can be the decision-maker in that office or the clerk that handles the paper work and can monitors comings and goings.

7. Know the laws that will help you assert your right to demand copies of documents. Be able to quote the relevant provisions.

8. If you are unable to secure documents from a particular office, check with other agencies that have copies of the same papers.

9. If an official refuses to face journalists or advocates, go to the office or official above him to get the answers.

10. Push for the passage of the Freedom of Information law.

In many cases, lack of skills and confidence dissuade journalists and advocates from conducting thorough transparency-related investigations. Other than the obvious answer of studying how to monitor and conduct one, the following are some tips:

1. Read up on the issue. Familiarity with the topic gives confidence when facing difficult interviewees, while the knowledge helps journalists and advocates make intelligent decisions.

2. Join investigative reporting workshops to improve skills, learn lessons from the experiences shared by other participants and help build a network of resources.

3. Interviewing, a very important method of data gathering, is a skill that has to be cultivated. Scour the internet for materials and watch veteran journalists ask questions. Know what to do when your source is hostile, scolds you on cam or blabbers on and on. Learn how to interview children, elderly persons or those who have just suffered traumatic experiences or are in the verge of a nervous breakdown. One of the most basic learning principles is that adults learn by doing. Practice, practice, practice.

4. Take time to decide on the right approach, whether in asking sensitive questions or approaching a clerk for a document. Sometimes, this simple step can make or break your search for answers.

5. Look for good models of transparency reporting to serve as guide.

6. Collect materials on transparency and anti-corruption issues and advocacy campaigns. Develop your own personal resource bank. Make a list of experts or advocates to follow or monitor.

Ethical dilemmas

Is it ever ok to pay for information? How about stealing documents or lying to get sources to talk? “Diskarte” is the euphemism for these methods but however they are called, the ethical answer would always be: No.

Journalism ethics, or simple good manners, demand that sources be informed where and how the interview will be used. Stealing is a criminal offense, while paying for information raises questions on the motive of the payee and veracity of information.

The following are some guidelines to remember:

1. Abide by the Code of Ethics.

2. Know your newsroom’s policies on these matters. Ask editors to clarify situations which may appear to be on the borderline or unclear on which side of the ethical fence it belongs.

3. Learn the relevant laws, i.e. Sotto Law, Anti-Wiretapping Law, Cybersex Law

4. If you find yourself in a tricky situation, consult your editor and elder colleagues.

5. When colleagues are accepting favors from the subject of an investigation and you are being pressured into accepting the same, find a way to firmly refuse. You may say, “Please don’t put my job in danger because it is ground for termination,” or something similar. Assure the source that the story will be written even without him paying. While it is best to avoid antagonizing your peers, it is a bigger problem once journalists start accepting bribe to highlight or kill an issue.

6. A PR-brokered interview may not necessarily be a bad thing, as long as the journalist stays true to reporting the issue as is, and not accept money after the interview. If the source offers bribe or enticement, it is best to firmly refuse. You not only build credibility but also keep you from being beholden to anyone.

Lack of resources and management support

Many stations and newspapers in the provinces, as well as advocacy groups have limited resources and normally cannot afford to finance researches that will take several days and entail a lot of traveling. Even for ordinary coverages, reporters are not given enough transportation and communication allowance to encourage them explore leads.

Journalists and advocates are thus forced to be extra resourceful. Some tips:

1. Advocacy groups and journalists may share resources with each other, or partner with colleagues to shorten the process and save resources.

2. Let your fingers do the walking! Use the magic of mobile phones which allow people to be reached wherever they are, whatever time it is. It lessens the transportation expenses. However, keep in mind that important and sensitive interviews should be done in person.

3. Maximize the internet.

4. Work with other NGOs that already have research studies or can refer you to the relevant resource persons.

5. Plan carefully. A well-planned investigation prevents waste of resources.

6. If the reason for lack of management support is not lack of resources but lack of appreciation of the issue by those in decision-making positions, then include them in transparency workshops to spark their interest. Update them on developments in the issue.

7. Learn how to pitch your story to your editors. Timing, correct approach and clear presentation are some necessary ingredients.

8. If some of the limitations that hinder in-depth transparency monitoring and reporting are due to the nature itself of media, find a way to go around them. For example, the quota system demands three to five stories a day from correspondents and stringers. If there are good transparency stories brewing, ask your editor to give you time to pursue them. Regarding the limited space or air time for reports, one solution is to make a several-part report, or find different angles and produce several related stories.

Cultural factors

In several of the workshops conducted, advocates and journalists cited Filipino traits, like utang na loob (debt of gratitude), pakikisama (camaraderie), wag magpahiya (sparing others from shame), as well as the extended family system, as hindering factors to transparency reporting. This is particularly difficult if the community is small and people are all related to each other one way or another.

1. Media and advocacy groups have an even bigger role to play in this situation. The need to make the community understand the importance of dealing with transparency issues, no matter who are involved, is a difficult mission and may entail a long-term campaign.

2. Choose the journalist with as little dealings as possible with the persons involved in the issue.

3. When conducting the investigation, explain that you are doing is “trabaho lang, walang personalan” (just work, not a personal issue). Always be professional in your transactions and do not allow personal ties, peer pressure, past relations and debts of gratitude to cloud your judgment.

4. Always be fair in your reporting so that you will establish a reputation of being impartial and open-minded. This will prevent your criticisms from being taken personally.

5. Partner with a national organization, whether media or advocacy group. This will help diffuse attention and serve as a way out if confronted by families and peers.

6. Choose the journalist with as little dealings as possible with the persons involved in the issue.

Below are the diagnostic test questions for the two trainings and the percentage of correct answers:

First training

1. What law defines the conduct of public officials? 33% correct
2. What do you call the document that contains the income of a public official, amounts of his and his family’s expenses, and the taxes he paid for the preceding year? 50%
   
3. What law requires public officials to submit sworn statements on their total assets every year? 10%
4. What government body is tasked to investigate and prosecute corruption cases? 75%
5. If you want to get the tax record of your mayor, where can you get it? 70%
6. What do you call the form of investigation that looks at an official’s declared income and compares it with his actual net worth, sources of wealth and way of living? 54%
7. What term refers to situations wherein a public official’s performance of his duty is affected by his personal interest? 38%
8. What do you call the crime wherein a public official, in a series of criminal acts, amasses more than P50 million in illegally acquired wealth? 70%
9. In a local government unit, which body has the power to allocate funds? 58%
10. Fill in the blank: A public office is a public _____. 86%

Second training

1. What law paved the way for greater local autonomy? 58%
2. Which among the following can a mayor not do? (Secure financial grants on his own) 81%
3. How many members does your provincial board have? Please give the total number, not just the elected. 33%
4. Every year, the proposed budget for next year must be submitted by what date? 24%
5. In an LGU, what government body approves the budget? 55%
6. What body proposes? 40%
7. Which committee conducts hearings on the proposed budget? 61%Who is the head of this committee in this city/province? 15%
8. What do you call the share of local government units in the national internal revenue taxes? 53%
9. Fill in the blank: A public office is a public _______. 55%

Philippine Public Transparency Reporting Project

(The author is the Secretary General of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines and the lead trainer for the Philippine Public Transparency Reporting Project).