Nanda Alivia Fitriani, Anita Wijayanti

Analysis of Monitoring Practices of Follow-Up on Supervision Results (TLHP)

Introduction

Analysis of monitoring practices of follow-up on supervision results (tlhp). Analyzes APIP's TLHP monitoring for audit finding completion, identifying policy, resource, and bureaucratic obstacles using Edward's Theory. Offers recommendations for APIP and theory development.

Abstract

This research analyzes the flow of TLHP monitoring implementation by APIP based on existing regulations. Then identify the obstacles faced and what policies APIP has implemented in the process of accelerating the completion of audit findings using Edward's Theory of Policy Implementation III. Data and information were obtained by conducting observations, interviews and documentation with two heads of division and two implementing employees at APIP "X" in Province "X" which was determined using purposive judgment. This research found that the main obstacles in completing TLHP were policy weaknesses, limited resources, and weak bureaucratic structures so that coordination between auditors and auditees was not yet effective. The results of this research also show that there are still obstacles for which there is no policy to improve, namely a lack of resources and a weak bureaucratic structure. Apart from that, it is important to add basic regulatory elements to Edward III's Implementation Theory so that policy implementation is more focused. This research has implications for the development of Edward's Theory of Policy Implementation III and provides necessary recommendations for APIP in the process of accelerating the completion of audit findings. Keywords: Internal Supervision; TLHP Monitoring; Edward's Theory of Policy Implementation III.

Review

The study "Analysis of Monitoring Practices of Follow-Up on Supervision Results (TLHP)" addresses a critical area of public administration: the effectiveness of internal audit follow-up mechanisms by government internal oversight agencies (APIP). By focusing on the flow of TLHP monitoring and identifying implementation obstacles, the research tackles a pertinent issue concerning accountability and governance efficiency. The chosen theoretical lens, Edward's Theory of Policy Implementation III, is appropriate for dissecting the multifaceted challenges in policy execution, providing a structured framework to analyze the practicalities of follow-up processes. The research effectively pinpoints key practical obstacles to completing audit findings follow-up, namely policy weaknesses, limited resources, and weak bureaucratic structures leading to ineffective coordination. This detailed identification is a significant strength, offering clear targets for improvement. Methodologically, the qualitative approach, utilizing observations, interviews, and documentation with key personnel at APIP "X," provides rich, in-depth data necessary for understanding complex organizational dynamics. However, the reliance on a very limited sample of four individuals from a single APIP, while suitable for an exploratory case study, naturally limits the generalizability of findings across other APIPs or provinces. A notable finding is the persistence of obstacles—resource limitations and weak bureaucratic structures—for which current policies lack adequate solutions. This highlights a critical gap in policy design and implementation. Furthermore, the paper makes a valuable theoretical contribution by suggesting the integration of "basic regulatory elements" into Edward III's Implementation Theory, arguing for a more focused analysis of policy execution, especially in a regulatory context. This theoretical refinement, coupled with practical recommendations for APIP, positions the research as both academically insightful and practically relevant. Future research could expand on this by conducting comparative studies across multiple APIPs or exploring specific interventions designed to address the identified resource and structural weaknesses.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.