LRA DISCLOSURE LEVEL RESULT AND REVIEW

1853 The top 5 provinces based on average score were DKI, West Sulawesi, NAD, North Maluku and Papua average score above 84. Other than NAD and DKI, 3 other provinces were consistent enough with high scores in Balance Sheet and LAK. DKI was consistent at LAK and LRA, while NAD, although not in the top 5 in Balance Sheet and LAK, but its score was consistently high, at above 80. Further analysis revealed that the top 5 provinces‘ ratio of number of PEεDA with δRA that had been reviewed by BPK to the total number of PEMDA in that province is very low. DKI, although with the highest score at 90, had only 1 PEMDA with 2007 LRA that had been audited by BPK, compared with the total 7 PEMDA in that province. Consistent with the result in Balance Sheet and LAK, the ratio of number of PEMDA with issued FS to number of PEMDA in a province showed DIY, Bali, East Java, West Java and Gorontalo at the top 5 with a high ratio at above 85. The analysis result of δRA‘s information components showed 6 points with the lowest disclosure: 1. Name of reporting entity or other identification visible on every page; 2. Scope of FS entity, whether it was a sole entity or a consolidation of several reporting entities; 3. Scope of FS entity, whether it was a sole entity or a consolidation of several reporting entities, on every page; 4. Reporting currency and quantifier; 5. Reporting currency and quantifier visible on every page; and 6. Presentation of disbursement qualifications based on organizations. This result is consistent with the Balance Sheet and LAK results. Point 6 needs particular notice because this information is needed by LRA users to evaluate the efficiency of organization unit, by comparing the realization and the budget.

3.4 CaLK DISCLOSURE LEVEL

1854 Sample number for CaLK component was 267 PEMDA or 50.6 of PEMDA population. Unlike Balance Sheet, LAK and LAR, CaLK disclosure level was low at 47. This showed that the information presented in CaLK had not included most of the information required by PP SAP. Standard deviation was low at 9 and showed that the CaLK disclosure levels tend to be consistent. The highest score of 68 was West Sumatera, while the lowest at 11 was North Kolaka. The top 5 province based on average score were NTB, Bali, DIY, NTT and East Kalimantan average score above 54. This composition differed greatly from the result of Balance Sheet, LAK and LRA. Although those 5 provinces were not at the top 5 of Balance Sheet, LAK and LRA, but their disclosure levels were above 80. Further analysis showed the top 3 provinces, NTB, Bali and DIY had the highest ratio of the number of PEMDA with CaLK that had been reviewed by BPK to total number of PEMDA in that province. NTB had the highest CaLK score of 56 and the number of PEMDA with CaLK in 2007 that had been audited by BPK were 9 out of 11 PEMDA. Besides that, consistent with the results of Balance Sheet, LAK and LRA, the ratio of number of PEMDA with issued FS to number of PEMDA in a province showed DIY, Bali, East Java, West Java and Gorontalo at the top 5 with a high ratio at above 83. Meanwhile the analysis result of CaLK information component showed low disclosure level. Of 286 checklists, more than 55 scored below 50 or nearly 75 scored below 70. Based on an in-depth analysis of CaLK presentation it was discovered that although several information component had been presented, the contents were merely details of posts included in Balance Sheet, LAK and LRA, without other economical explanation this research was not designed to provide substance over disclosure quality, merely to quantify the number of disclosures. Moreover, several information component of CaLK especially the part about the general policy of the disclosed information, had not illustrate the fiscalfinancial policy and macro economy related to APBD Local Revenue and Expenditure