EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

The City Government of Lucena used to be a small barrio of the town of Tayabas in
the 16th century. It was called Cotta before because forts or cottas were built to defend the
place from occasional Muslim piratical raids. On November 5, 1879, the Orden Real
Superior Civil officially adopted the name “Lucena” in honor of a friar named Fr.
Mariano Granja, who was a native of Lucena in Andalucia, Spain. Fr. Granja was
responsible for the development of the barrio, which became a parish in 1881. Lucena
became an independent municipality on June 1, 1882, and on June 17, 1961, by virtue of
Republic Act No. 3271, Lucena was made into a Chartered City through the efforts of the
late Congressman Manuel S. Enverga. It was officially inaugurated on August 19, 1962
during the 84th anniversary of Manuel Luis Quezon. Finally, on July 1, 1991, Lucena
became a Highly Urbanized City.

The City Government is envisioned to be a peaceful and progressive city,

strategically positioned as the social and economic service center in the Southeast
Calabarzon Corridor, blessed with God-loving and enlightened citizenry enjoying life to
the fullest and equitably sharing the fruits of an economically sound agro-industrial
development.

Mayor Barbara Ruby C. Talaga, served as City Mayor of Lucena from July 2010 to
November 2012 by virtue of substitution for her husband, former City Mayor Ramon Y.
Talaga, Jr. after the COMELEC En Banc disqualified the latter from running for another
term.

However, in a Supreme Court decision dated October 9, 2012, the court affirmed
the decision of the COMELEC En Banc on May 20, 2011 that annulled the election and
proclamation of Barbara Ruby C. Talaga as Mayor of Lucena and cancelled the
certificate of canvass that declared her as the winner in the May 10, 2010 election. The
said COMELEC Resolution also granted the petition for intervention of then Vice Mayor
Roderick A. Alcala and ordered him to succeed then seated City Mayor Ruby Talaga as
provided for under Section 44 or the “succession rule” for elected local officials under
Republic Act 7160. City Mayor Roderick A. Alcala assumed office as the Local Chief
Executive of Lucena City on November 29, 2012.

Financial Highlights

The City generated a total income of P660,016,519 from local taxes, permits and
licenses, service and business income and internal revenue allotment which decreased
by P47,511,107 compared to last year’s total income of P707,527,626. The City had a
continuing appropriation balance of P46,161,571 at the beginning of the year, of which,
P20,551,197 was obligated. The total funds utilized for the year amounted to
P751,855,233 out of the total appropriation of P884,804,562.

The City’s financial condition and results of operations for Calendar Year 2012
compared with that of the preceding year are summarized below and shown in detail in
the attached audited financial statements.

Increase/
2012 2011 (Decrease)

Assets P773,421,366 P834,828,643 P(61,407,277)

Liabilities 291,540,433 361,643,047 (70,102,614)
Equity 481,880,933 473,185,596 8,695,337
Income 660,016,519 707,527,626 (47,511,107)
Expenses 640,276,911 595,007,660 45,269,251

Scope of the Audit

Financial and compliance audit was conducted, on a test basis, on the accounts and
operations of the City Government of Lucena for Calendar Year 2012. The audit was
conducted to ascertain the fairness of the presentation of the financial statements and
compliance of the City with laws, rules and regulations as well as the economical,
efficient and effective utilization of resources.

Auditor’s Opinion on the Financial Statements

The Auditor rendered an adverse opinion on the fairness of the presentation of the
financial statements as of December 31, 2012 of the City Government of Lucena in view
of the following errors which misstated various accounts:

Amount and % of
Obser Effect on the Error to
vation Nature of Errors Accounts Affected FS Account
No. Under(Over) Balance
Stated

7 Erroneous recording of Various Expenses (4,870,202.63) 0.85%

prior year’s expenses Government Equity 4,870,202.63 1.01%

8 Erroneous classification Other MOOE (64,462,576.35) 64.26%

of various expenses Various Expenses 64,462,576.35 11.25%

9 Erroneous recording of Share from 10,828,599.86 201%

income PAGCOR/PCSO
 Moreover, the City failed to establish the existence and accuracy of the balances of
the following asset and liability accounts as of December 31, 2012, which added to the
unreliability of the affected account balances:

Obser Nature of Deficiencies Accounts Affected Amount

vation
No.

1 Unaccounted number of lost animals, Livestock 4,140,602.00

unrecorded transfer of offsprings, and Inventory 646,825.10
unreported mortalities of animals in Work/Other 44,800.00
the City Government’s Animal Animals
Dispersal Program Breeding Stock

2 Procurement of Office Supplies Various expenses 14,425,581.61

directly recorded as expense Inventories account 1,516,620.48

3a Unreconciled difference between the Various PPE 80,576,317.95

balances of the recorded PPE and accounts
RPCPPE

3b Inclusion of unserviceable properties Various PPE 16,122,390.20

sold at public auction accounts

3c Subsidiary Ledgers were not Various PPE 540,947,064.31

maintained for PPE accounts

4 Unreliable RPT/SET Receivable RPT Receivable 42,000,000.00

SET Receivable 52,425,601.30

5 Erroneous recording of Other Payables Other Payables 19,167,245.28

Due to Other 19,167,245.28
NGAs

6 Dormant Other Payables account not Other Payables 3,128,272.84

supported with Subsidiary Ledgers and
other documents

For the above errors and deficiencies, the Auditor recommended to the City Mayor
the following courses of action:

 Require the City Accountant to book up all expenses in the period when these
are incurred and to use the Prior Year’s Adjustment account in recording
fundamental errors of prior years (Observation No. 7);
 That the Local Finance Committee exercise utmost prudence in recommending
to the City Mayor the proper allocation of expenditures for each development
activity, necessary in the preparation of budget proposals. Also, we
recommended that the City Mayor require the City Accountant to refrain from
recording under Account 969 those expenses with specific accounts provided
in the Chart of Accounts (Observation No. 8);

 Require the City Accountant to make the proper adjustment in the books to
ensure that transactions relative to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office
(PCSO) Charity Fund are properly presented in the financial statements.
Likewise, this should be made available for appropriation for its intended
purpose (Observation No. 9);

 Require the City Agriculturist and the General Services Officer (GSO) to:
(a) conduct a more intensive monitoring and evaluation of the project
implementation to determine the success or failure of the program for further
decision making; (b) conduct investigation on the circumstances surrounding
the death or loss of the animals and determine if negligence was committed so
that the concerned recipients may be compelled to refund the cost of animals
as part of their responsibility, pursuant to the Animal Dispersal Contract; (c)
improve the existing system of documentation by maintaining a logbook or
record for easy monitoring of stocking and re-stocking activities and tracking
of next-in-line recipients to ensure effective accomplishment of the program;
and (d) submit timely the Livestock Death Certificate to the City Accountant to
support the dropping from the books the cost of dead animals, in accordance
with the rules and regulations for the relief from accountability (Observation
No. 1);

 Direct the City Accountant to record all purchases of supplies and materials in
the appropriate inventory account/s and ensure that deductions/credits to these
accounts are based on the Summary of Supplies and Materials Issued (SSMI)
prepared and submitted by the General Services Office (GSO). Further, the
City Accountant should require the submission of proof of acknowledgement
from the recipients/beneficiaries who were given textbooks and instructional
materials to establish the validity of the transaction (Observation No. 2);

 Create an inventory team that will conduct actual physical count of the City’s
property at the earliest possible time and to furnish the Audit Team and the
City Accountant copies of the complete inventory reports. Further, require the
City Accountant to: (a) establish the accumulated depreciation of each PPE
reported in the Inspection and Inventory Report of Unserviceable Property
(IIRUP) and prepare Journal Entry Voucher (JEV) to drop the property from
the books by debiting Government Equity and Accumulated Depreciation
pertaining to the unserviceable properties and crediting the appropriate PPE
account; and (b) maintain subsidiary records and reconcile these with records
 of the GSO. In addition, require the GSO to ensure that the Acknowledgment
Receipt for Equipment (ARE) are regularly updated, and assigned property
number for each property based on the category of the property, and reconcile
the property records with the subsidiary records of the Accounting Unit
(Observation No. 3a, 3b and 3c);

 Require the City Assessor to update the Real Property Tax Register to enable
the City Treasurer to submit the certified list of taxpayers showing the amount
due and collectible to the City Accountant for her to set up a more reliable
RPT/SET Receivable. Further, require the City Assessor to make
representation with the Sangguniang Panlungsod relative to the revision of the
Real Property Assessment (Observation No. 4);

 Require the City Accountant to reclassify the funds held in trust to the Trust
Fund books under the Due to Other NGAs account totaling P19,167,245.28.
Moreover, trace back the transactions/expenditures incurred out of these funds
and make the necessary adjustments to reflect the correct balance of these
funds (Observation No. 5); and

 Direct the City Accountant to exert effort in locating documents pertaining to

the dormant funds to support their validity. Moreover, assess the needs of these
funds and if found that their purpose has been completed, require the refund of
the said funds to the source agency (Observation No. 6).

Other Significant Observations and Recommendations

The following is the summary of the other significant audit observations and
recommendations in the audit of the City Government of Lucena for the year 2012:

1. The City Government of Lucena invested P1,021,002.39 of its unutilized

balance of trust fund in time deposit to a private bank without prior approval of
the Sangguniang Panlungsod and Local Chief Executive, in violation of
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Circular No. 110 series of 1996 and
Department of Finance (DOF) Department Order (DO) No. 27-05 dated
December 9, 2005.

We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Treasurer to close the
account maintained with United Coconut Planters (UCPB) in accordance with
DOF DO No. 27-05 and transfer back the amount of P1,021,002.39 to the
City’s current account maintained for its trust fund.

2. Cash Advances totaling P25,778,699.71 were not supported with copy of

payrolls showing list of payees and their corresponding net pay, and liquidation
of cash advances were taken up in the books of the City without the
 corresponding Credit Notice, contrary to COA Circular No. 97-002 dated
February 10, 1997.

We recommended that the City Mayor instruct the City Accountant to require
the accountable officers to attach payrolls and documents/list of estimated
expense to ascertain the correctness of cash advance.

3. Expenditures totaling P8,606,596.10 representing honoraria, salaries and year-

end benefits of non-teaching personnel, incentive allowance and various
expenses were paid out of the Special Education Fund (SEF), contrary to
Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS), Department of Budget
and Management (DBM) and Department of Interior and Local Government
(DILG) Joint Circular No. 01, series of 1998 dated April 14, 1998, Section 272
of Republic Act (RA) 7160, and RA 5447, thereby funds that should be
allocated and utilized for priority projects/activities as mandated, such as
operation and maintenance of public schools, construction/repair/maintenance
of public school buildings, educational research, and purchase of books and
periodicals were depleted.

We recommended that the Local School Board Officials strictly observe the
provisions of Section 272 of RA 7160, DBM Local Budget Circular No. 62 and
DBM Compensation Policy Guidelines No. 98-1 relating to the defined usage
or utilization of the SEF. Likewise, comply with the provisions of DECS-
DBM-DILG Joint Circular No. 01, s. of 1998 in identifying projects/programs
and activities chargeable against SEF where the budget should reflect an
equitable distribution of SEF mandated priority projects.

4. Payment of expenditures totaling P2,227,269.24 were made through

reimbursement method, instead of through the procurement and disbursement
procedures prescribed under RA 9184 or the Government Procurement Reform
Act, thereby, exposing the City Government funds to the personal discretion of
the authorities concerned and resulting in non-withholding and payment of
taxes due the Government, contrary to BIR Revenue Regulations No. 16-2005.

We recommended that the City Mayor and other officials concerned refrain
from resorting to procurement and disbursement through reimbursement basis.
All payments should pass through the regular mode of procurement and
disbursement procedures, in accordance with the provisions of RA 9184.
Likewise, comply with the requirement of adequate procurement planning,
pursuant to Section 7 of RA 9184.

5. Cash assistance totaling P1,543.914.14 granted to several barangays as dole-

out/sponsorship to various activities and programs in their respective barangays
was not properly receipted to acknowledge receipt of the government funds
 and were not supported with complete and proper documentation, in violation
of Sections 4 and 63 of P.D. No. 1445.

We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Accountant to see to it
that all financial transactions are supported with duly signed list of recipients
and other documents required for the particular transaction, pursuant to
Sections 4 and 63 of PD No. 1445. Moreover, require the City Treasurer to
demand the issuance of official receipts on the financial assistance released to
them and all disbursements regarding transactions with the barangays to ensure
that all receipts of funds in their capacities as barangay officials are properly
acknowledged and recorded in the books.

6. The unexpended balance of P1,767,338.67 which represents inactive account

of trust fund remained dormant for many years and were not remitted to the
National Treasury, contrary to Section 22 of the Government Accounting and
Auditing Manual (GAAM), Volume I.

We recommended that the City Mayor instruct the City Accountant to remit the
idle funds to the National Treasury as required under Section 22 of GAAM,
Volume I and Executive Order No. 431 dated May 30, 2005.

7. Disbursements totaling P26,136,022.54 were paid despite the absence of

complete and proper documentation, contrary to Section 4(6) of Presidential
Decree No. 1445, thus, validity, propriety, and legality of disbursements could
not be determined.

We recommended that the City Accountant ensure that payments be supported

with complete and proper documentation to ensure the validity, propriety, and
legality of the transactions. No payment should be made for transactions with
incomplete documentation.

8. Subsidiary Ledgers were not maintained by the Accounting Unit for accounts
requiring to be supported by subsidiary records, contrary to Section 10 of the
Manual on New Government Accounting System (MNGAS) for LGUs,
Volume II, thus, correctness of the balances of the accounts could not be
completely verified and substantiated.

We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Accountant to maintain
the required subsidiary ledgers for each account to facilitate the verification of
transactions incurred and to enable the Management to readily determine and
evaluate the City’s results of operations and financial condition.

9. Payment totalling P6,589,500.00 for the lot purchased with an aggregate area
of 43,930 square meters were paid and processed without complete
 documentation, contrary to Section 4(6) of Presidential Decree (PD) No. 1445,
thus, validity, propriety and legality of disbursement could not be determined.

We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Accountant to ensure
that payments are supported with complete documentation to ascertain the
validity, propriety and legality of the transaction and to submit the required
documents.

10. Expenditures of at least P35,014,857.78 were not approved by the City Mayor
in Box C of the Disbursement Voucher (DV), but instead were signed by the
City Administrator, who also countersigned the check payments, contrary to
Section 39 of the Manual on New Government Accounting System (MNGAS)
for Local Government Units (LGUs), Volume I, and Section 345 of the Local
Government Code, thus, the principle of check and balance was defeated.

We recommended that the City Mayor strictly adhere to the provision provided
for under Section 39 of the MNGAS for LGUs, Volume I in relation to Section
344 of Republic Act (RA) 7160 as to the government official authorized to
approve Disbursement Voucher and Section 345 of the same Code as to
countersigning of checks.

11. The propriety/regularity/validity of the grant of financial assistance to Non-

Governmental Organizations (NGOs)/People’s Organizations (POs) totaling
P5,998,610.65 could not be established due to the inadequacy of supporting
documents and the apparent failure of the City to act with prudence to show
compliance with the mandated requirements, contrary to the pertinent
provisions of COA Circular No. 2007-001 dated October 25, 2007.

We recommended that the City Mayor stop granting financial assistance to

NGOs/POs without complete documentation and strictly enforce compliance
with the requirements set forth in the provisions of COA Circular No. 2007-
001. Further, require the City Accountant to submit the appropriate documents
mentioned above to comply with the requirements for entitlement of
government funds by the NGOs/POs and proof of compliance by the City
Government with the proper procedures for the availment, release and
utilization of subject funds, pursuant to Sections 4.4 and 4.5 of the same
Circular, to avoid suspension/disallowance in audit of the amount of
P5,998,610.65.

12. Granting of donations/financial assistance by the Office of the City Mayor

totalling P18,353,457.60, which is not within the function of the said Office is
contrary to the well-settled principle on the general welfare clause in the Local
Government Code which does not imply a dole out of government funds, and
to the fundamental principle on financial transactions which provides that
government funds should be spent or used solely for public purposes.
 We recommended that the City Mayor entrust to the City Social Worker
Development Office (CSWDO) the granting financial assistance to those who
are really entitled to it in view of the well-settled principle that the general
welfare clause in the Local Government Code does not imply a dole out of
government funds and to the fundamental principle that government funds
should be spent or used solely for public purpose.

13. The City Government of Lucena paid for Customized Government Accounting
System in the amount of P149,500.00 which remained unutilized despite its
completion, resulting in waste of government funds.

We recommended that the City Mayor instruct the City Accountant to

investigate into the matter and make a follow up on the completion or
installation of the software on computerized accounting system in order to
serve the purpose/s for which it was undertaken and take advantage of the
benefits of the computerization in increasing productivity and improving
services to the public. Also, require the payment of liquidated damages, if
made operational. Otherwise, require the refund of the amount by the persons
liable for the loss of funds.

14. The necessity of hiring 803 personnel under contract of service/job order status
which is more than 280 or 52% of the regular permanent employees for more
than six months which cost the City P79,576,637.55 for salaries or 39% of
P205,903,360.13 salaries paid to permanent employees, could not be
established because the payments were not supported with the Statement of
Duties and Responsibilities and Accomplishment Reports, as required under
COA Circular No. 2012-001 dated June 14, 2012.

We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Accountant to support
the services rendered by job orders with Statement of Duties and
Responsibilities and Accomplishment Report, and ensure that the hiring of
personnel in Job Order schemes be guided by the provision of Civil Service
Commission (CSC) Resolution No. 02-1480 dated November 12, 2002.

15. The absence of well-defined policy guidelines on the grant of financial aids
charged to Other Maintenance and Operating Expenses instead of Donations
and Subsidy to LGU, contrary to COA Circular No. 2004-008 dated September
20, 2004 totalling P16,141,745.39 resulted in inconsistencies in the grants of
donations and assistance and created doubts in the eligibility of some
beneficiaries and the purpose for which the assistance were given.

We recommended that the City Mayor instruct the Head of the City Social
Worker Office to create data bank of information of all indigents per barangay
for ready reference in processing financial assistance and other related
 transactions. Together with the Department Heads concerned, study the flow of
the transaction documents from inception, processing, authorization and
payment of financial assistance. From thereon, set up clear-cut policies and
guidelines on its program of granting donations, financial and other form of
assistance. The beneficiaries, amounts and documentary requirements and the
processing office/s should be well-defined to ensure that only qualified
beneficiaries are assisted and that assistance is given only for public and
general welfare purpose.

We also recommended that the City Accountant and Budget Officer use proper
budgetary and expense accounts to avoid improper use of Other Maintenance
and Operating Expense account.

16. Disbursements made out of 20% Development Fund of the City totaling
P19,764,208.92 were not in conformity with the guidelines set forth in Section
3 of DILG-DBM Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2011-01 dated April 13,
2011, thus, the intended benefits that should have been extended to the
constituents had the amount been used for development projects were not
attained.

We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Planning and
Development Office (CPDO) to:

a. design and implement projects having developmental impact that would

improve the socio-economic condition and delivery of services for the
betterment of the constituents;

b. exercise fiscal responsibility and prudence in the utilization of 20%

Development Fund provided by the Local Government Code and Joint
Memorandum Circular 2011-01; and

c. source and appropriate in the General Fund book the expenses that are
administrative in nature which meet the validity and regularity requirements
under the existing accounting and auditing regulations.

We also recommended that the City Mayor require the employees/officials

concerned to refund the amount of P91,720.00, the expenditures incurred, in
violation of Section 4 of DILG-DBM Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2011-
01.
17. The City had no approved Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Plan (LDRRMP) and the corresponding Work and Financial Plan, contrary to
Rule 5, Section 4(1) and Rule 6, Section 4(7) of the Implementing Rules and
Regulations (IRR) of Republic Act (RA) 10121, thus time frames, sources of
funding, and expected output was not explicitly defined.
 We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Officer to adhere to the provisions of the IRR of
Republic Act (RA) 10121 and prepare LDRRMP, taking into consideration the
legislated usage of the fund in order that the necessary plans for risk reduction
and proper utilization of the fund can be achieved.

18. Expenditures charged to Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund
(LDRRMF) totaling P9,838,306.88 lacked the supporting documents required
under Section 5.1.3 of COA Circular No. 2012-002 dated September 12, 2012,
contrary to Section 4(6) of Presidential Decree No. 1445, thus, validity,
propriety, and legality of disbursements could not be determined.

We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Accountant to:

 make sure that payments are supported with complete documentation to

ensure the validity, propriety, and legality of the transactions;
 submit the Sanggunian Resolution declaring the state of calamity;
 demand refund of expenses totaling P273,713.33 (Annex 16) not supposed
to be charged to LDRRMF; and
 require the grantee Local Government Unit (LGU) to submit liquidation
report of the financial assistance granted.

We also recommended that the City Mayor instruct the Local Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Officer (LDRRMO) to:

 identify and categorize properly the programs, projects and activities that are
to be charged to LDRRMF;
 utilize the fund strictly for calamity-related activities and stop the utilization
of LDRRMF for activities other than those specified under RA 10121; and
 work out for the replacement of the utilized Quick Response Fund (QRF) as
reserve fund for immediate response in case of calamities and the like.

19. The City Assessor failed to submit the listing of idle lands within the City to
the City Treasurer as required under Sections 2.02 and 2.05 of City Ordinance
No. 2285 or the 2007 Revised Revenue Code of Lucena City, which resulted in
the non-imposition of additional taxes, thereby, depriving the City government
of income equivalent to three per cent of the assessed value of idle lands.

We recommended that the City Mayor require the City Assessor to:

a) include the survey of idle lands in the annual program/projects/activity

within the City’s area of jurisdiction; and

b) conduct actual survey of idle lands in order to generate the list of idle lands
and compute the corresponding assessed value thereof to be submitted to the
 City Treasurer for collection. The list should be maintained and kept
updated on a regular basis by the City Assessor.

20. The economical and efficient utilization of motor vehicles and reasonableness
of fuel consumption could not be determined because Monthly Report of
Official Travels and Fuel Consumption were not submitted to the Auditor for
review and evaluation, contrary to COA Circular No. 77-61 dated September
26, 1977.

We recommended that the City Mayor enjoin the employees or officials

concerned to submit the Monthly Report of Official Travels and Monthly
Report of Fuel Consumption for Auditor’s review and evaluation, in
compliance with the provision of COA Circular No. 77-61.

21. The Supply Officer and/or General Services Officer neither furnish the Audit
Team Leader (ATL) with copies of the Purchase Orders (POs) within five days
upon approval nor notify the latter of the deliveries received as required under
several COA Circulars, thus, preventing the ATL from conducting appropriate
auditorial review of the same and to perform timely inspection of the subject
deliveries.

We recommended that the City Mayor instruct the Supply Officer and/or
General Services Officer to furnish the Audit Team copies of Purchase Orders
and Inspection and Acceptance Reports, together with the Delivery Receipts
within 24 hours from acceptance for timely and relevant audit results.

22. The City Government of Lucena has no Internal Audit Service (IAS) Unit or
office duly created, organized and operated, as required by law and other
administrative rules and regulations, which could weaken the internal control
system of the City and thus, could result to inefficient and ineffective fiscal
administration and uneconomical operation.

We recommended that the City Mayor consider the establishment of an

Internal Audit Service under the direct administrative supervision and control
of the head of the agency and as an independent staff unit to perform staff
functions and to institute and conduct a program of internal audit for the City.
Also, make a representation with the Sangguniang Panlungsod for the due
establishment/creation of the IAS unit, wherein the proposal should include the
organizational structure in reference to DBM Budget Circular No. 2004-4
(Guidelines on the Organization and Staffing of IAU) and the National
Guidelines on Internal Control Systems (NGICS), which was made effective
under DBM Circular Letter No. 2008-8.
 23. Suspensions, disallowances and charges amounting to P27,384,887.49,
P3,032,098.85 and P3,531.00, respectively, remained unsettled as of
December 31, 2012, contrary to COA Circular No. 2009-006.

We recommended that the City Mayor require all the persons responsible/
liable to settle immediately the audit suspensions, disallowances and charges,
in compliance with COA Circular No. 2009-006.

24. Various programs, projects and activities implemented by the City Government
of Lucena out of funds allocated for Gender and Development (GAD) for CY
2012 totalling P33,804,673.03 were not in consonance with the primary
purpose and objectives to which the program was created, thus, the primordial
intentions in promoting gender-responsive governance, protection and
fulfillment of women’s human rights and the promotion of women’s economic
empowerment were not fully addressed.

We recommended that the City Mayor instruct the City Social Welfare
Development Officer (CSWDO) to prepare a GAD Plan that will fully address
and adhere to the basic purpose and objectives towards the role of women in
becoming a participative partner in nation building and development to protect
their lives and rights and to live a modest life in society.

We also recommended to require the GAD Focal Point to conduct gender

mainstreaming or self-assessment particularly on the following areas:

 Seeing to it that the City’s plans, and Programs, Projects and Activities
(PPAs) are aligned to the Philippine Plan for GAD;
 Monitoring the use of GAD funds for the purpose for which it have been
appropriated; and
 Determining whether gender issues were addressed by GAD interventions in
the City.

The above observations and recommendations contained in the report were

discussed with the concerned City officials and staff in the exit conference conducted
for the purpose on June 20, 2013. Management’s views and reactions were considered
in the report, where appropriate.

Status of Implementation of Prior Year’s Audit Recommendations

Of the eight prior year’s audit recommendations embodied in the 2011 Annual
Audit Report, six were fully implemented, and the remaining two were not
implemented.