GOVERNANCE GOVERNANCE EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey Main Results and Recommendations EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 1 © 2024 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. >>> Contents Acknowledgments v Acronyms vi Executive Summary 1 1. Context and Objectives of This Study 9 1.1 The Anticorruption Agenda in Armenia 9 1.2 Human Resource Management in the Public Sector in Armenia 10 1.3 Public Procurement 11 1.4 This Study 12 1.5 Conceptual Framework 14 2. Experiences of Integrity Risks 16 3. Policies, Regulatory Environment, Institutions & Tools 20 3.1 Anticorruption Institutions and Programs 20 3.2 Assets Declarations 24 3.3 Whistleblowing System 25 3.4 Code of Conduct 27 4. Inside the Public Administration 29 4.1 HRM Practices 31 4.2 Public Procurement 35 4.3 Awareness and Training 38 4.4 Attitudes and Behaviors 42 5. Policy Recommendations 46 Notes 50 References 55 Annex A: Methodology and Samples 57 Annex B: Survey Instrument 62 Annex C: Indexes from Public Procurement Data 102 Annex D: Indexes from Survey Data 106 Annex E: Additional Analysis 109 Figures Figure 1: Global Surveys of Public Servants 14 Figure 2: The Government Production Function and Integrity Risks 15 Figure 3: Situations with Potential Conflict of Interest Happen Frequently 17 Figure 4: Witnessed or Subject to Unethical Behavior in at Least One HRM Situation in the past Three Years 18 Figure 5: Perceptions on Budget Audits 21 Figure 6: Are Integrity Officers a Known and Used Resource in Their Entity? 22 Figure 7: Awareness on Ongoing Anticorruption Efforts 23 Figure 8: Most Effective Measures in Reducing Corruption, in the Views of Public Servants 23 Figure 9: Views of Managers on Asset Declaration 24 Figure 10: Knowledge of the Whistleblowing System 25 Figure 11: Willingness to Report a Colleague/Supervisor in Case of Witnessing Some Unethical Behavior 26 Figure 12: Top Three Factors Influencing Public Servants Not to Use the Whistleblowing System 26 Figure 13: Share of Public Servants that Believe that Wrongdoing Is Likely to be Discovered By… 27 Figure 14: Main Reasons Why Rules in the Code of Conduct Are Not Consistently Enforced 28 Figure 15: Main Reasons Why Public Servants Do Not Comply with the Code of Conduct 28 Figure 16: Functions More Prone to Corruption Risks 30 Figure 17: Primary Reasons Why Some Public Servants Have Unethical Behaviors 30 Figure 18: Assessment Methods Used in the Selection Process for the First Position in the Public Sector – 31 International Comparisons Figure 19: Public Servants that Had a Performance Evaluation in the past Two Years – International Comparisons 32 Figure 20: Views on Performance Evaluations 33 Figure 21: Salary Satisfaction – International Comparisons 34 Figure 22: Perceptions on Public Procurement 36 Figure 23: Effective Measures in Helping to Reduce Corruption Risks in Public Procurement 37 Figure 24: Awareness on Integrity Risks Associated with Using Personal Connections 38 Figure 25: Awareness on Integrity Risks Associated with Direct Contracting 39 Figure 26: Perceived Consequences of Corruption in the Public Sector 39 Figure 27: Existing Demand for Anticorruption Assistance 40 Figure 28: Share of Public Servants that Reported Receiving Training on the Code of Conduct Applicable to Their Position and Share of Public Servants Reporting Undue Pressure 41 Figure 29: Share of Public Servants that Reported Receiving Training on the Code of Conduct Applicable to Their Position and Share of Public Servants Subject to or Witnessing Unethical Behavior in HRM Situations 41 Figure 30: Satisfaction and Workplace Trust 42 Figure 31: “Job Satisfaction” and “Feeling Valued at Work” – International Comparisons 43 Tables Table 1: Incidence of Integrity Risks 17 Table 2: Top Factors in HRM Decisions 19 Table 3: Perceptions on the Effectiveness of Different Actors in the Fight Again Corruption 21 Table 4: Perceptions on the Clarity, Applicability, and Implementation of the Code of Conduct 27 Table 5: Quality of HRM Practices and Experiences of Integrity Risks 35 Table 6: Quality of HRM Practices and Corruption Risks in Public Procurement 35 Table 7: Public Servants’ Attitudes and Experiences of Integrity Risks 44 Table 8: Public Servants’ Attitudes and Corruption Risks in Public Procurement 45 >>> Acknowledgments This report was prepared in collaboration with the GOV-ECA team and the Bureaucracy Lab. The team appreciates the valuable cooperation of the Government of Armenia and the support and efforts of the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption, the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of Justice, the Procurement Policy Department at the Ministry of Finance, and the Civil Service Bureau, all of whom provided essential assistance and feedback throughout the study. The team would like to express its gratitude to the more than 3,000 Armenian public servants who participated in the survey and shared their valuable opinions. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< v >>> Acronyms CPC Corruption Prevention Commission HRM Human Resource Management HRMIS Human Resource Management Information System MOF Ministry of Finance OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< vi >>> Executive Summary The 2018 Velvet Revolution and the change in government brought new momentum to anticorruption reforms in Armenia; however, the implementation of anticorruption reforms is yet to show the expected results on the ground. The new administration put the fight against corruption high in the government’s policy agenda, enabling important reforms in line with international practice. The 2019–2022 Anticorruption Strategy of Armenia included reform actions aimed at establishing a highly transparent, accountable, and trustworthy public service system. Armenia has modernized its legal framework and tools to encourage and protect whistleblowing; disclose and monitor assets, income, and interests; track beneficial ownership; and establish a common set of ethical standards to guide the behavior of public servants. Armenia’s ongoing efforts in further modernizing and strengthening its public administration also cover improvements in human resource management practices and an upgrading of the Human Resource Management Information System (HRMIS). Public perception regarding the effectiveness of the anticorruption agenda is mixed and has deteriorated over time. In a survey conducted in March 2023, only 43 percent of respondents expressed that the fight against corruption in Armenia has improved over the past 6 months. This figure starkly contrasts with the 82 percent recorded in October 2018, indicating a significant decline in public confidence.1 These findings underscore the existing challenges and possible disparities between de jure laws and de facto practices, highlights the need for comprehensive assessments to bridge the gap particularly in terms of integrity within the public sector. The Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey is instrumental in addressing the disparities between de jure laws and regulations and de facto practices and seeks to fill existing knowledge gaps and inform further definition and implementation of the government’s anticorruption initiatives. The survey was implemented by the Corruption Prevention Commission (CPC) and the World Bank. It aimed to: (i) provide a comprehensive assessment of the patterns and determinants of integrity risks, and how they can impact productivity and performance in the public administration in Armenia; (ii) understand the perceptions of Armenian public servants regarding ongoing anticorruption initiatives, their awareness of integrity risks, and the needs for further interventions; and (iii) generate evidence, support and inform further definition of reforms and anticorruption initiatives that help address and counter weak integrity practices in the public sector in Armenia. By highlighting the disparities between de jure laws and de facto practices, particularly in terms of integrity within the public sector, this survey aimed to serve as a cornerstone for informing effective implementation in targeted interventions and bridging the gap between policy intentions and actual practices within Armenia’s governance. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 1 The Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey was likely explanation behind non-response. For the purposes of aimed at public servants in selected public entities in this analysis, unless indicated otherwise, the share of non- Armenia, including central ministries and agencies, responses is explicitly considered and reported in the analysis. regional governments, and selected municipalities across Some statistics is also reported within an interval defined by the country. The survey was directed at professionals, the assumptions made on the non-responses. Please see managers, and public procurement specialists in 50 selected Annex E for a deeper discussion on the non-response rates. public entities. More than 7,000 public servants were invited to participate, following a census approach (survey was sent to all employees) with voluntary participation. The survey Main Findings was designed by the World Bank and the CPC, with the involvement of the primary beneficiaries: the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of Justice, the Procurement Policy Experiences of Integrity Risks Department at the Ministry of Finance (MOF), and the Civil Service Bureau. The survey followed international research The evidence from the survey data provides insights into ethics and confidentiality standards.The survey was carried the potential prevalence of integrity risks in the public out online between June 1, 2022 and June 30, 2022. 3,103 administration in Armenia, however the interpretation of valid responses were collected, corresponding to a 45 percent these results cannot be conclusive. 65 percent of public participation rate. servants report that unethical behaviors rarely or never happen in their entity, 5 percent that unethical behaviors The analysis of the survey findings is anchored in the sometimes, frequently or always happen, and 30 percent government production function conceptual framework2, report not knowing or preferring not to answer. Eighty percent and adjusted to explicitly take into account the drivers of public servants report that they have not been under any and consequences of corruption. The foundations for undue pressure in the last three years, 6 percent that they effective government operations and services lay on the have been under some undue pressure, and 14 percent report policies, regulatory environment and institutions, and on the not knowing or preferring not to answer. In terms of conflict of functioning of the public administration, which translates interest, situations that happen with more frequency include strategies and legislations into practice and operations. leaving the public service to work in a private company in the The study follows innovative analytical approaches for the same sector (23 percent [29 percent reported not knowing combination of survey data and government administrative or preferring not to answer]), being hired in the public sector data, for advanced analysis. For example, it demonstrates the after working on a political campaign (14 percent [38 percent links between human resource management (HRM) practices, reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) or hiring a perceptions of corruption, and objective risks of corruption family member or a friend (12 percent [35 percent reported in public procurement transactions. Whenever possible, the not knowing or preferring not to answer]). These shares vary study also reports comparisons between survey results in depending on the assumptions made on non-responses, and Armenia and other countries with similar available public data. this is reflected in the presentation of the results. Given the lack of baseline data to assess trends, the lack of comparable The survey results are carefully presented as some of data for other countries for benchmarking, the influence that the questions have relatively elevated number of “non- culture and social norms may have on the willingness to response” rates. Despite the survey achieving a high report, and the apparent lack of awareness on certain integrity participation rate overall, the average rate of non-responses risks among public servants, the interpretation of these results across questions is 32 percent, which is higher than in cannot be conclusive. public servants surveys conducted in other countries, and higher than in a similar public sector accountability survey conducted online in Brazil in 2021 (World Bank, 2021a). Policies, Regulatory Environment, The high rate of non-responses to survey questions can be Institutions & Tools attributed to various factors. These include respondents lacking necessary information, survey fatigue, concerns Anticorruption Institutions and Programs about trust and anonymity, doubts regarding the utility of the survey, and fears of reputational harm to their organizations. Public servants express limited confidence toward the However, in the case of Armenia, non-response rates vary by effectiveness of different actors in the fight against different modules, and it points to that survey fatigue is not a corruption and towards some of the new institutions and EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 2 functions established by recent anticorruption reforms. Whistleblowing System The share of public servants believing in the effectiveness of senior management in their own entity in fighting corruption There is limited knowledge on how the whistleblowing is 35 percent (45 percent reported not knowing or preferring system works, and there is limited willingness to report not to answer), higher than for the government (28 percent a colleague or supervisor in case of witnessing unethical [43 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), behavior. The latter may also explain the high rate of for the CPC (23 percent [47 percent reported not knowing respondents who declined to answer the most sensitive or preferring not to answer]), and for investigation and law survey questions. Only 22 percent of public servants report enforcement agencies (22 percent [50 percent reported that there is a whistleblowing system in their entity and they not knowing or preferring not to answer]). These results know how it works, and 20 percent reports not knowing about may be partially explained by the lack of awareness among the whistleblowing system in their entity (48 percent preferred public servants of the existing institutions and the ongoing not to answer). One of the challenges to the effectiveness of anticorruption efforts, and by the apparent disconnect the whistleblowing system is the apparent limited willingness between the recent anticorruption measures and the priorities of public servants to use it. 66 percent of public servants report expressed by public servants for the fight against corruption. they have never witnessed a colleague or supervisor behaving While 86 percent of public servants have heard about the unethically, but among them, only 32 percent would report a CPC, only 27 percent are familiar with its function (5 percent colleague or supervisor if they did. Similarly, among the public preferred not to answer), and only a minority of public servants servants that report witnessing a colleague or supervisor know the integrity officer in their entity (44 percent [19 percent behaving unethically (7 percent), only 33 percent reported it. preferred not to answer]). While the recent anticorruption This low willingness to report can be partially explained by the efforts in Armenia have been focusing on establishing a robust prevailing culture and norms around reporting and lack of trust legal framework and institutions, public servants express on the anonymity of the whistleblowing system. 21 percent different views on what would be the most effective measures believes that public servants do not use the whistleblowing to reduce corruption in the country, giving highest priorities system because they prefer to avoid conflict, and 14 percent to increasing salaries (51 percent) and making penalties because it is not acceptable to report a colleague, 17 percent for corruption crimes more severe (26 percent) (26 percent because public servants do not trust the confidentiality of reported not knowing or preferring not to answer). This the reports, and 8 percent because there is no protection for apparent disconnect may indicate the need to further promote whistleblowers (60 percent reported not knowing or preferring a cultural shift in the public sector in Armenia to increase the not to answer). Another challenge to the effectiveness of the effectiveness of measures that rely on the proactivity and whistleblowing system may be the limited perception that participation of public servants in the fight against corruption. wrongdoing is likely to be discovered by direct colleagues, and less likely than by the immediate supervisor, the head of the Assets Declarations entity, or the audit body. The survey results show some challenges with the Code of Conduct process for completing assets declarations and a lack of awareness on the role of assets declarations in the fight Public servants are widely familiar with the Code of against corruption. Among managers, 25 percent report that Conduct applicable to their position, and the main the process is tedious or burdensome (26 percent reported challenges with its implementation are related to the not knowing or preferring not to answer), 18 percent mentions existing loopholes and exceptions, and difficulties in that the process is confusing and not user-friendly (31 percent monitoring and applying sanctions. 85 percent of public reported not knowing or preferring not to answer), and servants know that a Code of Conduct exists for their position, 17 percent says that they do not trust the confidentiality of the and 79 percent are familiar with it (12 percent preferred not process (31 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to to answer). The majority of public servants express positive answer). In addition, while 51 percent of managers believe views on the clarity of the Code of Conduct applicable to that it is important for public servants to declare their assets their position, its dissemination and communication, its (10 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer), enforcement, compliance with it, and the administrative only 29 percent believe that the state is using this data steps for its application. Among non-managers that believe effectively (27 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to the Code of Conduct is not well-enforced, the main reasons answer). These results do not reflect the recent improvements are the difficulties to monitor compliance with the rules to the asset declaration electronic platform. (28 percent) and the many loopholes and exceptions EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 3 (27 percent). Among managers that believe the Code of included a written exam. 80 percent of public servants had their Conduct is not complied with by public servants, the main performance evaluated in the two years prior to the survey, a reasons are ineffective sanctions (24 percent), lack of a share that in other countries with comparable data available monitoring system (22 percent), lack of understanding among ranges between 94 percent in Lithuania and 85 percent public servants on the importance of complying with the in Uruguay. Among non-managers, 22 percent indicates rules (21 percent), and the many loopholes and exceptions performance evaluations are used for tracking and improving (20 percent). performance, 12 percent says performance evaluations are used in assessing training needs, and 13 percent mentions Inside the Public Administration they are not used in any significant way (24 percent of public servants reported not knowing or preferring not to answer). The survey results highlight some of the drivers of Managers expressed concerns on primarily feeling pressured unethical behaviors and integrity risks in the public to give a high rating to all employees (28 percent [16 percent administration in Armenia as perceived by public reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), and on lack servants. The larger share of public servants (31 percent) of tools to address underperformance among their employees believe that the function more prone to corruption risks is public (21 percent [24 percent reported not knowing or preferring not procurement. They identify the following top reasons why to answer]). The survey results show slow career progression some public servants have unethical behaviors: low salaries and 18 percent of public servants are not confident they will be and rising cost of living (33 percent), insufficient monitoring promoted if performing well (23 percent reported not knowing (18 percent), and insufficient sanctioning (17 percent) or preferring not to answer). Only 27 percent of public servants (45 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer). report being satisfied with their salary, a lower share than for The analysis follows the conceptual framework to assess the majority of countries with comparable data available. some of the potential factors explaining integrity risks in the public administration in Armenia and their consequences. The quality of HRM practices is associated with lower integrity risks, measured both from the survey data HRM Practices and from public procurement data publicly available. Public servants who report higher quality of HRM practices Recruitment practices are generally perceived as fair in their entity are less likely to report having been subject to and transparent by public servants, but the performance or witnessing unethical behaviors in HRM situations, having evaluations are not properly implemented and there are been under undue pressure, or that conflicts of interest often limited career or compensation incentives to motivate happen. The relevance of the quality of HRM practices goes public servants to perform well. For their first position in the beyond perceptions and subjective views of integrity risks, as public sector, 70 percent of public servants report that they it is also reflected in the positive association between HRM were hired through an open competitive recruitment process, quality and corruption risks measured using procurement 75 percent mentions that the assessment method included an administrative data on tenders and contracts. interview, and 58 percent says that the assessment method EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 4 Public Procurement The lack of awareness of public servants seem to concern the consequences of corruption as well, as only a minority of public While according to MOF’s statistics noncompetitive servants agree that corruption in the public administration tendering practices are widespread in Armenia, this affect the effectiveness and efficiency of their entity and their does not seem to be perceived as an issue by public own work. The analysis demonstrates that there is a link servants. A relative large share of public servants believe that between the share of public servants that reported receiving public procurement procedures are transparent (66 percent integrity trainings in an entity and the reported incidence of [12 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), integrity risks in that entity, further supporting the case for that evaluation and award criteria are typically well defined more awareness raising initiatives and capacity building on (60 percent [32 percent reported not knowing or preferring these topics. not to answer]), that political influences/interests do not affect procurement decisions (53 percent [27 percent reported not Attitudes and Behaviors knowing or preferring not to answer]), and that procurement processes are typically free from undue influences (48 percent Workplace trust is an important element of the working [36 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]). environment in Armenia and the majority of public servants However, the survey results show that only 34 percent of public report being satisfied with their job and feeling valued in servants believe that noncompetitive procurement procedures their entity, but fewer believe that their job allows them are used only in well-justified circumstances (38 percent to unleash their full potential. 78 percent of public servants reported not knowing or preferring not to answer), and only feel valued in their entity, 70 percent are satisfied with their 20 percent agrees that public servants do not have too much job, and 56 percent believe their job allows them to unleash discretion in preparing tender documents (45 percent reported their full potential (Figure 31). The share of public servants not knowing or preferring not to answer). This perception is in satisfied with their job is lower in Armenia than for the majority line with the statistics from the MOF on the high use of direct of other countries where similar surveys have been conducted contracting and open procedures in Armenia, but according to in recent years, while Armenia scores relatively high in the the survey, public servants do not recognize this as a threat “feeling valued at work” dimension. In terms of motivation, the to integrity.3 The survey shows that some practices that can top three factors keeping workers in the public administration help reduce corruption risks in public procurement do not are the opportunity to serve society (50 percent), the good appear to be implemented consistently, such as composition working environment (35 percent), and career development of evaluation committees and relationships with firms. opportunities (32 percent). Job satisfaction and workplace trust are associated with lower integrity risks. Public servants who Awareness and Training report higher job satisfaction are less likely to report having been subject to or witnessing unethical behaviors in HRM The survey results highlight a potential lack of awareness situations, having been under undue pressure, or that conflicts among public servants on the integrity risks associated of interest often happen. The relevance of public servants with certain circumstances and on the consequences satisfaction and workplace trust goes beyond perceptions and of corruption in the public administration, making the subjective views on integrity risks, as it is also reflected in the case for increasing training. For example, while 60 percent positive association between these attitudes and corruption of public servants think it is unjustifiable to use personal risks measured using procurement administrative data on connections for being hired (25 percent reported not knowing tenders and contracts. or preferring not to answer) and 61 percent for being promoted (25 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer), only 41 percent thinks so for helping a friend getting hired Main Recommendations (26 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer. A minority of public servants recognize the integrity risks associated with direct contracting in case of delays in tender The report provides recommendations to address the preparation (44 percent [37 percent reported not knowing or main challenges highlighted by the survey results. A preferring not to answer]), to contract a firm with a convenient first set of recommendations is directed to promote a cultural offline offer (39 percent [47 percent reported not knowing or shift toward integrity issues in the public sector through preferring not to answer]), and to contract a well-performing policy actions directed to increasing awareness of public supplier through a small-value contract (28 percent servants about their role in the fight against corruption, their [48 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 5 active involvement in anticorruption efforts, and trust in the recommends increasing the use of open procedures, closing government. Second, the report recommends improving the knowledge gaps on integrity risks in public procurement, knowledge of anticorruption efforts through increasing increasing transparency, and promoting citizen engagement communication and transparency, as well as strengthening in monitoring and oversight of public procurement. Finally, the the role of integrity officers. Third, the report recommends report recommends moving towards evidence-based decision improving HRM tools for career development and increasing making in anticorruption, public administration and HRM, and staff motivation and productivity, through actions targeted to public procurement. This will require building the necessary improving performance management, career management, data analytics skills and sensitize decision-makers on how and compensation management. Fourth, to address integrity using data and evidence can lead to better-designed and risks in public procurement, the government function perceived targeted policies and reforms. by public servants as the most prone to corruption, the report Policy Recommendations Increasing trust towards the government Increase public To increase trust in the government and promote a culture of greater involvement (reporting servant’s knowledge of and addressing corruption in the public service), the CPC and the government should anticorruption efforts disseminate the results of this survey widely among public servants. They should also link these results to specific policy actions and track their implementation progress over time. This will demonstrate that public servants’ opinions can contribute to shaping change in the government. Increase communication Increase communication to public servants and to the general society about the role of on the role and impact of institutions that have a direct mandate to fight corruption, such as the Corruption Prevention anticorruption institutions Commission (CPC), the Anti-Corruption Committee, the prosecutor’s office, and the judiciary. A strong focus should be put on recent achievements in the fight against corruption to help build trust. Provide integrity officers The role of integrity officers as the first point of contact in public entities on any integrity with a more prominent role issues (including guidance on resources and tools available to report and address corruption in public entities) should be widely communicated. Integrity officers should be given a more active role through the provision of regular training or communications to staff. As this role is widened, the capacities of integrity officers shall be enhanced to ensure their competency for performing their role. Increase awareness on A communication campaign should be launched on the existing tools such as the asset the use and impact of declaration e-platform, the whistleblowers’ reporting system, and the code of conduct. anticorruption tools The potential impact of anticorruption tools should be broadly disseminated. For example, the CPC and the Government of Armenia should share more widely among public servants how completing assets declarations or reporting corruption situations in the whistleblowers’ platform can contribute to a more effective fight against corruption. The upgraded electronic platform for declarations should be launched in a public event to disseminate the expected benefits (and initial results) of the new platform, and further encourage declarations. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 6 Policy Recommendations Increasing trust towards the government Increase transparency Transparency and data availability around asset declarations, whistleblowers reporting, and and open data from beneficial ownership should be increased to further promote trust in anticorruption initiatives anticorruption tools and disseminate the work of the CPC and other anticorruption stakeholders. It is essential to continually enhance the anticorruption tools and increase the use of data analytics to improve detection of corrupt behaviors. Promoting a cultural shift toward integrity issues in the public sector Awareness raising on To increase awareness of public servants about their role in the fight against corruption, social norms awareness-raising efforts should be conducted, focused on uncovering integrity risks that are hidden by social norms and cultural aspects, such as using connections to help friends, or the risks associated with certain practices in public procurement. Improving HRM tools for career development and increasing staff motivation and productivity Performance management The design and use of performance evaluations should set clear performance expectations, establish clear links between staff contributions and the organization’s goals and objectives, and identify areas for staff growth and development. A well-defined and transparent framework for performance evaluations should establish a closer link between performance and HRM decisions, such as bonuses and promotions. Managers should facilitate constructive performance conversations, set concrete performance measurements based on common agreements between staff and managers, and identify follow-up actions and training needs for career progression. Managers should provide performance feedback to staff in their units on a regular basis. A system to track check-ins and feedback provision should be established to monitor performance conversations and follow-up actions. Training should be provided to managers as needed. Career management To improve career perspectives, current mechanisms for staff promotion to higher positions should be less restrictive (i.e., currently promotions can be done only through competition) and should base career progression on performance. Rewarding good performers and further motivating staff can help them unleash their full potential. In the short-term, to address the issue of low motivation resulting from limited career prospects, the government could use non-financial incentives such as recognition and awards to enhance workplace culture and boost staff motivation. Compensation To address the question of salary dissatisfaction, further analyses should be conducted to management understand the causes of these negative perceptions. For example, an in-depth wage bills assessment should be conducted to evaluate the current structure of compensations in the public sector and determine whether dissatisfaction is linked to low competitiveness, inequity, discretionary allowances, or other factors. This information can then be used to inform adjustments in the public sector compensation framework. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 7 Policy Recommendations Increasing integrity in public procurement Increase the use of Various measures could incentivize the use of open procedures, such as targeted audits open procedures on requests for quotation and single-source procurement, and regular reporting on the contracting authorities with higher corruption risks, higher share of single-bidder contracts, and larger use of noncompetitive procedures. Increase awareness Training and specific capacity-building programs could be organized on the topics with on integrity risks in the biggest knowledge gaps, such as the use of direct contracting, conflict of interest, public procurement communication with firms outside the e-procurement portal, and contract management, and in particular for sector specialists that are responsible for the procurement in their entity and for members of evaluation committees. Increase transparency and Transparency and open data can be powerful tools to increase accountability in the public involvement of civil society sector, including in public procurement. The quality of procurement micro-data available on the e-procurement website should be improved, and be complemented and interconnected with other data to measure and monitor corruption risks, such as data on beneficial ownership, assets declarations, debarment, budget plans, and contract implementation. Initiatives can be implemented to inform and train civil society on how they can use these resources, to involve civil society in the design of transparency tools to favor their take-up, and to promote coordinated/joint oversight of public procurement involving anti-corruption institutions and civil society. Moving toward evidence-based decision-making Culture for evidence-based There is great potential in adopting an evidence-based approach to reforms in a variety decision-making of policy areas, including anticorruption, public administration and HRM, and public procurement. Moving toward evidence-based decision-making in the public sector would require building the necessary data analytics skills and sensitize decision-makers on how using data and evidence can lead to better-designed and targeted policies and reforms. The production and consumption of data analytics to inform reforms could be facilitated by the availability of complete and high-quality data, by connecting existing information and data (for example Procurement and Asset Declaration datasets) and by the development of dashboards and standard data analytics tools. Regular surveys of public servants can be part of this shift toward evidence-based decision- making, and they can be tailored to specific topics such as HRM, integrity, or sector-specific investigations. The CPC and the government should consider regularly implementing a survey with public servants on integrity risks in the public sector to assess trends in the fight against corruption and evaluate emerging weaknesses. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 8 1. >>> Context and Objectives of This Study4 1.1 The Anticorruption Agenda in Armenia The 2018 Velvet Revolution and the change in government brought new momentum to anticorruption reforms in Armenia, putting the fight against corruption high in the government’s policy agenda and enabling important reforms. In 2019, the Government of Armenia set forth a five-year plan that envisions reinforcement of the rule of law and elimination of widespread corruption, substantial and inclusive economic growth, and equal business opportunities for all. The 2019–2022 Anticorruption Strategy of Armenia included reform actions aimed at establishing a highly transparent, accountable, and trustworthy public service system. Central to Armenia’s fight against corruption is ensuring integrity and accountability of its public servants and officials. The government’s anticorruption concept envisions an institutional system with preventive, investigative, and litigative bodies. The overall anticorruption policy is developed by the Ministry of Justice, which also performs monitoring functions. The implementation of the preventive anticorruption policy is under the Corruption Prevention Commission (CPC), an independent agency established in 2019, which includes a wide number of anticorruption measures, such as (1) the collection, publication, and analysis of asset, income, and expenses, and conflict declarations of public officials; (2) conducting integrity checks of candidates for public office; (3) oversight of political party financing; and (4) ensuring compliance with anticorruption requirements and restrictions covering a broad category of rules including conflict of interest, gifts, and incompatibilities; and (5) ensuring the uniform interpretation of principles of conduct of persons holding public office and observance of model rules of conduct of public servants.5 The new institutional framework is completed by the Anti-Corruption Investigative Committee and the Anti-Corruption Court, established in 2021, and the Anti-Corruption Chamber of the Court of Cassation.6 EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 9 Armenia has recently introduced several tools to fight improved over the past 6 months. This figure starkly contrasts corruption, in line with international practices. Existing with the 82 percent recorded in October 2018, indicating a tools include a legal framework and an electronic platform to significant decline in public confidence.15 These findings encourage and protect whistleblowing; an electronic platform underscore the existing challenges and possible disparities for the declaration of assets, income, and interests; and a between de jure laws and de facto practices, highlights the beneficial ownership registry. The 2018 Law on Public Service need for comprehensive assessments to bridge the gap also establishes the fundamentals of the integrity system for particularly in terms of integrity within the public sector. public servants, including their rights and duties, limitations, incompatibilities, and declaration obligations. The 2022 CPC 1.2 Human Resource Management decree7 establishes that public servants are to strictly follow the rules of conduct applicable to their position and can face in the Public Sector in Armenia disciplinary sanctions in case of violations to those rules (except for persons holding political positions). They are also obliged to follow the regulations on gifts, incompatibility, The fundamentals of the public service system in conflict of interest, and other limitations set forth by the law. Armenia are established by the 2018 Law on Public The 2022 CPC decree also introduced a Model Code of Service, which provides the general definition and Conduct for Public Servants to be used for drafting new codes scope of the public service and position types. The law of conduct or updating the existing ones in various public envisages three main types of public service: state service sector agencies.8 Integrity officers have been supporting its (e.g., civil service, diplomatic service, tax service, and military implementation and providing related guidance to staff within service), municipal service, and public positions. The Civil Armenian public entities.9 Service Bureau of the Prime Minister’s Office is in charge of the methodological coordination and oversight of the human Armenia has been modernizing the implementation of resource management (HRM) policy, including analyzing several anticorruption tools, such as the whistleblowing the legislation and practice, developing renumeration policy, platform and the assets declaration system. The Law on and monitoring the performance evaluation practice. At the Whistleblowing System, adopted in 2018 and further improved same time, the Secretary General and the Human Resources in 2022, regulates both internal and external reporting in public Department of each public entity are tasked with coordinating entities. With support from the World Bank, a whistleblowing internal HR management. The last major reforms to the public platform10 began operating in 2019 and it ensures total administration system were undertaken in 2018, when the anonymity for persons reporting corruption crimes. The assets Government of Armenia amended the regulatory framework of declaration system was established in 2012 and has been the public and civil service system, expanded the boundaries continuously improved. The official website of the CPC11 of the civil service, introduced mechanisms for merit-based includes published declarations of all declarant officials. The recruitment, and improved the performance evaluation system. scope of declarant officials was expanded with the adoption of the 2018 Law on Public Service,12 and continued gradually The 2018 Law on Civil Service provides detailed regulation expanding afterward. New legislative amendments were made for the recruitment of public servants for positions in a in 2021, introducing expense declarations and establishing a wide range of public entities. These include staff members post office integrity mechanism for public officials. With the of the Prime Minister’s Office, the Parliament, the President’s World Bank support, a new asset declaration e-platform13 administration, ministries and agencies, the office of the 3was launched in February 2023 to improve access to and Human Rights Defender, the General Prosecutor’s Office, quality of data in order to facilitate verification and analysis of investigative agencies, and independent and autonomous declarations, as well as to make the declaration process more bodies. The maximum number of staff and positions in each user-friendly (with pre-filed declarations).14 public entity is established by a Prime Minister Decree,16 while separate legal acts for each entity define the exact number However, the implementation of anticorruption reforms is and positions for each entity in accordance with the Prime yet to show the expected results on the ground. Public Minister Decree. While the main recruitment mechanism in perception regarding the effectiveness of the anticorruption the public sector is competition, replenishment from a cadre agenda is mixed and has deteriorated over time. In a survey reserve (of previous civil servants) or rating lists is also conducted in March 2023, only 43 percent of respondents allowed.17 Promotions to a higher position are allowed only expressed that the fight against corruption in Armenia has through a new competition. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 10 The salary scales for the entire public service system are become operational to ensure the efficient maintenance of established by the 2013 Law on Remuneration of Persons HRM data, such as staff lists, staff reserve, applications for Holding Public Positions and Public Service Positions, vacant positions, and recruitment tests. The current HRMIS and are publicly accessible. The law provides the payment was implemented with the World Bank’s assistance, and coefficients for these positions, while the base unit is it includes an electronic competition module to increase determined by the Law on State Budget. The base unit has efficiency and transparency in the recruitment of public not been changed for several years, and the payment gap with servants, and a training system. The Government of Armenia the private market used to be adjusted with bonus payments, recently conducted a deeper analysis of the main challenges determined by each agency discretionary. To address in the public administration system, resulting in adoption of concerns on these practices and the increasing disconnect the Public Administration Reform Strategy for 2022–2024 between public sector and private sector wages, the 2023 Law in May 2022.18 The Strategy has four main pillars—better on State Budget raised the base salary by around 25 percent. policy making, stronger institutions, quality public services, and improved human resources—and thus envisages major The 2018 Law on Civil Service provides detailed reforms in these four directions. regulations for performance evaluation of civil servants, which should be conducted once a year, resulting on encouragement or assignment of training. The Government 1.3 Public Procurement Decision regulating performance evaluation system of civil servants provides the features for performance evaluation and envisaged bonuses to be based on the evaluation results. Efficient, effective, and accountable public procurement The performance evaluations are organized and conducted is key for ensuring responsible use of public resources through the electronic system for official document circulation, and successful delivery of public projects. Unfortunately, and they are expected to inform training and capacity-building because of the volume of transactions and the financial needs, awards of bonuses, and promotions. Performance interests at stake, the complexity of the process, the close assessments data are accessible to the Civil Service Bureau interaction between public officials and businesses, and the and to the HR units of the respective public entities, but are multitude of stakeholders, public procurement is one of the not publicly available. government activities most vulnerable to corruption (OECD 2016). The direct and indirect costs of corruption include loss Armenia has been continuing its reform efforts to of public funds through misallocations or higher expenses modernize and strengthen its public administration. The and lower quality of goods, services, and works; distortion of 2018 Law on Civil Service envisages that an upgraded Human competition; and limited market access for firms and reduced Resource Management Information System (HRMIS) shall business appetite for foreign investors (OECD 2016) — EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 11 ultimately leading to the erosion of public trust and confidence 1.4 This Study in government. Given its relevance to anticorruption efforts, this report provides a detailed analysis of the perceptions on integrity risks in public procurement in the next paragraphs. Given this context and building on the World Bank’s longstanding engagement in Armenia, the CPC and the Armenia has an electronic public procurement system World Bank implemented the Armenia Public Sector and some elements for transparency and accountability Accountability Survey to address the disparities between in public procurement. Public procurement is primarily de jure laws and regulations and de facto practices, fill regulated by the 2016 Public Procurement Law.19 While existing knowledge gaps, and inform further definition of public procurement is decentralized, the MOF oversees the government’s anticorruption initiatives. Most recently, the overall public procurement, is responsible for the the World Bank has been providing technical assistance and development, operation and maintenance of the electronic capacity-building to the CPC to strengthen data analytics public procurement system, and produces annual reports on for the identification of corruption risks with a focus on asset public procurement. Procurement planning is an integral part declaration and public contracting data.26 More generally on of annual budgeting and planning. The Armenia electronic public administration reforms, the World Bank is supporting procurement system was launched in 2011 with the World the upgrade of the existing HRMIS, the introduction of a Bank’s support, and it was upgraded with three new modules Senior Executive Service system, the digitalization and for planning, contract management and reporting in 2015, modernization of public service delivery, and improvements and with an e-auction module in 2016. These modules are in the strategic planning framework.27 The ongoing initiatives organized in two e-platforms: the procurement planning and by the Government of Armenia and the World Bank have contract management system and the electronic procurement been informed by analytical studies and diagnostics, but there website. The electronic procurement website includes a has been limited knowledge on the integrity risks and HRM section to access analytics on some procurement indicators practices experienced by public servants in Armenia, as well and the possibility to download some of the microdata.20 as on their impact on satisfaction and motivation. The Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey aimed at filling these Low competition and noncompetitive tendering practices knowledge gaps. are prevalent in Armenia. Despite the 2016 Public Procurement Law encourages the use of open auctions The survey involved public servants in selected public and states that open tender is the default procedure for any entities in Armenia, with these main objectives: public procurement, what happens in practice can be very different.21 According to the 2022 MOF annual report on public • Generating a comprehensive assessment of the patterns procurement (MOF, 2023), in 2022 direct contracting (single and determinants of integrity risks, and how they can sourcing or urgent single sourcing) represented 43 percent impact productivity and performance in the public of procurement expenditures and 46 percent of procedures. administration in Armenia. A World Bank analysis of public procurement open data for the period between 2017 and early June 2020 showed that • Understanding the perceptions of Armenian public the share of contracts awarded through open procedures is servants of the ongoing anticorruption initiatives, the 44 percent in Armenia,22 much lower than in EU countries awareness and norms around integrity risks, and the (74 percent) or in countries in the Western Balkans (94 percent) existing needs for further interventions. (OECD 2020).23 The use of open procedures alone does not guarantee a high level of competition, and indeed in Armenia • Generating evidence, support and inform further definition the share of single-bid tenders – a standard indicator of lack of reforms and anticorruption initiatives that help address of competition and corruption risks in public procurement and counter weak integrity practices in the public sector (European Commission, 2017) – is 33 percent for open tenders in Armenia. and 43 percent for electronic auctions, which is comparable to the highest share of single-bid tenders in some East European The survey aimed to reveal the mechanisms and incentives and Mediterranean countries (European Commission, 2017). of corruption within the public sector, inform ongoing As a result, the average number of bidders per procedure is reform efforts and the new Anticorruption Strategy, and considerably lower in Armenia (2.3)24 than in the EU (4.3) or develop targeted anticorruption actions. In particular, the Western Balkans (3.0) (OECD 2020).25 the survey was designed to inform the implementation of EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 12 the asset declaration system, the whistleblower protection benchmark survey modules and a platform for practitioners framework, codes of conduct, integrity assessments of public and researchers to generate improved diagnostics and a officials, and training for public servants and members of better understanding of the public service through survey the ethics commissions on integrity matters, among others. data; it currently covers 27 countries and 32 surveys The primary beneficiaries of this activity are the Ministry of (Figure 1). While these global surveys typically focus on HRM Justice and the CPC as the policy makers and implementing topics, the World Bank in 2021 conducted two public sector agency of the anticorruption policy in Armenia, as well as the accountability surveys, in Brazil and Madagascar. In Brazil Procurement Policy Department at the Ministry of Finance, (World Bank, 2021a), the survey focused on public servants the Civil Service Bureau, and other institutions mandated with from the federal governments and revealed insights into public the task of preventing and fighting corruption, such as the servants’ experiences with unethical behavior, knowledge of Anticorruption Committee. The CPC coordinated this exercise reporting mechanisms, and perceptions of whistleblowing on the government’s side. and grievances. In Madagascar (World Bank, 2021b), the survey focused on the education sector, providing information This survey built on similar studies conducted by the on policies and practices regarding teacher recruitment, World Bank and other counterparts in other countries. incentives, school management, transparency, accountability, The Global Survey of Public Servants website aims to provide and regulatory mechanisms. > > > B O X 1 - Methodology The Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey was aimed at public servants in selected public entities in Armenia, including central ministries and agencies, regional governments, and selected municipalities across the country. The survey was aimed at professionals, managers, and public procurement specialists in 50 selected public entities. More than 7,000 public servants were invited to participate, following a census approach with voluntary participation. The census approach ensures that all public servants in the target population have the opportunity to participate and express their opinion, thereby ensuring greater inclusiveness than other approaches. The responses were collected online between June 1, 2022 and June 30, 2022. To ensure a high participation rate, the dissemination of the survey followed a decentralized approach with support from integrity focal points or HR representatives in participating institutions. The participation rate to the survey was 45 percent, with 3,103 valid responses. The participation rates vary across institutions (Annex A: Figure 1), and respondents to the survey represent a wide range of public entities, positions, levels of responsibilities, and demographic groups (Annex A). The analysis uses balancing weights to ensure that the empirical results are representative of the target population and to minimize sampling biases. The study follows innovative analytical approaches for the combination of survey data and government administrative data. Some of the analysis was done using indexes constructed from the survey and government administrative data to represent overall aggregate patterns in the data. Whenever possible, the study also reports comparisons between survey results in Armenia and other countries with similar available public data. Deeper explanation of the methodology is provided in Annex A. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 13 > > > F I G U R E 1 - Global Surveys of Public Servants Source: Global Survey of Public Servants. 1.5 Conceptual Framework public servants, and their interactions with integrity risks in the public sector. The presentation of the survey findings is organized around this conceptual framework. The analysis of the survey findings is anchored in the The empirical analysis explores the links between integrity government production function conceptual framework risks and HRM practices, training and awareness raising, presented in Figure 2. This conceptual framework is inspired and public servants’ satisfaction and workplace trust, by the one presented in World Bank (2019), and adjusted and the most promising areas for improving processes to explicitly take into account the drivers and consequences in the public administration. The analysis presented in of corruption. The foundations for effective government this report builds from a large economics, psychology and operations and services lay on the policies, regulatory public administration literature. For example, numerous environment and institutions, and on the functioning of the public research studies provide evidence that the quality of HRM administration, which translates strategies and legislations practices influences corruption (e.g., Nieto-Morales and Ríos, into practice and operations. The functioning of the public 2021) through various mechanisms, such as: merit-based administration depends on the “inputs” (such as personnel recruitment can reduce exposure of public servants to undue and IT systems), the “processes” (such as HRM practices, pressure and influences (e.g., Heywood and Meyer-Sahling, procurement practices and trainings), and the “attitudes and 2013); monitoring, performance evaluations, and realistic behaviors” of public servants, which ultimately drive their work performance goals can increase accountability and aligning efforts and performance. “Integrity” (understood as issues incentives (e.g., Belle and Cantarelli, 2017); meritocratic career related to corruption, conflict of interest, undue influence, management can shift incentives from risky short-term corrupt and favoritism) influences and is influenced by government gains to long-term career goals (e.g., Evans and Rauch, 1999); operations (policies, laws and institutions; inputs), processes, and higher salary and lower salary inequalities can increase and attitudes and behaviors. In this report, we consider the workplace trust and commitment to organizational goals (e.g., policies, regulatory environment and institutions, the public Dal Bó, Finan, and Rossi, 2013; Jost, Banaji, and Nosek, administration processes, and attitudes and behaviors of EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 14 2004). The conceptual framework (Figure 2) makes it clear attitudes can shape the incidence of integrity risks as well as that anticorruption policies and institutions, HRM practices, being shaped by them. The results presented in this report public procurement practices, trainings, and public servants’ should be interpreted in light of this reciprocal connection. > > > F I G U R E 2 - The Government Production Function and Integrity Risks Policies, Public Administration Regulatory Environment, Attitudes & Institutions Inputs Processes behaviors Anticorruption Personnel Public sector Work institutions management environment Goods practices and Assets declarations (e.g., HR, organizational Infrastructure procurement) culture Outcomes Whistleblowing Training & Motivation & Productivity Code of conduct awareness satisfaction raising Quality of service delivery Integrity Bribes and misappropriations Conflict of interest Political influences and undue pressure Favoritism and personal connections Source: Authors’ elaboration, adapted from the World Bank Bureaucracy Lab government production function conceptual framework presented in World Bank (2019). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 15 2. >>> Experiences of Integrity Risks The evidence from the survey data provides insights into the prevalence of integrity risks in the public administration in Armenia. 5 percent of public servants report that unethical behaviors sometimes, frequently or always happen in their entity (30 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer), and 6 percent that they have been under some undue pressure in the last three years (14 percent report not knowing or preferring not to answer) (Table 1). However, these reported incidences of integrity risks vary depending on the assumptions made on non-responses, for example increasing to, respectively, 35 percent and 20 percent, if it is assumed that non-responses should be interpreted as indication of integrity risks (Table 1). In terms of conflict of interest, situations that happen with more frequency include leaving the public service to work in a private company in the same sector (23 percent [29 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), being hired in the public sector after working on a political campaign (14 percent [38 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) or hiring a family member or a friend (12 percent [35 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) (Figure 3). These shares vary depending on the assumptions made on non-responses, for example increasing to, respectively, 52 percent, 53 percent and 47 percent, if it is assumed that non-responses should be interpreted as indication that conflict of interest happens frequently (Figure 3). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 16 > > > T A B L E 1 - Incidence of Integrity Risks Share of public servants Considering Excluding Assuming non-responses non-responses non-responses are signs of integrity risks Believe that unethical behaviors sometimes, 5% 7% 35% frequently or always happen in own entity Have been under any undue pressure in the 6% 7% 20% last 3 years Have witnessed or have been subject to unethical behavior in at least one HRM 18% 24% 42% situation in the last 3 years Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: The first column reports the raw shares, considering all answers given to each question, including the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer”. The second column reports the shares when non-responses are excluded from the calculations, i.e. the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer” is considered as missing. The third column reports the shares under the assumption the selection of the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer” should be interpreted as a sign of integrity risks, i.e. respectively that the respondent believe that unethical behaviors sometimes, frequently or always happen in own entity; that the respondent has been under any undue pressure in the last 3 years; that the respondent have witnessed or have been subject to unethical behavior in at least one HRM situation in the last 3 years. > > > F I G U R E 3 - Situations with Potential Conflict of Interest Happen Frequently Leaving the public service to work in 33% 52% a private company in the same sector 23% Working on a politicians’ election campaign, and then being 24% 53% hired by the same politician to work in the public service 14% 19% 47% Hiring a family member or friend 12% Support the elctoral campaign of a political party 16% 51% in the course of his/her duties 10% Having a second job with a private company 14% 55% or running their own business 9% Awarding contracts to firms owned by their 16% 48% or their colleagues’ family members 8% Owning, or owning shares, or managing a business 9% 49% in the same sector (directly or indirectly) 5% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: For each situation with potential conflict of interest, the graph bar reports the share of public servants that believe it happens often or always, considering all answers given to each question, including the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer”. The ranges report the corresponding shares under different assumptions on the non-responses. The minimum value in the range reports the shares when non-responses are excluded from the calculations, i.e. the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer” is considered as missing. The maximum value in the range reports the shares under the assumption the selection of the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer” should be interpreted as a sign that the corresponding situation happens frequently. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 17 The survey also measured public servants’ perceptions getting a monetary bonus (29 percent reported not knowing on the ethics and integrity in HRM decisions in their or preferring not to answer), 7 percent for getting a promotion entity. 18 percent of public servants report having witnessed (13 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer), or having been subject to unethical behavior in at least one and 7 percent for getting a job (7 percent reported not knowing HRM situation in the last three years (24 percent reported not or preferring not to answer) (Table 2). However, these shares knowing or preferring not to answer) (Figure 4), increasing vary depending on the assumptions made on non-responses, to 42 percent if it is assumed that non-responses should be for example increasing to, respectively, 33 percent, 20 percent, interpreted as indication of integrity risks (Table 1). Public and 14 percent, if it is assumed that non-responses should be servants were also asked to indicate the top three most interpreted as indication of integrity risks (Table 2). Among non- important factors in a series of HRM decisions, including managers, 4 percent believe that performance evaluations in having political links, having personal links, or providing their entity are not conducted fairly, and 3 percent believe that gifts or unofficial payments (Table 2). The share of public results depend on personal relationships (32 percent reported servants that selected any of these factors is 4 percent for not knowing or preferring not to answer). > > > F I G U R E 4 - Witnessed or Subject to Unethical Behavior in at Least One HRM Situation in the past Three Years Travel authorization, events, training, licenses 1 Transfers 3 Selection and recruitment 4 Dismissals and disciplinary action 4 18 percent Training and professional development 5 Performance evaluation 7 Promotion and career advancement 7 Renumeration and rewards 9 Don’t know/Prefer not to respond 24 I didn’t witness any of the above in the last 3 years 58 0% 20% 40% 60% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 18 > > > T A B L E 2 - Top Factors in HRM Decisions Share of public servants Considering Excluding Assuming non-responses non-responses non-responses are signs of integrity risks Agree that (i) having political links, (ii) having personal links, (iii) or providing gifts or unofficial payments are among the three most important factors in: Getting a bonus in own entity 4% 5% 33% Getting a promotion in own entity 7% 8% 20% Getting a job in own entity 7% 7% 14% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: The first column reports the raw shares, considering all answers given to each question, including the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer”. The second column reports the shares when non-responses are excluded from the calculations, i.e. the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer” is considered as missing. The third column reports the shares under the assumption the selection of the option “don’t know/prefer not to answer” should be interpreted as a sign of integrity risks, i.e. that the respondent agree that (i) having political links, (ii) having personal links, (iii) or providing gifts or unofficial payments are among the three most important factors in, respectively, getting a bonus in own entity, getting a promotion in own entity, getting a job in own entity. The interpretation of these results cannot be conclusive circumstances, such as helping a friend being hired, use of given the lack of baseline data to assess trends, the lack direct contracting and small-value contracts, or contracting of comparable data for other countries for benchmarking, a firm with a convenient offline offer (see further details in the influence that culture and social norms may have Section 5.3), which may distort public servants’ perceptions on the willingness to report, and the apparent lack on the incidence of integrity risks in their entity. of awareness on certain integrity risks among public servants. First, this study is based on the first survey of public The next sections explore in more detail some of the servants on the topics of integrity risks in the public sector strengths and weaknesses of the existing system and conducted in Armenia, and therefore there is no baseline the implementation of recent anticorruption initiatives. As data against which to compare the results presented in this discussed in Section 1.1, Armenia has a robust anticorruption study from the 2022 data collection, nor a sufficient number legislative and regulatory framework. However, culture, social of countries with comparable survey data for benchmarking. norms, and a lack of awareness on certain integrity risks may Second, a considerable share of public servants preferred not jeopardize the effectiveness of anticorruption measures and to answer the most sensitive questions on their experience the compliance of public servants with good integrity practices, of integrity risks.28 As discussed in Section 2.1, the relatively especially when they are not specifically mandated by the high rate of respondents that declined to answer the survey law or are difficult to monitor and enforce. To look at these questions seems to be primarily explained by respondents not matters in further detail, Section 4 reviews the implementation feeling comfortable in sharing negative views or experiences and perceived effectiveness of anticorruption institutions and and widespread social norms preventing public servants to ongoing anticorruption efforts and Section 5 investigates report or share about integrity issues they may have directly processes, culture and norms inside the public administration, or indirectly experienced (see further details in Section 4.3 in particular HRM practices, public procurement, awareness on the whistleblowing system). Third, there is a potential lack and training, and public servants’ attitudes and behaviors. of awareness on the integrity risks associated with certain EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 19 3. >>> Policies, Regulatory Environment, Institutions & Tools 3.1 Anticorruption Institutions and Programs Public servants express limited confidence toward the effectiveness of different actors in the fight against corruption. The share of public servants believing in the effectiveness of senior management in their own entity in fighting corruption is 35 percent (45 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer), higher than for the government (28 percent [43 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), for the CPC (23 percent [47 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), and for investigation and law enforcement agencies (22 percent [50 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) (Table 3). Specifically on audits, a large share of public servants believe that internal audits (55 percent [20 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) and external audits (48 percent [32 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) are useful in detecting irregularities in budget management, but a much lower share of public servants believe that internal audits (21 percent [56 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) and external audits (23 percent [43 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) on budget are free from political pressure (Figure 5). These results may be partially explained by the lack of awareness among public servants of the existing institutions and the ongoing anticorruption efforts, and by the apparent disconnect between the recent anticorruption measures and the priorities expressed by public servants for the fight against corruption. These aspects are explored in further detail in the next paragraphs. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 20 > > > T A B L E 3 - Perceptions on the Effectiveness of Different Actors in the Fight Again Corruption Share of public servants that believe it has been effective in fighting corruption The Head of staff and other senior officers in own entity 35% The Government 28% The Corruption Prevention Commission (CPC) 23% Investigation and law enforcement agencies 22% (Anti-Corruption Agency, Investigative Committee) The Prosecutor’s office 20% Judges and Courts 18% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. > > > F I G U R E 5 - Perceptions on Budget Audits Internal audits are useful in detecting irregularities in the budget management 55% External audits are useful in detecting irregularities in the budget management 48% External audits on budget are free from political pressures 23% Internal audits on budget 21% are free from political pressures 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 21 Public servants are not yet familiar with some of the integrity officer in their entity (44 percent [19 percent preferred new institutions and functions established by recent not to answer]), and even fewer got in contact with that officer advancements in the anticorruption agenda. Indeed, in the year prior to the survey (38 percent) (Figure 6). The the CPC became operational in 2019,29 the Anti-Corruption limited confidence in the effectiveness of certain actors in the Investigative Committee and the Anti-Corruption Court in fight against corruption (Table 3) is partially explained by lack 2021, and integrity officers were appointed in 2018. While of knowledge on their functions and work. Indeed, the share of 86 percent of public servants have heard about the CPC, only public servants that believe that the CPC has been effective in 27 percent are familiar with its function (5 percent preferred fighting corruption is higher among those that are familiar with not to answer). Only a minority of public servants know the its function (37 percent vs. 18 percent). > > > F I G U R E 6 - Are Integrity Officers a Known and Used Resource in Their Entity? 49% 44% 40% 38% 20% 0% Integrity officers that got Public servants that know the Public servants that got in contact contracted by 5 or more colleagues integrity officer in their entity at least once with the integrity during the previous year office in their entity during the previous year Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. The ongoing anticorruption effort is not widely known on what would be the most effective measures to reduce among public servants, and it does not seem to reflect the corruption in the country, giving highest priorities to increasing views of public servants on the most effective measures salaries (51 percent) and making penalties for corruption to reduce corruption. Only a minority of public servants is crimes more severe (26 percent) (26 percent reported not aware of the various actions and projects implemented by the knowing or preferring not to answer) (Figure 8). This apparent government in the anticorruption agenda; the most known are disconnect deserves attention since it may explain some of the hotlines of various government agencies (48 percent) and the implementation challenges highlighted in Section 4.2 — the unified electronic platform for whistleblowing (30 percent) Section 4.4, and it may indicate the need to further promote (39 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer) a cultural shift in the public sector in Armenia to increase the (Figure 7). While the recent anticorruption efforts in Armenia effectiveness of measures that rely on the proactivity and have been focusing on establishing a robust legal framework participation of public servants in the fight against corruption. and institutions, public servants express different views EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 22 > > > F I G U R E 7 - Awareness on Ongoing Anticorruption Efforts Open Government Partnership Initiative 6 Initiative to reveal the real owners of companies 8 Anti-Corruption Strategy Monitoring Platform 12 Anti-Corruption Strategy, Action Plan for 2019-2022 14 Other participatory democracy e-tools 20 E-draft Platform 25 Unified Office for Public Services 25 Unified Electronic Platform for Whistle-Blowing 30 Hotlines for various government agencies 48 Don’t know/Prefer not to respond 39 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Questions not asked to procurement specialists. Respondents could select multiple options. > > > F I G U R E 8 - Most Effective Measures in Reducing Corruption, in the Views of Public Servants Increase the renumeration of public servants 51% Make penalties for corruption crimes more severe 26% Improve the role of anti-corruption agencies 18% Simplify administrative procedures 17% Make public-private relations more transparent 16% Other 9% Strengthen the monitoring of public policies by civil society 8% Reduce de facto impunity of public servants 8% Establish standard rules of conduct for public servants 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Respondents could select up to three options. The share of non-responses to this question is 26 percent. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 23 3.2 Assets Declarations The survey results show some challenges with the believe that it is important for public servants to declare their process for completing assets declarations and a lack of assets (10 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to awareness on the role of assets declarations in the fight answer), only 29 percent believe that the state is using this against corruption. Among managers, 25 percent report that data effectively (27 percent reported not knowing or preferring the process is tedious or burdensome (26 percent reported not to answer) (Figure 9). To address some of these gaps, not knowing or preferring not to answer), 18 percent mentions the World Bank recently supported the development of that the process is confusing and not user-friendly (31 percent an improved asset declaration e-platform,31 and provided reported not knowing or preferring not to answer), and technical assistance to the CPC to strengthen the use of 17 percent says that they do not trust the confidentiality of the assets declaration data, such as the use of data analytics process (31 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to tools to identify corruption risks from assets declaration data. answer) (Figure 9).30 In addition, while 51 percent of managers > > > F I G U R E 9 - Views of Managers on Asset Declaration Process of assets declarations The process is tedious/burdensome 25% The process is confusing and not user friendly 18% I don’t trust the confidentiality of the process 17% There is not enough support during the filing process 6% Use and effectiveness of assets declarations It is important for public servants to declare their assets 51% The state is using this data effectively 29% Public servants frequently lie in their declarations 16% There are no sanctions if you don’t file your declarations 13% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: This analysis considers only answers provided by public servants with grade M. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 24 3.3 Whistleblowing System The survey shows that there is limited knowledge on how use the whistleblowing system because they prefer to avoid the whistleblowing system works and limited willingness conflict, and 14 percent believes that it is not acceptable to report a colleague or supervisor in case of witnessing to report a colleague (60 percent reported not knowing or some unethical behavior. While the whistleblowing platform preferring not to answer) (Figure 12). Despite the platform became operational in 2019, only 22 percent of public servants ensuring anonymity for persons reporting corruption crimes, report that there is a whistleblowing system in their entity and lack of trust seems to play a role as well, with 17 percent they know how it works, and 20 percent reports not knowing believing that public servants do not use the whistleblowing about the whistleblowing system in their entity (48 percent system because they do not trust the confidentiality of the preferred not to answer) (Figure 10).32 One of the challenges to reports, and 8 percent believing that there is no protection for the effectiveness of the whistleblowing system is the apparent whistleblowers (60 percent reported not knowing or preferring limited willingness of public servants to use it. 66 percent of not to answer) (Figure 12). These factors limiting the use of public servants report they have never witnessed a colleague the whistleblowing system may be also explaining the high or supervisor behaving unethically, but among them, only rate of respondents that declined to answer the most sensitive 32 percent would report a colleague or supervisor if they did survey questions (Section 2.1). Another challenge to the (Figure 11). Similarly, among the public servants that report effectiveness of the whistleblowing system may be the limited witnessing a colleague or supervisor behaving unethically perception that wrongdoing is likely to be discovered by direct (7 percent), only 33 percent reported it. This low willingness colleagues, and less likely than by the immediate supervisor, to report can be partially explained by the prevailing culture the head of the entity, or the audit body (Figure 13). and norms: 21 percent believes that public servants do not > > > F I G U R E 1 0 - Knowledge of the Whistleblowing System There is a system but There is no system (4%) I don’t know about it (6%) No, I don’t know about it (20%) Prefer not to respond (48%) There is a system and I know about it (22%) Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 25 > > > F I G U R E 1 1 - Willingness to Report a Colleague/Supervisor in Case of Witnessing Some Unethical Behavior No (7%) Other (6%) It depends on the situation (22%) Yes (32%) Don’t know/prefer not to respond (32%) Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. > > > F I G U R E 1 2 - Top Three Factors Influencing Public Servants Not to Use the Whistleblowing System Long/complicated reporting process 3 Reported cases of corruption are neither 3 investigated nor punished Whistle-blowing investigation process is not impartial 3 Don’t know the procedure for reporting 7 No protection for whistle-blowers/retaliation 8 Other 11 Not acceptable to report a colleague 14 No trust in the confidentiality of the report 17 Prefer to avoid conflict 21 Don’t know/Prefer not to respond 60 0% 20% 40% 60% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Questions not asked to procurement specialists. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 26 > > > F I G U R E 1 3 - Share of Public Servants that Believe that Wrongdoing Is Likely to be Discovered By… Immediate supervisor 35% Head of entity 32% Audit Body 25% Direct colleague 17% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Respondents were asked to indicate their perceived probability that each actor would discover some wrongdoing, from 1 (no probability) to 10 (high probability). The graph reports the share of those selecting 6 or higher. 3.4 Code of Conduct Public servants are widely familiar with the Code of with it (12 percent preferred not to answer). The majority of Conduct applicable to their position,33 but there are public servants express positive views on the clarity of the concerns about its implementation, monitoring, and Code of Conduct applicable to their position, its dissemination enforceability. 85 percent of public servants know that a Code and communication, its enforcement, compliance with it, and of Conduct exists for their position, and 79 percent are familiar the administrative steps for its application (Table 4). > > > T A B L E 4 - Perceptions on the Clarity, Applicability, and Implementation of the Code of Conduct Share of public servants that agree The Code of Conduct applicable to my position… with each statement Is simple, clear and easy to understand 75% Is promptly disseminated and communicated 66% Is complied with by public servants 59% Is well enforced (managers make sure that the rules are followed) 54% Does not require an excessive number of administrative steps 53% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 27 The main challenges with the implementation of the (Figure 14). Among managers that believe the Code of Conduct Code of Conduct are related to the existing loopholes is not complied with by public servants, the main reasons are and exceptions, and difficulties in monitoring and ineffective sanctions (24 percent), lack of a monitoring system applying sanctions. Among non-managers that believe (22 percent), lack of understanding among public servants on the Code of Conduct is not well-enforced, the main reasons the importance of complying with the rules (21 percent), and are the difficulties to monitor compliance with the rules (28 the many loopholes and exceptions (20 percent) (Figure 15). percent) and the many loopholes and exceptions (27 percent) > > > F I G U R E 1 4 - Main Reasons Why Rules in the Code of Conduct Are Not Consistently Enforced It is difficult to monitor compliance with rules 28% There are many loopholes and exceptions 27% Other 20% Managers are not properly informed about the rules 11% It is difficult to apply sanctions 11% The rules are not fair to me 4% It is important to comply with these rules 1% The rules are unclear or difficult to understand to me 0% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Questions are only asked to non-managers who think the Code of Conduct is not well enforced. Respondents could select up to two options. The share of non-responses to this question is 36 percent. > > > F I G U R E 1 5 - Main Reasons Why Public Servants Do Not Comply with the Code of Conduct Public servants are not scared of sanctions/there are no 24% sanctions when incompliance There is no monitoring system 22% Public servants don’t understand the importance of 21% complying with these rules 20% There are many loopholes and exceptions 10% Public servants are not properly informed about the rules 9% The rules are unclear or difficult to understand 9% Other 6% The rules are not fair Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Questions are only asked to those that think public servants do not comply with the Code of Conduct. Respondents could select up to two options. The share of non-responses to this question is 27 percent. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 28 4. >>> Inside the Public Administration The survey results highlight some of the drivers of unethical behaviors and integrity risks in the public administration in Armenia as perceived by public servants. The larger share of public servants (31 percent) believe that the function more prone to corruption risks is public procurement (Figure 16). They identify the following top reasons why some public servants have unethical behaviors: low salaries and rising cost of living (33 percent), insufficient monitoring (18 percent), and insufficient sanctioning (17 percent) (45 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer) (Figure 17). These results reflect the public servants’ views on what would be the most effective measures to reduce corruption in the country (Figure 8), which similarly feature increasing salaries and making penalties for corruption crimes more severe in the top positions. In order to further investigate some of the potential factors explaining integrity risks in the public administration in Armenia, and following the conceptual framework described in Section 2.3, the next sub-sections analyze HRM practices (Section 5.1), public procurement (Section 5.2), awareness and training (Section 5.3), and public servants’ attitudes and behaviors (5.4), and their links with integrity risks. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 29 > > > F I G U R E 1 6 - Functions More Prone to Corruption Risks Procurement 31% Supervision 18% Financial Management 16% Front Office (Citizen-facing or Firm-facing functions) 12% Management 11% Legal 10% Administration 8% Other 7% Human Resources 6% Budget and planning 5% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Respondents could select up to three options. The share of non-responses to this question is 52 percent. > > > F I G U R E 1 7 - Primary Reasons Why Some Public Servants Have Unethical Behaviors Low pay and rising cost of living 33% Insufficient monitoring of unethical behavior 18% Insufficient sanctioning of unethical behavior 17% Other 14% Selection of corrupt/corruptible inviduals to work in the entity 12% Lax regulations 7% Too many regulations 2% Pressure from superiors 2% Peer pressure 1% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Respondents could select up to three options. The share of non-responses to this question is 45 percent. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 30 4.1 HRM Practices Recruitment practices are generally perceived as fair method included an interview, and 58 percent says that the and transparent by public servants. The 2018 Law on Civil assessment method included a written exam (42 percent of Service provides detailed regulation for the recruitment of public servants report that the assessment method included public servants for positions in a wide range of public entities, both an interview and a written exam) (Figure 18). Relative and the survey results indicate that these provisions are to other countries with comparable data, in Armenia, a higher perceived as well as implemented by public servants. For their share of public servants report having been assessed through first position in the public sector, 70 percent of public servants a written exam, which is typically considered a positive signal report that they were hired through an open competitive of the fairness of the selection process. recruitment process, 75 percent mentions that the assessment > > > F I G U R E 1 8 - Assessment Methods Used in the Selection Process for the First Position in the Public Sector – International Comparisons Written exam Interview Brazil 86% 19% Armenia 58% 75% Croatia 57% 80% Albania 51% 67% Kosovo 49% 89% Slovakia 45% 86% Chile 36% 70% Estonia 18% 85% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022, and Global Survey of Public Servants. Note: For comparability with other countries, this analysis does not consider non-responses (those that select “don’t know” or “prefer not to answer”). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 31 In Armenia, there is a more limited use of performance Service allows performance evaluations to inform other HRM evaluations than in other countries for which comparable decisions, such as promotions or bonuses, but only few non- data is available, and public servants have concerns on managers report that their past performance evaluations were how they are conducted and on their impact. Despite the fact used for promotions (3 percent) or to award them a bonus that the 2018 Law on Civil Service indicates that performance (6 percent). Non-managers seem primarily concerned with evaluations of public servants should be conducted annually, the existing criteria/indicators not capturing well performance the survey results show that 80 percent of public servants had (14 percent) or not being clearly defined (11 percent) their performance evaluated in the two years prior to the survey, (32 percent of public servants reported not knowing or preferring a share that in other countries ranges between 94 percent not to answer) (Figure 20, panel a). The views expressed in Lithuania and 85 percent in Uruguay (Figure 19). Among by managers instead highlight concerns on primarily feeling non-managers, 22 percent indicates performance evaluations pressured to give a high rating to all employees (28 percent are used for tracking and improving performance, 12 percent [16 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), says performance evaluations are used in assessing training and on lack of tools to address underperformance among their needs; and 13 percent mentions they are not used in any employees (21 percent [24 percent reported not knowing or significant way (24 percent of public servants reported not preferring not to answer]) (Figure 20, panel b). knowing or preferring not to answer). The 2018 Law on Civil > > > F I G U R E 1 9 - Public Servants that Had a Performance Evaluation in the past Two Years – International Comparisons Lithuania 94% Chile 93% Colombia 89% Romania 87% Uruguay 85% Armenia 80% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022, and Global Survey of Public Servants. Note: For comparability with other countries, this analysis does not consider non-responses (those that select “don’t know” or “prefer not to answer”). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 32 > > > F I G U R E 2 0 - Views on Performance Evaluations Managers’ views Performance evaluation is taken seriously in my entity 58% I feel pressure to give a high performance rating to all 28% I have tools to address underperformance 16% among my employees There are clearly defined criteria/indicators 20% Existing criteria/indicators capture well performance 20% Public servants’ views Existing criteria/indicators does not capture well performance 14% No clearly defined criteria/indicators 11% Everyone gets the same rating 6% Performance evaluations are not conducted fairly 4% Results depend on personal relationships 3% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. There are limited career or compensation incentives to position are allowed only through a new competition. One motivate public servants to perform well. Among public of the consequences of this slow career progression is that servants with at least five years of experience in the public 18 percent of public servants are not confident they will be sector, 12 percent never received a promotion since they were promoted if performing well (23 percent reported not knowing hired, and 32 percent in 2017 or earlier (9 percent reported or preferring not to answer). Only 27 percent of public servants not knowing or preferring not to answer). This might be report being satisfied with their salary, a lower share than partially explained by the existing provisions in the 2018 Law for the majority of countries with comparable data available on Civil Service, which establish that promotions to a higher (Figure 21). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 33 > > > F I G U R E 2 1 - Salary Satisfaction – International Comparisons 80% 60% 40% 27% 20% 0% ia tes bia ria ala ine azil nia nia tia nes ovo nia om ay hile ria nia kia pia na an a e a Br ba ua oa pi os o d u C be e a io a o m St olom Nig tem Ukr A l th C r lip K E st ing rug Li rm lov Eth Gh R te d C a i i K U A S i Gu L Ph d Un i te Un Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022, and Global Survey of Public Servants. Note: For comparability with other countries, this analysis does not consider non-responses (those that select “don’t know” or “prefer not to answer”). The quality of HRM practices is associated with lower the quality of HRM practices goes beyond perceptions and integrity risks, measured both from the survey data and subjective views of integrity risks, as it is also reflected in the from public procurement data publicly available, through positive association between HRM quality and corruption a variety of channels. Public servants who report higher risks measured using procurement administrative data on quality of HRM practices in their entity are less likely to report tenders and contracts (Table 6).34 On mechanisms, the having been subject to or witnessing unethical behaviors in evidence from the survey data indicates that these results HRM situations, having been under undue pressure, or that are partly explained by the positive association between conflicts of interest often happen (Table 5). These results the quality of HRM practices and job satisfaction, workplace are in line with various research studies from the academic trust, and willingness to report unethical behaviors in case literature that demonstrate that the quality of HRM practices witnessing them.35 influences corruption in the public sector. The relevance of EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 34 > > > T A B L E 5 - Quality of HRM Practices and Experiences of Integrity Risks Subject to/ Witnessed unethical Frequency of conflicts behaviors in HRM situations of interest Subject to undue pressure HRM quality -0.324*** -0.623*** -0.165*** (-0.049) (-0.05) (-0.032) Note: Correlations were estimated within a regression framework at respondent level. The regressions include control for gender, age, education, managerial grade, central entity, and professional role. Results are weighted. Standard errors are clustered at entity level. The definition of the indexes used in this analysis is provided in Annex D. > > > T A B L E 6 - Quality of HRM Practices and Corruption Risks in Public Procurement Risks related to Risks related to Risks related to bids Risks related to single bidding procedure type submission period decision Period HRM quality -0.750*** -0.558*** -0.946*** -1.595*** (0.036) (0.023) (0.030) (0.039) Note: Correlations were estimated within a regression framework at contract level. The main explanatory variables are HRM quality indexes at entity level. The regressions include control for basic contract characteristics: supply type, buyer type, and estimated contract value. Standard errors are robust. The definition of the HRM quality index is provided in Annex D. The definition of the corruption risks indicators in public procurement is provided in Annex C and commented in Section 2.1. 4.2 Public Procurement36 While according to MOF’s statistics noncompetitive not to answer), and only 20 percent agrees that public tendering practices are widespread in Armenia, this servants do not have too much discretion in preparing tender does not seem to be perceived as an issue by public documents (45 percent reported not knowing or preferring servants. A relative large share of public servants believe that not to answer) (Figure 22). This perception is in line with the public procurement procedures are transparent (66 percent statistics from the MOF on the high use of direct contracting [12 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), and open procedures in Armenia presented in Section 1.3, that evaluation and award criteria are typically well defined but according to the survey, public servants do not recognize (60 percent [32 percent reported not knowing or preferring this as a threat to integrity. This apparent disconnect might not to answer]), that political influences/interests do not affect be partly explained by some lack of awareness among public procurement decisions (53 percent [27 percent reported not servants on the procurement practices typically associated with knowing or preferring not to answer]), and that procurement corruption risks in public procurement (Section 5.3). In public processes are typically free from undue influences procurement, corruption refers to the allocation of government (48 percent [36 percent reported not knowing or preferring not contracts to favored firms by distorting principles of open and to answer]) (Figure 22). However, the survey results show that fair government contracting, and avoiding competition through only 34 percent of public servants believe that noncompetitive the use of direct contracting and noncompetitive tenders is procurement procedures are used only in well-justified one way to do so (World Bank, 2009). circumstances (38 percent reported not knowing or preferring EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 35 Some practices that can help reduce corruption risks in (14 percent [37 percent reported not knowing or preferring not public procurement do not appear to be implemented to answer]), and procurement specialists are more likely to consistently (Figure 22). As already mentioned in Section 1.3, express concerns on the evaluation committees than technical a wider use of open procedures alone would not necessarily specialists involved in public procurement.37 Moreover, be sufficient to address corruption risks in public procurement, although 65 percent of the public servants believe that the as other practices as well (e.g. biased qualification criteria and relationship between suppliers and the public administration technical specifications, insufficient time for bids preparation, is transparent (20 percent reported not knowing or preferring sharing restricted information, insufficient appeal options) not to answer), only 17 percent agrees that public servants contribute to define to what extent public procurement is are rarely approached by firms outside the e-procurement actually competitive, transparent and accountable. Only a portal (54 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to minority of respondents agree that procurement evaluation answer), and only 37 percent believes that an existing supplier committees do not have too much discretion (17 percent is as likely as a new firm to be awarded a contract (34 percent [35 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to reported not knowing or preferring not to answer). answer]) or often include an objective participant from outside > > > F I G U R E 2 2 - Perceptions on Public Procurement Procedures In my entity, public procurement procedures are transparent 66% Evaluation and award criteria are typically well-defined 60% Non-competitive procedures are used only in well-justified circumstances 36% Public servants do not have too much discretion 20% in preparing tender documents Roles and responsibilities Procurement specialists are able to provide sufficient supervision 58% Public servants are willing to take decisions in public procurement 31% Procurement evaluation committees do not have too much discretion 17% Evaluation committees often contain an 14% objective participant from outside Relationship with the private sector Relationship between suppliers and the public administration are transparent 65% Any existing supplier is as likely as a new firm to be awarded contract 37% Public servants are rarely approached by firms 17% outside the e-procurement portal Undue pressure Political influences/interests do not affect 53% procurement decisions in my entity Procurement process are typically free from undue influences 48% 0% 20% 40% 60% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 36 The survey results highlight some measures that public contracts, since public servants report that these procedures servants consider most effective to reduce corruption are audited with similar frequency as open tenders and with risks in public procurement (Figure 23). In particular, public lower frequency than urgent single source procedures. The servants identify more rules on conflict of interest (26 percent analysis of Armenia’s publicly available procurement data [32 reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), more reveals that open procedures are associated with lower audits (26 percent [28 reported not knowing or preferring not corruption risks,39 however, only 9 percent of public servants to answer]), requirements on the disclosure of beneficiary believe that the use of open procedures is an effective measure ownership (24 percent [35 reported not knowing or preferring not to reduce corruption risks in public procurement (Figure 23). to answer]), and public disclosure of procurement information This may be partially explained by the limited awareness and data (24 percent [30 reported not knowing or preferring among public servants on the integrity risks associated with not to answer]).38 More audits (internal and external) could be noncompetitive procedures, such as requests for quotation particularly useful for single-source procedures for small-value and single-source procurement (Section 5.3). > > > F I G U R E 2 3 - Effective Measures in Helping to Reduce Corruption Risks in Public Procurement Less discretion for sector specialists involved in the 8% procurement process Use of open procedures 9% More supervision by critified procurement specialists 14% Evaluation committees with representatives from outside the “responsible procurement department” for 19% that purchase Use of e-procurement system 20% Public disclosure of procurement information & data 24% Requirement on disclosure of the beneficiary ownership 24% Audits (Internal and External) 26% Rules on conflict of interests 26% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Respondents could select up to three options. The share of non-responses to this question is 26 percent. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 37 4.3 Awareness and Training The survey results highlight a potential lack of awareness servants recognize the integrity risks associated with direct among public servants on the integrity risks associated contracting in case of delays in tender preparation (44 percent with certain circumstances and on the consequences of [37 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), corruption in the public administration. For example, while to contract a firm with a convenient offline offer (39 percent 60 percent of public servants think it is unjustifiable to use [47 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), personal connections for being hired (25 percent reported not and to contract a well-performing supplier through a small- knowing or preferring not to answer) and 61 percent for being value contract (28 percent [48 percent reported not knowing or promoted (25 percent reported not knowing or preferring not preferring not to answer]) (Figure 25). The lack of awareness to answer), only 41 percent thinks so for helping a friend of public servants seem to concern the consequences of getting hired (26 percent reported not knowing or preferring corruption as well, as only a minority of public servants not to answer) (Figure 24). In line with the widespread use agree that corruption in the public administration affect the of direct contracting observed from procurement tenders and effectiveness and efficiency of their entity and their own work contracts data (see Section 1.3),40 only a minority of public (Figure 26). > > > F I G U R E 2 4 - Awareness on Integrity Risks Associated with Using Personal Connections PERSONAL CONNECTIONS FOR RECRUITMENT OR PROMOTIONS Using a connection for helping a friend getting a job 26 26 14 5 5 Using a connection to get hired 25 49 6 2 4 Using a connection for being promoted 25 51 4 42 3 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage Don’t know/Prefer no response Unjustifiable 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Justifiable Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 38 > > > F I G U R E 2 5 - Awareness on Integrity Risks Associated with Direct Contracting USE OF DIRECT CONTRACTING Set small value contract to contract 48 19 8 3 6 a well performing existing supplier Urgent direct contracting because 37 32 9 2 3 of delays in tender preparation Set small value contract to contract 47 28 6 1 3 a firm with a convenient offline offer 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage Don’t know/Prefer no response Unjustifiable 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Justifiable Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. > > > F I G U R E 2 6 - Perceived Consequences of Corruption in the Public Sector 37% Citizens trust in the public service 19% 30% Employee motivation and engagement 21% 29% The quality of the services provided to citizens 27% 25% The ability of your entity to effectively deliver services 29% 23% Your ability to effectively perform your daily tasks 32% Agree and strongly agree Disagree and strongly disagree Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 39 Training on the topic of integrity is demanded by share of public servants reporting being subject to undue public servants and it is associated with lower integrity pressure (Figure 28) or having witnessed or been subject to risks and willingness to report unethical behavior. unethical behavior in HRM situations (Figure 29) is lower in The survey results show some knowledge and awareness entities with a higher share of public servants that reported gaps, such as on what constitute integrity risks, on the role receiving training on the Code of Conduct applicable to their of public servants in the fight against corruption, or on the positions.41 Attitudes towards reporting is one mechanism that whistleblowing system. Given these gaps, it is encouraging could partially explain these results, as the analysis shows that that public servants express demand for anticorruption training participating in training on the Code of Conduct applicable to (22 percent), information on anticorruption legislation and one’s own position is positively associated with the willingness policies (15 percent), information on rights and responsibilities to report unethical behavior and wrongdoing.42 These findings (15 percent), and information on redress mechanisms are in line with public servants’ views, as a large share report (15 percent) (Figure 27). The analysis demonstrates as well that the Code of Conduct and integrity training help prevent that there is a link between integrity trainings and incidence of corruption (45 percent [22 percent reported not knowing or integrity risks, further supporting the case for more awareness preferring not to answer]). raising initiatives and capacity building on these topics. The > > > F I G U R E 2 7 - Existing Demand for Anticorruption Assistance TO P N E E D S F O R T Y P E S O F A N T I - C O R R U P T I O N A S S I S TA N C E Free representation in law enforcement and court/lawyer service 8 Info on hotlines of public authorities 8 Info on sanctions on corrupt public servants 11 Free legal advice on submitting complaints/reporting 11 Other 14 Info about my rights and responsibilities on corruption 15 Info on anti-corruption legislation and policies 15 Info on the institutions for complaints/reporting 15 Anti-corruption educational programs and outreach activities 22 Don’t know/Prefer not to respond 40 0 10 20 30 40 Percentage Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 40 > > > F I G U R E 2 8 - Share of Public Servants that Reported Receiving Training on the Code of Conduct Applicable to Their Position and Share of Public Servants Reporting Undue Pressure .5 Workplace Pressure (entity level) .4 .3 .2 .1 0 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 .1 Ethics Training (entity level) Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: The graphs show entity-level averages to correlate the share of public servants that reported receiving training on the Code of Conduct applicable to their position with the Undue Pressure index and the Unethical behavior in HRM index. Entity-level averages are calculated as simple averages from the individual-level indexes. > > > F I G U R E 2 9 - Share of Public Servants that Reported Receiving Training on the Code of Conduct Applicable to Their Position and Share of Public Servants Subject to or Witnessing Unethical Behavior in HRM Situations .8 Witnessing Unethical Behavior .6 in HRM (entity level) .4 .2 0 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 .1 Ethics Training (entity level) Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: The graphs show entity-level averages to correlate the share of public servants that reported receiving training on the Code of Conduct applicable to their position with the Undue Pressure index and the Unethical behavior in HRM index. Entity-level averages are calculated as simple averages from the individual-level indexes. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 41 4.4 Attitudes and Behaviors The majority of public servants in Armenia report being career development opportunities (32 percent). Workplace satisfied with their job and feeling valued in their entity, trust is an important element of the working environment, and but fewer believe that their job allows them to unleash the majority of public servants report trusting their supervisors their full potential. 78 percent of public servants feel (83 percent [11 percent reported not knowing or preferring not valued in their entity, 70 percent are satisfied with their job, to answer]), colleagues in their own department (77 percent and 56 percent believe their job allows them to unleash [12 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), their full potential (Figure 30). The share of public servants and colleagues in their own entity (60 percent [15 percent satisfied with their job is lower in Armenia than for the majority reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]), and these of other countries where similar surveys have been conducted shares are higher than for actors external to own department in recent years, while Armenia scores relatively high in the or entity such as colleagues in other entities (23 percent “feeling valued at work” dimension (Figure 31).43 In terms [33 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer]) of motivation, the top three factors keeping workers in the and auditors (31 percent [35 percent reported not knowing or public administration are the opportunity to serve society preferring not to answer]) (Figure 32). (50 percent), the good working environment (35 percent), and > > > F I G U R E 3 0 - Satisfaction and Workplace Trust Satisfaction i feel valued in my entity 78% I am satisfied with my job 70% My job allows me to unleash my full potential 56% Workplace trust Trust in own supervisors 83% Trust in colleagues in own department 77% Trust in colleagues in own entity 60% Trust in auditors 31% Trust in public servants in other entities 23% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: For comparability with other countries, this analysis does not consider non-responses (those that select “don’t know” or “prefer not to answer”). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 42 > > > F I G U R E 3 1 - “Job Satisfaction” and “Feeling Valued at Work” – International Comparisons Job satisfaction Feeling valued at work Romania 95% 93% Nigeria 89% Chile 84% Ukraine 83% Lithuania 82% 85% Estonia 81% Albania 77% Uruguay 74% 40% Slovakia 73% Australia 71% 47% Armenia 70% 78% Kosovo 70% United States 70% Croatia 66% Brazil 55% Canada 68% Guatemala 76% United Kingdom 66% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022, and Global Survey of Public Servants. Note: For comparability with other countries, this analysis does not consider non-responses (those that select “don’t know” or “prefer not to answer”). For “Job satisfaction”, the share of non-responses is 10 percent, and for “Feeling value at work” it is 11 percent. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 43 Job satisfaction and workplace trust are associated with results presented in Table 7 and Table 8 should be interpreted lower integrity risks. Public servants who report higher in light of the reciprocal relationship between integrity risks job satisfaction and workplace trust are less likely to report and attitudes. On the one hand, a workplace environment having been subject to or witnessing unethical behaviors in with a high incidence of corruption can demotivate public HRM situations, having been under undue pressure, or that servants and be detrimental for workplace trust. On the other conflicts of interest often happen (Table 7). The relevance of hand, entities with low job satisfaction and workplace trust are public servants satisfaction and workplace trust goes beyond more likely to have public servants without a strong sense perceptions and subjective views on integrity risks, as it of belonging in their organization and commitment for the is also reflected in the positive association between these achievement of their organizational goals, which can lead to a attitudes and corruption risks measured using procurement self-serving attitude in the public sector workforce and higher administrative data on tenders and contracts (Table 8).44 The incidence of corruption risks. > > > T A B L E 7 - Public Servants’ Attitudes and Experiences of Integrity Risks Subject to/Witnessed Frequency of conflicts unethical behaviors in Subject to of interest HRM situations undue pressure I trust colleagues in my department 0.002 -0.074** -0.037 (-0.039) (-0.028) (-0.046) I trust colleagues in my entity -0.075*** -0.019 -0.044*** (-0.016) (-0.021) (-0.013) I trust my supervisor -0.136*** -0.148*** -0.069 (-0.037) (-0.034) (-0.041) Satisfaction Index -0.071*** -0.191*** -0.080*** (-0.019) (-0.025) (-0.023) Note: Correlations were estimated within a regression framework at respondent level. The regressions include control for gender, age, education, managerial grade, central entity, and professional role. Results are weighted. Standard errors are clustered at entity level. The definition of the indexes used in this analysis is provided in Annex D. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 44 > > > T A B L E 8 - Public Servants’ Attitudes and Corruption Risks in Public Procurement Risks related to Risks related to Risks related to bids submission Risks related to single bidding procedure type period decision Period I trust colleagues in my department -0.108 0.216* 0.418 0.065 (0.143) (0.123) (0.264) (0.055) I trust colleagues in my entity 0.398** 0.128 0.519 -0.150* (0.175) (0.157) (0.316) (0.075) I trust my supervisor -0.423** -0.462** -1.137** -0.012 (0.168) (0.183) (0.421) (0.055) Satisfaction Index -0.399** -0.213 -0.378 0.043 (0.167) (0.148) (0.268) (0.052) Note: Correlations were estimated within a regression framework at contract level. The regressions include control for basic contract characteristics: supply type, buyer type, and estimated contract value. Standard errors are robust. The definition of the Satisfaction index is provided in Annex D. The definition of the corruption risks indicators in public procurement is provided in Annex C and commented in Section 2.1. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 45 5. >>> Policy Recommendations This report highlighted the recent advancements in the anticorruption agenda in Armenia, as well as areas for further improvements. Armenia has a robust legal framework for combating corruption, and it has recently introduced several tools in line with international practices, such as an electronic platform to encourage and protect whistleblowing, an electronic platform for the declaration of assets, income and interests, and a beneficial ownership registry. The evidence from the survey data provides insights into the prevalence of integrity risks in the public administration in Armenia, however the interpretation of these results cannot be conclusive due to the lack of benchmarks and the relatively high rate of respondents that declined to answer some of the survey questions. Results do highlight a lack of awareness on certain integrity risks—which may drive some of the results—and some gaps in the implementation of existing anticorruption measures. Public servants report some challenges with the process for completing assets declarations, some difficulties in the monitoring and enforceability of the Code of Conduct, limited knowledge on how the whistleblowing system works, and limited willingness to report a colleague or supervisor in case of witnessing some unethical behavior. Public servants have limited awareness on the ongoing anticorruption efforts and their rationale, which risks limiting their impact. Training on integrity and quality of HRM practices are associated with lower integrity risks, and in particular there is room for improvements in performance management, career management, and compensation management. The survey results support the policy recommendations presented in this section, and they are already informing Armenia’s ongoing reform efforts and new Anticorruption Strategy. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 46 Increasing trust in government. The following address corruption in public entities) should be widely recommendations are aimed at addressing public servants’ communicated. Integrity officers should be given a more lack of confidence in the efficacy of various stakeholders in active role through the provision of regular training or the fight against corruption, as well as their unfamiliarity with communications to staff. newly established anticorruption institutions and tools. • Increase awareness on the use and impact of • Increase public servant’s knowledge of anticorruption anticorruption tools. A similar communication campaign efforts. To increase trust in the government and should be launched for the existing specific anticorruption promote a culture of greater involvement (reporting and tools such as the asset declaration electronic platform, addressing corruption in the public service), the CPC and the whistleblowers reporting system, and the code of the government should disseminate the results of this conduct. The potential impact of anticorruption tools survey widely among public servants. They should also should be broadly disseminated. For example, the CPC link these results to specific policy actions and track their and the Government of Armenia should further educate implementation progress over time. This will demonstrate public servants about how completing assets declarations that public servants’ opinions can contribute to shaping or reporting corruption situations in the whistleblowers’ change in the government. platform can contribute to a more effective fight against corruption. To achieve this, the upgraded electronic • Increase communication on the role and impact of platform for declarations should be launched in a public anticorruption institutions. Increase communication to event to disseminate the expected benefits (initial results) public servants and to the general society about the role of of the new platform, and further encourage declarations. institutions that have a direct mandate to fight corruption, such as the Corruption Prevention Commission (CPC), the • Increase transparency and open data from Anti-Corruption Agency, the Anti-Corruption Investigative anticorruption tools. Improved transparency and Committee, the Prosecutor’s Office, and the judiciary. increased access to information regarding asset Communication should highlight the functions of the new declarations and beneficial ownership have been effective institutions and, to help in building trust, some recent in building trust in anticorruption efforts and fostering achievements in the fight against corruption. cooperation with civil society. In the context of Armenia, this can aid in spreading awareness of the work being • Provide integrity officers with a more prominent done by the CPC and other anticorruption stakeholders. role. The role of integrity officers as the first point of Publishing statistics and providing updates on actions contact in public entities on any integrity issues (including taken following whistleblowers’ reports in a timely manner guidance on resources and tools available to report and can instill confidence in the system. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 47 Promoting a cultural shift toward integrity issues in the financial incentives such as recognition and awards to public sector. It is crucial to promote a cultural shift that places enhance workplace culture and boost staff motivation integrity at the forefront of the public sector in Armenia, given the significant percentage of public servants who refrained • Compensation management. To address the question from answering questions about integrity risks in the survey of salary dissatisfaction, further analyses should be and the potential influence of societal norms in discouraging conducted to understand the causes of these negative them from reporting such issues. To achieve this, raising perceptions. For example, an in-depth wage bills awareness among public servants about their responsibility assessment should be conducted to evaluate the in combating corruption will be essential. The awareness current structure of compensations in the public sector campaign should aim to uncover integrity risks that are hidden and determine whether dissatisfaction is linked to low by cultural practices and social norms, including the misuse of competitiveness, inequity, discretionary allowances, or personal connections to benefit personal contacts or the risks other factors. This information can then be used to inform associated with certain practices in public procurement. adjustments in the public sector compensation framework. Improving HRM tools for career development and Increasing integrity in public procurement. The following increasing staff motivation and productivity. The following recommendations are aimed reducing the use of non- recommendations are aimed at strengthening practices and competitive practices in public procurement, mitigating public mechanisms to generate incentives that can further motivate procurement integrity risks, and increasing competition. Armenian public servants to increase their performance. Addressing weaknesses in human resource management • Increase incentives to use open procedures. Both the practices is important since they have the potential to increase MOF statistics on public procurement (MOF, 2023) and the the likelihood of integrity risks. survey results indicate that there is a widespread use of noncompetitive procedures in Armenia. Various measures • Performance management. The design and use of could incentivize the use of open procedures, such as performance evaluations should set clear performance targeted audits on requests for quotation and single-source expectations, establish clear links between staff procurement, and regular reporting on the contracting contributions and the organization’s goals and objectives, authorities with higher corruption risks, higher share of and identify areas for staff growth and development. A single-bidder contracts, and larger use of noncompetitive well-defined and transparent framework for performance procedures. A dashboard with data analytics on public evaluations should establish a closer link between procurement data would facilitate some of these performance and HRM decisions, such as bonuses and monitoring activities, and a specific module on corruption promotions. Managers should facilitate constructive risks indicators could be made available to agencies in performance conversations, set concrete performance charge of audit, inspection, and corruption prevention measurements based on common agreements between and investigation, whose work would benefit from easier staff and managers, and identify follow-up actions and access to procurement-related data and analysis. training needs for career progression. Managers should provide performance feedback to staff in their units on a • Increase awareness on integrity risks in public regular basis. A system to track check-ins and feedback procurement. The use of procurement practices provision should be established to monitor performance associated with higher integrity risks could be mitigated by conversations and follow-up actions. Training should be a more widespread awareness among public servants on provided to managers as needed. the associated risks. Training and specific programs could be organized on the topics with the biggest knowledge • Career management. To improve career perspectives, gaps, such as use of direct contracting, conflict of interest, current mechanisms for staff promotion to higher positions communication with firms outside the e-procurement should be adjusted to be less restrictive (i.e., currently portal, and contract management, and in particular for promotions can be done only through competition) sector and technical specialists that are responsible and allow career progression based on performance. for the procurement in their entity and for members of Rewarding good performers and further motivating staff evaluation committees. can help them reach their full potential. In the short-term, to address the issue of low motivation resulting from • Increase transparency and involvement of civil society. limited career prospects, the government could use non- Transparency and open data can be a powerful means to EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 48 increase accountability in the public sector, including in the can achieve their maximum potential if they are accompanied public procurement function. It can facilitate civil society by an effort to ensure quality and completeness of data, by the to monitor of specific contracts or contracting authorities possibility to connect information systems and databases, and with the highest corruption risks, and complement efforts by a cultural shift toward evidence-based decision-making. by agencies in charge of audit, inspection, and corruption prevention and investigation. While Armenia already • Culture for evidence-based decision-making. Data- has an open public procurement portal, data quality driven diagnostics and evaluations can support policy can be improved, and open public procurement data making and reform efforts through monitoring the should be complemented and interconnected with other implementation of existing policies, identifying areas data typically used to measure and monitor corruption for further improvements, and generating evidence on risks, such as beneficial ownership, assets declarations, new policies during the piloting stage. Moving toward debarment, budget plans, and contract implementation. evidence-based decision-making in the public sector Initiatives can be implemented to inform and train civil would require building the necessary data analytics skills, society on how they can use these resources, to involve for example, through the establishment of analytical units it in the design of transparency tools to favor their take- in key agencies. It would also require that key decision- up, and to promote coordinated/joint oversight of public makers are sensitized on how using data and evidence procurement involving anti-corruption institutions and civil can lead to better-designed and targeted policies and society. These initiatives could increase trust toward the reforms, thereby making them regular consumers of data public procurement system and encourage more firms to analytics and research. The production and consumption participate in the public procurement market. of data analytics to inform reforms could be facilitated by making available complete and high-quality data; by Moving toward evidence-based decision-making. The connecting existing information and databases; and implementation of surveys such as this one and the Government by creating dashboards and developing standard data of Armenia’s plans to improve data analytics for anticorruption analytics tools that could be routinely and automatically can be powerful instruments to inform policy decisions and applied for monitoring, reporting, and supporting decision- implementation. There is great potential in adopting an making. Regular surveys of public servants can be part evidence-based approach to reforms in a variety of policy of this shift toward evidence-based decision-making, areas, including anticorruption, public administration and and they can be tailored to specific topics such as HRM, HRM, and public procurement. The e-government solutions integrity, or sector-specific investigations. The Armenia already implemented in Armenia—such as the HRMIS, the Public Sector Accountability Survey was widely welcomed platform for assets declarations, the whistleblowing platform, across participating entities at both central and local and the electronic public procurement system—are steps in levels. Regularly conducting such a survey would help the right direction for modernizing the public administration assess trends and increase trust among public servants and providing the Government of Armenia with effective tools toward the reliability and confidentiality of this type of data in the fight against corruption. These e-government solutions collection and toward the state more generally. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 49 >>> Notes 1. This is based on a nationwide poll conducted by the International Republican Institute’s Center for Insights in Survey Research, 2023. https://www.iri.org/resources/public-opinion- survey-residents-of-armenia-january-march-2023/ 2. The government production function conceptual framework was developed by the World Bank Bureaucracy Lab in 2019. See for further information: World Bank, 2019. 3. In public procurement, corruption refers to the allocation of government contracts to favored firms by distorting principles of open and fair government contracting, and avoiding competition through the use of direct contracting and noncompetitive tenders is one way to do so (World Bank, 2009). 4. All Armenian laws are available on arlis.am. 5. The CPC approves the code of conduct for public officials and guidelines on the rules of ethics, integrity, and conflict of interest; it also conducts training on these topics. 6. The Anti-Corruption Committee is a specialized body for investigating and combating corruption crimes; the Anti-Corruption Court hears corruption cases related to both criminal and civil (confiscation of illicit assets) matters; and the Anti-Corruption Chamber of the Court of Cassation is a specialized chamber in the higher court that hears appeals against both civil and criminal corruption cases. 7. CPC decree N01-N of June 17, 2022. 8. The Model Code of Conduct for Public Servants, adopted by the CPC in 2022 (CPC decree N01-N of June 17, 2022), refers to all civil servants. In addition, certain types of public service may have their own Codes of Conduct given the specifics of those services. 9. Upon adoption of the 2018 Law on Public Service, all public entities appointed integrity officers. 10. See Armenia’s whistleblowing platform at www.azdararir.am. 11. See CPC’s official website at http://cpcarmenia.am. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 50 12. Under the Law on Public Service, declarant officials are defined as persons holding state positions; persons holding positions of a head, deputy head, or secretary of staff of a community; persons holding a position of member of elders council of a community with a population of 15,000 or more, head or deputy head of an administrative district of the community of Yerevan, and staff secretary and members of elders council of the community of Yerevan; persons holding positions listed in the first or second subgroup of managerial positions of civil service, and the Secretary General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; persons holding the highest positions in the military service; persons holding chief positions in the police, tax, customs, penitentiary, and judicial acts compulsory enforcement services; and persons holding chief or higher public service positions in the staff of National Assembly or in bailiff service. 13. For filing, see https://file-online.cpcarmenia.am/, and for retrieving, see http://cpcarmenia. am/hy/declarations-registry/. 14. The World Bank supported the development of the new platform for asset, interest, and expenditure declaration through a loan operation and technical assistance (Public Sector Modernization Project III [P149913], Supporting Governance and Justice in Armenia [P171928], and Programmatic Technical Assistance on Public Financial Management in Armenia [P165251]). The World Bank supported the whistleblowers framework through two budget support operations: (1) Green, Inclusive, and Resilient DPO (P176278); and (2) Economic, Fiscal, and Public Sector Governance DPO (P169624). 15. This is based on a nationwide poll conducted by the International Republican Institute’s Center for Insights in Survey Research, 2023. https://www.iri.org/resources/public-opinion- survey-residents-of-armenia-january-march-2023/. 16. Prime Minister Decree N706-A of 11 June, 2018. 17. The Civil Service Office organizes rating tests twice a year to attract new people into the civil service. Candidates who successfully passed the tests are included in the rating list for appointment to junior civil service vacant positions. 18. Government Decree N621-L of 20 May 2022. 19. Law on Public Procurement N HO-21-N, adopted on December 16, 2016. 20. Among others, users could download datasets on Organized Procurement (at tender level), Failed Procurement (at tender level), Completed Procurement (at tender level) generated from the Electronic Procurement website, and on Contracts (contract level) generated from the Procurement Planning and Contract management system. Users can search procurement plans, tenders or contracts, and data can be downloaded. The portal is open to any user and can be accessed without registration. 21. Despite the 2016 Public Procurement Law stipulates a preference for open tendering in procurement processes, it also allows buyers to award suppliers through noncompetitive procedures. 22. For Armenia, open procedures are defined as open tenders, urgent open tenders and requests for quotation (which is also openly advertised). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 51 23. Comparisons across countries must be taken with caution due to countries’ different spending composition. The statistics for the EU countries and the Western Balkans refer to 2018, while for Armenia, to the period 2017–early June 2020. 24. The average number of bidders is 1.52 if framework agreements and requests for quotation are excluded. 25. The statistics for the EU countries and the Western Balkans refer to 2018, while for Armenia, to the period 2017–early June 2020. 26. The World Bank has supported the Government of Armenia’s anticorruption policies through several instruments, including Green, Inclusive and Resilient DPO (P176278); Economic, Fiscal and Public Sector Governance DPO (P169624); Public Sector Modernization Project III (P149913); Advancing Governance Reforms in the South Caucasus (P179503); FY22 Governance in the South Caucasus (P177565); Supporting Governance and Justice in Armenia (P171928); and Programmatic Technical Assistance on Public Financial Management in Armenia (P165251). 27. Support is provided under the Fourth Public Sector Modernization Project (PSMP4, P176803). 28. The share of non-responses is higher for the most sensitive questions and modules, and higher than in a similar public sector accountability survey conducted online in Brazil in 2021 (Annex E). 29. The CPC was established by the Law on CPC adopted in 2017 and became operational in 2019 with the appointment of the majority of its members. 30. The analysis on assets declarations considers only the answers provided by managers (public servants with grade M), since completing assets declarations is not compulsory for all public servants (further details are provided in Section 1.1). Indeed, a large share of non- managers did not answer the questions on assets declarations. 31. A new asset declaration e-platform was launched in February 2023 to improve access to and quality of data, as well as to make the declaration process more user-friendly (with pre-filed declarations). The upgraded platform was launched in February 2023. The World Bank supported the development of the new platform for asset, interest, and expenditure declaration through a loan operation and technical assistance: Public Sector Modernization Project III (P149913), Supporting Governance and Justice in Armenia (P171928), and Programmatic Technical Assistance on Public Financial Management in Armenia (P165251)). 32. In Armenia, the unified whistleblowing system was introduced in 2018 by the Law on Whistleblowing System. The law provides internal (for public servant within the public agencies), external (for citizens using public services), and anonymous (for anyone willing to report anonymous reports on corruption crime) mechanisms for whistleblowing. The wording in the questionnaire might have created confusion in respondents, since there is a unified whistleblowing system, but the questionnaire refers to how a whistleblowing system works within the respondent’s entity. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 52 33. The Model Code of Conduct for Public Servants was introduced in Armenia in June 2022 by the CPC, after the design of the questionnaire and the data collection for this survey. The questionnaire and the results presented in this section do not refer to this newly introduced code of conduct. Rather, as specified in the survey instrument (Annex B), the refer to “the Code of Conduct applicable to own position” as the principles and main rules of conduct provided in the Law on Public Service, or to the specific Code of Conduct that may be adopted by each entity. 34. The indexes on corruption risks in procurement are defined in Annex C and commented in Section 2.1. These corruption risks are measured using publicly available procurement data for Armenia, and they were developed and validated for Armenia by a World Bank study of Armenian public procurement open data for the period between 2017 and early June 2020. 35. These mechanisms were tested within a regression framework at respondent level, controlling for gender, age, education, managerial grade, central entity, and professional role. The regression model uses balancing weights and standard errors clustered at entity level. 36. This module of the questionnaire was given only to managers or public servants with relevant work experience in public procurement. 37. The share of public servants that agree that evaluation committees have too much discretion is 38 percent among procurement specialists (9 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer) and 25 percent among technical specialists involved in public procurement (41 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer). The share of public servants that disagree that evaluation committees often contain an objective participant from outside is 24 percent among procurement specialists (18 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer) and 14 percent among technical specialists involved in public procurement (45 percent reported not knowing or preferring not to answer). 38. Some public procurement data are already publicly available, and they were used by the World Bank in 2021 for a study on procurement data covering between 2017 and early June 2020. However, the 2021 World Bank analysis revealed some challenges in using this publicly available data, such as the complex data structure, inconsistencies, and errors. Further improvements could be possible to make this data more accessible to a wider group of users and civil society. 39. For example, the high single bidding rate in Armenia is closely associated with the type of procedure used. It is 33 percent for open procedures, 43 percent for electronic auctions, and 97 percent for single-source procedures. 40. According to the 2022 MOF annual report on public procurement (MOF, 2023), in 2022 direct contracting (single sourcing or urgent single sourcing) represented 43 percent of procurement expenditures and 46 percent of procedures. 41. These correlations are statistically significant even when estimated within a regression framework at respondent level, controlling for gender, age, education, managerial grade, central entity, and professional role. The regression model uses balancing weights and standard errors clustered at entity level. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 53 42. This result is estimated within a regression framework at respondent level, controlling for gender, age, education, managerial grade, central entity, and professional role. The regression model uses balancing weights and standard errors clustered at entity level. 43. Throughout the report, for comparisons we use all countries for which similar survey indicators are available from the Global Survey of Public Servants website. The comparator countries group varies across different indicators, since not all indicators could be constructed from the available survey data for all countries. The list of countries used for each analysis is reported in each figure. 44. The indexes on corruption risks in procurement are defined in Annex C and commented in Section 2.1. These corruption risks are measured using publicly available procurement data for Armenia, and they were developed and validated for Armenia by a World Bank study of Armenian public procurement open data for the period between 2017 and early June 2020. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 54 >>> References Belle, Nicola and Paola Cantarelli. 2017. “What Causes Unethical Behavior? A Meta-Analysis to Set an Agenda for Public Administration Research.” Public Administration Review. Dal Bó, Ernesto, Frederico Finan, Martín A. Rossi. 2013. “Strengthening State Capabilities: The Role of Financial Incentives in the Call to Public Service.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics. European Commission. 2017. My Region, My Europe, Our Future: Seventh report on economic, social and territorial cohesion. Brussel: European Commission. Evans, Peter and James E. Rauch. 1999. “Bureaucracy and Growth: A Cross-National Analysis of the Effects of “Weberian” State Structures on Economic Growth.” American Sociological Review. Government of Armenia, Ministry of Finance. 2023. 2022 Annual Procurement Report. Heywood, Paul and Jan-Hinrik Meyer-Sahling. 2013. “Danger Zones of Corruption: How Management of the Ministerial Bureaucracy affects Corruption Risks in Poland.” Public Administration and Development. Jost, John T., Mahzarin R. Banaji, Brian A. Nosek. 2004. “A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo.” Political Psychology. Nieto-Morales, Fernando and Viridiana Ríos. 2021. “Human resource management as a tool to control corruption: Evidence from Mexican municipal governments.” Public Administration. OECD. 2016. Preventing Corruption in Public Procurement. Paris: OECD. OECD. 2020. Government at a Glance: Western Balkans. Paris: OECD. World Bank. 2009. Fraud and Corruption Awareness Handbook. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2019. Innovating Bureaucracy for a More Capable Government. Washington, DC: World Bank. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 55 World Bank. 2021a. Ethics and Corruption in the Federal Public Service: Civil Servants’ Perspectives. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2021b. Key findings and recommendations from an empirical study of public officials, school directors and teachers. Washington, DC: World Bank. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 56 >>> Annex A. Methodology and Sample Methodology The Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey was were completely confidential and participation to the survey aimed at public servants in selected public entities in was optional—this means that public servants could choose Armenia, including central ministries and agencies, to skip any question they felt uncomfortable answering, and regional governments, and selected municipalities no one outside the survey team is able to trace individual across the country. The survey was aimed at professionals, responses. The questionnaire was designed to take about managers, and public procurement specialists in 50 selected 25 minutes to complete, and responses were collected online public entities. More than 7,000 public servants were invited between June 1, 2022 and June 30, 2022. to participate, following a census approach with voluntary participation. The census approach ensures that all public The CPC and the survey focal persons in each participating servants in the target population have the opportunity to entity carried out various initiatives to disseminate, participate and express their opinion, thereby ensuring greater socialize, and monitor the survey. To ensure a high inclusiveness than other approaches. Additionally, it allows participation rate, the dissemination of the survey followed a obtaining answers from a high number of respondents, thus decentralized approach with support from integrity focal points having higher levels of statistical confidence in the empirical or HR representatives in participating institutions. Significant results. The census approach requires a careful assessment efforts were put into communicating the survey to the focal of the participation rates from different groups and the use persons and involving them in the dissemination process. A of balancing weights to make the final sample representative meeting was held with the survey focal persons to inform them of public servants in the target population, which is further about the survey, agree collectively on the best dissemination discussed in Section 2.2. and communication strategies, and ensure their active support. The survey focal persons were primarily responsible The World Bank and the CPC designed the survey, with the for the dissemination of the survey invitation in their entities, involvement of the Ministry of Justice, the Procurement as well as for sending follow-ups and reminders and for other Policy Department at the Ministry of Finance, and the Civil actions to ensure broad participation. The CPC published on Service Bureau. The Armenia Public Sector Accountability its website the announcement of the survey, an FAQs page, Survey was based on the government production function and other relevant information on its Facebook page. The conceptual framework developed by the World Bank survey focal persons distributed invitation and reminder emails Bureaucracy Lab (World Bank, 2019), adjusted to explicitly and information leaflets, and provided additional information take into account the drivers and consequences of corruption to public servants with additional queries or concerns. The and customized to the specific circumstances of Armenia World Bank and the CPC closely monitored the participation (Section 2.3). The survey was programmed and managed rates across participating institutions, and the CPC actively by the World Bank through a mobile data collection platform engaged with participating institutions with lower participation (SurveyCTO). The survey followed international research rates. These initiatives were essential to disseminating and ethics and confidentiality standards, and the data collected legitimatizing the survey, thus encouraging participation from are subject to the World Bank’s Privacy Policy. Responses public servants. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 58 The study follows innovative analytical approaches Whenever possible, the study also reports comparisons for the combination of survey data and government between survey results in Armenia and other countries administrative data. Building on the ongoing World Bank with similar available public data. For comparisons, engagement in Armenia that focused on generating data and we use all countries for which similar survey indicators are analytics to identify risks in corruption-prone areas of the publicly available from the Global Survey of Public Servants public sector, such as public procurement, the Armenia Public website, which collects indicators and reports from similar Sector Accountability Survey was designed to leverage data public servants surveys conducted in 27 countries by the on the existing procurement transactions.1 By combining this World Bank or its counterparts. Given the variations in the administrative data with newly gathered survey data, this report survey instruments across countries, the group of comparator presents advanced analysis. For example, it demonstrates the countries varies across indicators based on data availability, links between human resource management (HRM) practices, and it is clearly reported for each analysis. perceptions of corruption, and objective risks of corruption in public procurement transactions. Sample Some of the analysis was done using indexes constructed from the survey and government administrative data to represent overall aggregate patterns in the data. From The participation rate to the survey was 45 percent, with the survey data, indexes were constructed by standardizing 3,103 valid responses. This relatively high participation rate for relevant survey variables and aggregating by simple averages an online survey was achieved through the strong involvement at individual level to capture the following dimensions: of the CPC and other government counterparts, and the satisfaction, quality of recruitment, quality of performance joint development of the communication and dissemination management, quality of career management, quality of strategy with the focal persons within each participating entity. compensation management, overall HRM quality, experience The participation rates vary across institutions (Figure 1), and of undue pressure, experience of unethical behaviors, it is higher among male than among female public servants experience of conflict of interest, and overall integrity risks.2 (70 and 33 percent, respectively). Managers and public The indicators on corruption risks in public procurement servants in local government offices have lower participation were constructed using open microdata on tenders and rates than managers and those in central government entities. contracts, and they are based on the following characteristics of the procurement process: single-bid tender, procedure The analysis uses balancing weights to ensure that the type, advertisement period, and decision period. These empirical results are representative of the target population indicators on corruption risks in public procurement should and to minimize sampling biases. Post-stratification survey be considered as “red flags” rather than definitive indication weighting was implemented using demographic data acquired of wrongdoing, and they are based on a large academic from the Armenian official statistical office. The data was literature that demonstrates that corruption risks tend to be weighted using gender, age group category, and position grade more pronounced for tenders that receive only one bid, for of respondents. Several cleaning steps were done to match non-open tenders, for tenders with too short submission demographic data to survey results data. This is necessary, period, and for tenders with too short (or too long) period for since the participation rates vary across participating entities, bids evaluation.3 Further details on the indicators constructed age groups, gender, and other respondent characteristics. The from the survey data and the public procurement data are use of balancing weights mitigates this potential disconnect provided, respectively, in Annex C and D. between the target population and the survey.4 1. Assets declaration microdata was also considered for the analysis, but it did not yield significant results and therefore is not included in this report. 2. The overall HRM quality index is calculated as the average of the sub-indexes: quality of recruitment, quality of performance management, quality of career management, and quality of compensation management. The overall integrity risks index is calculated as the average of the sub-indexes: experience of undue pressure, experience of unethical behaviors, and experience of conflict of interest. A higher level of the satisfaction and HRM indexes indicates a stronger belief or practice. A higher level of the integrity risks indexes indicates higher incidence of corruption risks. 3. The indicators on corruption risks in public procurement were developed and validated for Armenia by a World Bank analysis of Armenian public procurement open data for the period between 2017 and early June 2020. 4. For example, women represent 43 percent of public officials in the target population, but 30 percent of respondents in the survey sample. This under-representation of women in the survey sample implies that the survey results may be less representative of the views of women than men. This potential bias of results is corrected by the use of balancing weights, which adjusts the survey sample based on the proportions between groups in the targeted population (e.g., in terms of size of entity). The bal- ancing weights are constructed using the available information on the target population: participating entity, gender, age, and grade. This ensures that survey results are representative of the target population with respect to these dimensions, but not necessarily with respect to others. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 59 > > > F I G U R E A . 1 - Number of Responses and Participation Rate Total participation rates 45% Total participants 3,103 PA RT ICIPAT ION RAT ES AC RO S S ENT I T I ES State Protocol Service Education Inspectorate Ministry of Defence Science Committee Ashtarak Community Municipality Tourism Committee Civil Aviation Committee Urban Development Committee Urban Development and Fire Safety Inspectorate Ministry of Economy Ministry of Environment Military-Industrial Committee Rescue Service Ministry of Finance Language Committee State Property Committee Market Surveillance Inspection Body Cadastre Committee Ministry of Justice Ministry of Education Artashat Municipality Yerevan Municipality Gyumri Community Municipality Vanadzor Community Municipality 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% PART ICIPAT ION RAT ES AC RO S S G RO UP S Managers: 40% Central: 50% 33% 70% Non-managers: 47% Municipal: 27% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 60 Respondents to the survey represent a wide range of different ages and education, central and local entities, and public entities, positions, levels of responsibilities, professionals with a variety of job profiles (Figure 2). This and demographic groups (Figure 2). The realized survey ensures that the survey data and analysis results capture sample depends on the participation rates among different a variety of views and experiences within the Armenian demographic groups (Figure 1), and it includes men and public sector. women, managers and non-managers, public servants with > > > F I G U R E A . 2 - Characteristics of the Realized Survey Sample No college Manager degree (14%) (3%) College Non-manager degree and (86%) above (97%) Age 35 Female and below (43%) (31%) Age 36 and above Male (57%) (69%) Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 61 >>> Annex B. Survey Instrument Accountability and Integrity in the Armenian Public Administration Survey of Public Servants in Armenia INTRODUCTION The Government of Armenia is partnering with the World Bank for the implementation of the Armenia Public Sector Accountability and Integrity Assessment through Survey and Administrative Data. This activity builds on the collaboration in the areas of anticorruption and justice sector reform, and it is led by the Corruption Prevention Commission (CPC). Please read about the official launch of this study on CPC website. The Public Sector Accountability and Integrity Survey is aimed to generate a comprehensive assessment of the causes, patterns and consequences of corruption in the public administration in Armenia. The survey is expected to support and inform further definition of the Government’s anti-corruption initiatives in Armenia. The survey will be a part of the World Bank’s Global Survey of Public Servants (GSPS) initiative, aiming at generating survey data from public servants in government institutions around the world. As of now, GSPS have implemented public servants’ surveys in over 35 countries. Some of topics covered in the survey may be considered difficult or sensitive. Understanding such difficult topics and addressing them through concrete and evidence-based action is the entire purpose of this survey, so your input will be extremely valuable. This survey is being undertaken in the strictest confidence by professional researchers who will keep your answers completely secure. No one outside of the survey research team will be able to associate the individual answers you provide with you and your data will never be shared with anyone- especially not government. Published data will be completely anonymous. So please feel free to answer honestly. The researchers are interested only in the truth. Your participation is voluntary. If throughout the survey you feel uncomfortable or would prefer not to discuss certain topics, you can skip any questions or choose to end the discussion at any time. For further details, please see the World Bank’s Personal Data Privacy policy guiding this research. If you have any question, please read the survey information on CPC website, or please contact our team at ---. Thank you for your valuable time! World Bank team CONSENT Q Question Answer options C.1 Are you happy to take part in the survey? 1. Yes 2. No C.2 Could you please indicate why you are declining to participate? [OPEN ENDED] [If do not want to participate] END INTERVIEW EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 63 BD: DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Q Question Answer options BD.1 In which entity do you work? [DROPDOWN MENU] [Calculate municipality dummy if a municipality is selected] BD.2 In which region do you work? [DROPDOWN MENU] [if municipality] BD.3a Are you the integrity officer for your entity? 1. Yes 2. No BD.4A In which year you started in your current position? [dropdown years] BD.4B In which year you started working in this entity? [dropdown years] BD.4C In which year you started working in the public sector? [dropdown years] BD.6 What is the highest level of education you have completed? 1. Primary school 2. Secondary school 3. Vocational certificate/ Diploma 4. Bachelor’s degree 5. Master’s degree 6. PhD 700 = Other 900 = Prefer not to respond BD.7 What is your age? 1. 18-25 2. 26-35 3. 36-45 4. 46-55 5. 56-65 6. Over 66 900 = Prefer not to respond BD.8 What is your gender? 1. Female 2. Male 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond BD.3_central What is your current position? 1. P1 2. P2 [if municipality] 3. P3 4. P4 5. P5 6. P6 7. P7 EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 64 BD: Demographic Information continued Q Question Answer options 8. M1 9. M2 10. M3 11. M4 12. M5 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond BD.3_municipality What is your current position? 1. J1 2. J2 [if no municipality] 3. J3 4. L1 5. L2 6. L3 7. M1 8. M2 9. M3 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond BD.5 Please indicate all functions that you are involved in or are 1. Budget development responsible for in your position. 2. Procurement 3. Finance management For example: Please select “procurement” if you are a 4. Legal certified procurement specialist, or a public servant regularly 5. Project management conducting procurement for your entity, or if you have a and implementation managerial position with ultimate responsibility over the 700 = Other procurement process. Same for the other functions. 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond BD.5a In your current position, do you work as a certified procurement 1. J1 specialist or a public servant regularly conducting procurement 2. J2 [if function = procurement for your entity? 3. J3 and not manager] 4. L1 5. L2 6. L3 7. M1 8. M2 9. M3 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 65 BD: Demographic Information continued Q Question Answer options BD.5b How many tenders did you work on during 2021? 1. 1-5 2. 5-10 [if function = procurement 3. 11-16 and not manager] 4. 17-25 5. Over 25 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond. HRM: HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Q Question Answer options MOT.1 To what extent do you agree with the following sentences? 01 = Strongly Disagree 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond MOT.1a I am satisfied with my job MOT.1b I feel valued in my entity MOT.1c My job allows me to unleash my full potential HRM.1 In the last 3 years, in which of these HR situations have 1. Selection you witnessed or were subject to unethical behaviours by and recruitment colleagues or managers? 2. Performance evaluation 3. Promotion and career Select all that apply. advancement 4. Transfers [randomized order of options] between entities 5. Remuneration and rewards 6. Training and professional development 7. Travel authorization, events, training, licenses 8. Dismissals and disciplinary action EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 66 HRM: Human Resource Management continued Q Question Answer options 9. I didn’t witness any of the above in the last 3 years 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SR: Selection and Recruitment Q Question Answer options SR.1 For your first position in the public sector, were you hired 1. Yes through an open competitive recruitment process? 2. No 900 = Prefer not to answer Open-Competitive Recruitment means a recruitment for a particular position which is open to all persons meeting the qualifications for the position SR.2 Which of the following assessment methods were used in the 0= No formal assessment selection process for your first position in the public sector? was undertaken 01 = Interview Select all that apply. 02 = Written examination 700 = Other formal assessment 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SR.3 What do you think are the top 3 most relevant factors for 1. Academic qualifications getting a job in your entity? 2. Previous work experience Please select the top three most important factors. 3. Job-specific skills 4. Legal knowledge [randomized order of options] 5. Knowing a politician or someone with political links 6. Having family, friends or other personal connections in my entity 7. Providing gifts or unofficial payments 8. Work ethics 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SR.4 Which factors are the most important for you that make you 1. Job security stay in the public administration? 2. Salary level 3. Status and prestige EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 67 SR: Selection and Recruitment continued Q Question Answer options Please select the top three most important factors. 4. Career development opportunities [randomized order of options] 5. Training opportunities 6. Travel opportunities 7. Location 8. Opportunity to serve society 9. Work-life balance 10. Challenging work responsibilities 11. Good working environment 12. Having friends in the entity 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SN.B.1 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant knows that his entity is seeking for a 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement specialized data analyst. The public servant introduces to the 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] manager a friend that just acquired a degree in data science to respond with excellent grades, and convinces the manager to appoint the friend with temporary terms without a competition. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.B.1, SN.B.2, SN.B.3, randomly] SN.B.2 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A managerial position is going to be open in a public sector 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement entity. An applicant has a family connection with a political 900 = Don’t know / Prefer specialists] party representative with strong connections in that entity. not to respond Thanks to this, the applicant obtains a meeting with the manager in that entity before the opening of the position in order to discuss being hired. In your opinion, how justifiable is the applicant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 68 SR: Selection and Recruitment continued Q Question Answer options [To each respondent, show only one between SN.B.1, SN.B.2, SN.B.3, randomly] SN.B.3 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A managerial position is going to be open in a public sector 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement entity. A public servant has a family connection with a political 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] party representative with strong connections in that entity. to respond Thanks to this, the public servant obtains a meeting with the manager in that entity before the opening of the position in order to discuss a promotion/transfer to that entity. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.B.1, SN.B.2, SN.B.3, randomly] PM: Performance Management ASK NON-MANAGERS ONLY Q Question Answer options PM.1 Has your performance been formally evaluated during 01=Yes the past two years (through the annual performance 02=No evaluation report)? 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PM.2 Has your performance assessment/evaluation report been 01 = Yes shared with you/shown to you after it was written? 02 = No [if performance evaluated 900 = Prefer not to respond last 2 years] PM.3 How are performance evaluations conducted in your entity? 1. There are no clearly defined criteria/ Select all that apply. performance indicators 2. The existing criteria/ [randomized order of options] performance indicators do not capture well employees’ performance 3. Performance evaluations are not conducted fairly 4. The results depend on personal relationships EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 69 PM: Performance Management continued Q Question Answer options 5. Everyone gets the same rating 6. Poor performance is not adequately addressed 7. Good performance is rarely recognized 8. Individuals conducting the evaluations are not well trained 9. Ratings are too informal 10. Performance evaluations are not conducted regularly 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PM.4 In your case, have your performance evaluation results been 1. My performance used in any of the following ways? evaluation results have [if performance evaluated not been used in any last 2 years] Select all that apply. If selected 1 or 9, you cannot select significant way other options. 2. To help me keep track and improve of [randomized order of options] my performance 3. To assess what type of trainings I should receive 4. To set my base salary 5. To award me a bonus 6. To promote me to a higher grade position 7. To transfer me to another position (same grade) 8. To threaten potential dismissal from the public administration 9. I have never had a performance evaluation 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 70 PM: Performance Management continued ASK NON-MANAGERS ONLY Q Question Answer options PM.5 To what extent do you agree with the following statements on 01 = Strongly Disagree performance evaluations? 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PM.5a Performance evaluation is taken seriously in my entity. PM.5b I feel pressure to give all members of my team a high- performance rating. PM.5c I have tools to address underperformance among my employees. PM.5d There are clearly defined criteria / performance indicators PM.5e The existing criteria/performance indicators capture well employees’ performance. PA: Promotion and Advancement Q Question Answer options PA.1 When did you receive your last promotion in the public sector? 1. 2022 2. 2021 3. 2020 4. 2019 5. 2018 6. 2017 - 2014 7. 2013 or earlier 8. I have never received a promotion 900 = Prefer not to respond PA.2 Which of the following processes was used for your 01 = Competitive promotion last promotion? 02 = Performance- [If ever received a based promotion without promotion] A competitive promotion occurs when individuals compete for competition and are considered for a position that results in a promotion. 03 = Seniority-based promotion without competition 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 71 PA: Promotion and Advancement continued Q Question Answer options PA.3 What do you think are the top 3 most relevant factors for 01 = Job performance, such getting a promotion or advancement in your entity? as reaching job targets and goals Please select the top three most important factors. 02 = Academic qualifications [randomized order of options] 03 = Length of service 04 = Quality of relationship with supervisors 05 =Knowing a politician or someone with political links  06 =Having family, friends or other personal connections in my entity 07 = Providing gifts or unofficial payments 08 = Showing professionalism 09 = Work ethics 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PA.4 How confident are you that you will get promoted to the next 1. Very unconfident professional grade if you perform your job well? 2. Unconfident 3. Neither unconfident nor confident 4. Confident 5. Very confident 6. I cannot get promoted, because I am at the highest professional grade 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SP: Salary and Payments Q Question Answer options SP.1 Do you typically receive a monetary bonus in your current 01 = Regularly every month position in this entity? 02 = Every two months 03 = Once per trimester 04 = Once per quarter 05 = Twice a year 06 = Once a year 07 = Less than once a year EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 72 SP: Salary and Payments continued Q Question Answer options 08 = Never 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SP.2 What do you think are the top 3 most relevant factors for 01 = Job performance, such determining the size of the monetary bonuses in your entity? as reaching job targets and goals Please select the top three most important factors. 02 = Length of service 03 = Quality of relationship [randomized order of options] with supervisors 04 = Knowing a politician or someone with political links  05 = Having family, friends or other personal connections in my entity 06 = Providing gifts or unofficial payments 07 = Showing professionalism 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SP.3 Have you ever received a non-monetary performance bonus 01 = Yes in your current position in this entity? 02 = No 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not Non-monetary bonuses could be medals, acknowledgement to respond certificates, extra training, awards, etc. SP.4 To what extent do you agree/disagree with the 01 = Strongly Disagree following sentences? 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SP.4a I am satisfied with my total compensation SP.4b I am paid at least as much as other employees in other entities with responsibilities similar to mine SP.4c If I moved to the private sector, I would have a higher total compensation EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 73 CORR: CORRUPTION, SOCIAL NORMS, and PERCEPTIONS SN: Social Norms Section not asked to procurement specialists. Q Question Answer options SN.1 To what extent would you agree with each of the 01 = Strongly Disagree following statements: 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SN.1a It is customary to give gifts to people in Armenia. SN.1b It is customary to give gifts to public servants in Armenia. SN.A.1 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant works at the office issuing driving 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement licenses. A citizen approaches the office with the urgent 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] need to renovate the driving license. The public servant to respond agrees to expedite the process and accepts 25,000 AMD as special thanks. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.A.1, SN.A.2, SN.A.3, SN.A.4, randomly] SN.A.2 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant works at the office issuing driving licenses. A 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement citizen approaches the office with the urgent need to renovate 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] the driving license. The public servant agrees to expedite the to respond process and demands 25,000 AMD as special thanks. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.A.1, SN.A.2, SN.A.3, SN.A.4, randomly] EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 74 SN: Social Norms continued Q Question Answer options SN.A.3 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant works at the office issuing driving licenses. A 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement citizen approaches the office with the urgent need to renovate 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] the driving license. The public servant agrees to expedite the to respond process and accepts a box of chocolates as special thanks. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.A.1, SN.A.2, SN.A.3, SN.A.4, randomly] SN.A.4 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant works at the office issuing driving licenses. A 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement citizen approaches the office with the urgent need to renovate 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] the driving license. The citizen has been unemployed for more to respond than 1 year and recently found a driver job, which should start in only a few days. A valid driving license is required in order to sign the contract. The public servant agrees to expedite the process and accepts 25,000 AMD as special thanks. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.A.1, SN.A.2, SN.A.3, SN.A.4, randomly] SN.2 Based on your experience, how common/frequent it is for 01=This never happens public servants in your entity to have unethical behaviors, 02=This rarely happens such as accepting or paying bribes, exchanging favors, or 03=This sometimes bending the rules? happens 04 = This often happens 05=This always happens 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SN.3 What do you believe are the primary reasons that some 1. Low pay and rising cost public servants have unethical behaviors, such as accepting of living or paying bribes, exchanging favors, or bending the rules? 2. Lax regulations 3. Too many regulations Please select the top three most important reasons. 4. Pressure from superiors 5. Peer pressure EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 75 SN: Social Norms continued Q Question Answer options [randomized order of options] 6. Insufficient monitoring of unethical behaviour 7. Insufficient sanctioning of unethical behaviour 8. Selection of corrupt/ corruptible individuals to work in the entity 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SN.4 In your opinion, which functions are more prone to 1. Human Resources corruption risks? 2. Budget and planning 3. Procurement Please select the top three. 4. Administration 5. Legal [randomized order of options] 6. Financial Management 7. Front office (citizen-facing or firm-facing functions) 8. Management 9. Supervision 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SN.C.1 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant in the “procurement responsible department” 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement is responsible for specifying a purchase of a particular 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] equipment for his entity. This public servant sets a bids to respond submission time shorter than required by the legislation in order to purposely favor a particular company, which the public servant knows provides a good product. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.C.1, SN.C.2, SN.C.3, randomly] SN.C.2 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant in the “procurement responsible department” 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement is responsible for specifying a purchase of a particular 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] equipment for his entity. The head of this entity is interested in to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 76 SN: Social Norms continued Q Question Answer options favoring a company in this bid. The public servant thus sets a bids submission time shorter than required by the legislation in order to purposely favor that particular company. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.C.1, SN.C.2, SN.C.3, randomly] SN.C.3 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant in the “procurement responsible department” 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement is responsible for overseeing the purchase of a particular 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] equipment for his entity. The head of this entity is interested to respond in favoring a company, which the head knows provides a good product. The procurement specialist thus approves the tender specification with a bids submission time shorter than required by the legislation in order to purposely favor that particular company. In your opinion, how justifiable is the procurement specialist’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.C.1, SN.C.2, SN.C.3, randomly] SN.5 To what extent do you agree that corruption in the public 01 = Strongly Disagree sector impacts each of the following: 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond SN.5a Your ability to effectively perform your daily tasks SN.5b The ability of your entity to effectively deliver services SN.5c The quality of the services provided to citizens SN.5d Citizens trust in the public service SN.5e Employee motivation and engagement EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 77 TT: Trustworthiness Q Question Answer options TT.1 How much do you trust the following actors: 1. I trust them 2. I neither trust them nor don’t trust them 3. I don’t trust them 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond TT.1a Colleagues in your department TT.1b Colleagues in your entity TT.1c Your superiors TT.1d Public servants in other entities TT.1e Auditors TT.1f Friends and family TT.1g Strangers TT.1h Politicians TT.1i Judges PI: Interference Q Question Answer options PI.1 In the last three years, you’ve been under pressure to: 0. Give bonuses or rewards to a specific individual Select all that apply. 1. Recruiting a specific individual If selected 11, you cannot select other options. 2. Promoting a specific individual [randomized order of options] 3. Award a contract to a specific company 4. Other undue pressure 5. Allocate budget to a specific project 6. Award a contract to a specific company 7. Ignore an undue act 8. Share restricted access information 9. Make the entity’s rules and procedures more flexible EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 78 PI: Interference continued Q Question Answer options 10. Other undue pressure 11. I was not under any undue pressure 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PI.2 Which of these agents exerted undue pressure? 1. Hierarchical superiors (direct or indirect head) [if subject to some Select all that apply. 2. Public authority other undue pressure] than my superiors [randomized order of options] 3. Co-workers 4. Citizens 5. Enterprises 6. Politicians 7. Superiors from other entities/ministries 8. Friends and Relatives 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PI.3 To what extent would you agree that lobbying by private 01 = Strongly Disagree companies is well regulated and transparent? 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree nor disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond CI: Conflict of interest Q Question Answer options CI.1 Based on your experience, how frequent it is for public 01=This never happens servants to do the following acts: 02=This rarely happens 03=This sometimes happens 04 = This often happens 05=This always happens 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond CI.1a Leaving the public service to work in a private company in the same sector CI.1b Working on a politicians’ election campaign, and then being hired by that same politician to work in the public service EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 79 CI: Conflict of interest continued Q Question Answer options CI.1c Support the electoral campaign of a political party in the course of his/her duties CI.1d Awarding contracts to firms owned by their or their colleagues’ family members CI.1e Having a second job with a private company or running their own business CI.1f Owning, or owning shares, or managing a business in the same sector (directly or indirectly, for example through a trust fund or an intermediate company) CI.1g Hiring a family member or friend SN.E.1 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant in the “procurement responsible department” 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement is responsible for overseeing the purchase of a particular 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] equipment for his entity. The contracted firm experienced to respond some delays. Due to previous positive performance by this firm in previous contracts and established trustworthy relationship, the public servant extends the delivery timeline. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.E.1, SN.E.2, randomly] SN.E.2 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers A public servant in the “procurement responsible department” 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement is responsible for overseeing the purchase of a particular 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] equipment for his entity. The contracted firm experienced to respond some delays. The head of this entity is maintaining good relationships with this company, and therefore the public servant is requested to extend the delivery timeline. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.E.1, SN.E.2, randomly] EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 80 AD: Asset Declaration Q Question Answer options AD.1 Did you complete your declaration of assets, interests and 01= Yes expenses last year? 02=No 03=Prefer not to respond AD.2 To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following ideas 01 = Strongly Disagree on the usefulness of asset declarations? 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know / Prefer not to respond AD.2a It is important for public servants to declare their assets. AD.2b The state is using this data effectively. AD.2c There are no sanctions if you don’t file your declaration or if you lie in your declaration. AD.2e Public servants frequently lie in their declarations. AD.3 What are your views on the process of declaring own assets? 01 = Strongly Disagree 02 = Disagree [only non-managers 03 = Neutral – Neither and non-procurement agree or disagree specialists] 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond AD.3a The process is tedious/burdensome AD.3b The process is confusing and not user friendly AD.3c There is not enough support during the filing process AD.3d I don’t trust the confidentiality of this process EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 81 RTR: RULES, TRANSPARENCY, AND REPORTING MECHANISMS RR: Rules and regulations Q Question Answer options RR.1 Have you heard about the Corruption Prevention 1. Yes, I know it exists but Commission (CPC)? I am not familiar with [only non-procurement its functions specialists] 2. Yes, I know it exists and I am familiar with its functions 3. No, I don’t 900 = Prefer not to respond RR.2 How effective/ineffective have been the following actors in 01=Very effective fighting corruption? 02=Effective [only non-procurement 03=Neither effective specialists] nor ineffective 04= Ineffective 05=Very ineffective 900 = Prefer not to respond RR.2a The Corruption Prevention Commission (CPC) RR.2b The Government RR.2c The head of staff and other senior officers in my own entity [only non-managers] RR2d The Prosecutor’s office RR2e Judges and Courts RR2f Investigation and law enforcement agencies (Anti-corruption Agency, Investigative Committee) RR.3 Are you aware of the following actions/projects implemented 1. Anti-Corruption Strategy by the government? implementation Action [only non-procurement Plan for 2019-2022 specialists] Select all that apply. 2. Anti-Corruption Monitoring Platform [randomized order of options] (www.anti-corruption. gov.am) 3. Hotlines of various government agencies 4. Unified Electronic Platform for Whistle-blowing (www.azdararir.am) EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 82 RR: Rules and regulations continued Q Question Answer options 5. Other participatory democracy e-tools (e-request, e-hotline, e-petition) 6. Initiative to reveal the real owners of companies 7. E-draft platform for public participation in drafting legal acts 8. Open Government Partnership Initiative 9. Unified Office for Public Services 900 = Prefer not to respond RR.4 Are you familiar with the Code of Conduct applicable to 1. Yes, I know a Code of your position? Conduct exists but I am not familiar with it The Code of Conduct applicable to your position may be 2. Yes, I know a Code of defined by the principles and main rules of conduct are Conduct exists and I am provided in the Law on Public Service, or it may be defined familiar with it by the specific Code of Conduct adopted by your entity. 3. No, I don’t know whether a Code of Conduct applicable to my position exists 900 = Prefer not to respond RR.5 Please evaluate to what extent the Code of Conduct 01 = Strongly Disagree applicable to your position is: 02 = Disagree [if know a Code of 03 = Neutral – Neither Conduct exists] agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond RR.5a Simple, clear, and easy to understand RR.5b Does not require an excessive number of administrative steps RR.5c Well enforced (managers make sure that the rules are followed) RR.5d Complied with by public servants RR.5e Promptly disseminated and communicated EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 83 RR: Rules and regulations continued Q Question Answer options RR.6a What are the two main reasons why rules in the Code of 1. The rules are unclear or Conduct are not consistently enforced? difficult to understand [If disagree that the Code of to me Conduct is well enforced] Please select the top two most important reasons. 2. The rules are not fair to me [only non-managers] [randomized order of options] 3. Managers are not properly informed about the rules 4. It is not important to comply with these rules 5. It is difficult to monitor compliance with rules 6. There are many loopholes and exceptions 7. It is difficult to apply sanctions 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond RR.6b What are the two main reasons why public servants do not 1. The rules are unclear or comply with the Code of Conduct? difficult to understand [If disagree that the Code of 2. The rules are not fair Conduct is complied with] Please select the top two most important reasons. 3. Public servants are not properly informed about [randomized order of options] the rules 4. Public servants don’t understand the importance of complying with these rules 5. There is no monitoring system 6. There are many loopholes and exceptions 7. Public servants are not scared of sanctions/ there are no sanctions when incompliance 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond RR.7 Please indicate the extent to which you agree/disagree with 01 = Strongly Disagree the following statements: 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 84 RR: Rules and regulations continued Q Question Answer options 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond RR.7a I was provided an induction at the start of my role to ensure that I was adequately aware of the responsibilities and requirements of my specific job RR.7b I was trained in the Code of Conduct applicable to my position RR.7c There are often trainings organized to create awareness on integrity issues and on the Code of Conduct applicable to my position RR.7d The Code of Conduct and the integrity trainings help prevent corruption RR.8 Which of the following types of anti-corruption assistance 1. Information about would you like to be available to you? my rights and [only non-procurement responsibilities specialists] Please select the top three. on corruption 2. Information on [randomized order of options] anti-corruption legislation and policies 3. Information on the institutions that can be appealed/ complained of in the case of corruption 4. Information on the process of punishing corrupt public servants and/or their confiscated property 5. Free legal advice on filing a corruption complaint, collecting information and evidence/ documentation 6. Free representation in law enforcement and court/lawyer service 7. Anti-corruption educational programs and outreach activities 8. Detailed information on hotlines of public authorities 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 85 RR: Rules and regulations continued Q Question Answer options RR.9 In your opinion, which of the following measures would be 1. Make penalties for most effective in reducing corruption? corruption crimes more severe Please select the top three most effective measures. 2. Establish standard rules of conduct for [randomized order of options] public servants 3. Increase the remuneration of public servants 4. Reduce de facto impunity of public servants 5. Simplify administrative procedures 6. Make public-private relations more transparent 7. Strengthen the monitoring of public policies by civil society 8. Improve the role of anti-corruption agencies 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond RR.10 Do you know the integrity officer in your entity? 1. Yes 2. No [if non-integrity officer] 900 = Prefer not to answer RR.11 During last year, how many times did you get in contact with [insert number] the integrity officer in your entity, for example in order to seek [if know the integrity officer] information or advice? RR.12 During last year, how many colleagues from your entity got [insert number] directly in contact with you, for example in order to seek [if integrity officer] information or advice? SN.D.1 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers Based on the yearly budget allocations, a municipality is 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement expected to conduct renovation works in a local elementary 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] school. In the previous years, this municipality awarded to respond a contractor for similar projects in the municipality. This contractor showed positive performance in these previous projects and demonstrated being a trustworthy partner. The budget for the renovation works in the local elementary school is reviewed in order to be below 1 million AMD (the contract EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 86 RR: Rules and regulations continued Q Question Answer options threshold for direct contracting) and this existing contractor is awarded through direct contracting. In your opinion, how justifiable is the use of direct contracting in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.D.1, SN.D.2, SN.D.3, randomly] SN.D.2 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers Based on the yearly budget allocations, a municipality is 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement expected to conduct renovation works in a local elementary 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] school. Due to delays in the preparation of the tendering to respond documents, an open competitive tender cannot be initiated on time and therefore a contractor is selected using urgent direct contracting. In your opinion, how justifiable is the use of direct contracting in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.D.1, SN.D.2, SN.D.3, randomly] SN.D.3 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = Unjustifiable .. [only non-managers Based on the yearly budget allocations, a municipality is 10 = Justifiable and non-procurement expected to conduct renovation works in a local elementary 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] school. During preparation of the tender document, a to respond contractor approaches the municipality and offers a very convenient price, conditional on expediting the procurement process. The budget for the renovation works in the local elementary school is reviewed in order to be below 1 million AMD (the contract threshold for direct contracting) and this contractor is awarded through direct contracting. In your opinion, how justifiable is the use of direct contracting in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.D.1, SN.D.2, SN.D.3, randomly] EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 87 RC: Reporting Corruption and Unethical Behavior Q Question Answer options RC.1 Do you know how the whistle-blowing system works in 1. There is no whistle- your entity? blowing system in my entity A whistle-blowing system is written or oral reporting — by 2. There is a whistle- a whistle-blower to an authorised person or body provided blowing system in my for by the Law — of information regarding a case of entity, but I don’t know corruption or a violation in respect of conflict of interest, how it works or rules of ethics or incompatibility requirements, or other 3. Yes, I know how the restrictions or declaration, or other harm to public interests whistle-blowing system or the threat thereof within state and local self-government in my entity works bodies, state institutions and organizations, as well as within 4. No public organization. 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond RC.2a How many whistle-blowing reports did you receive in the last [number] two years? [only managers] RC.2b Of this, how many did you refer to the Prosecution? [number] [only managers] RC.3 Many people know of cases of corruption within the service, 1. Public servants do but do not report them. not trust that the [only non-procurement confidentiality of the specialists] What do you think are the three most important factors report will be protected. influencing public servants in NOT using the whistle-blowing 2. There is no protection for system even if they know of cases of corruption? whistle-blowers. Public servants are scared Please select the top three most important factors. of retaliation. 3. Public servants don’t [randomized order of options] know the procedure for reporting 4. The reporting process is long and complicated 5. Reported cases of corruption are neither investigated nor punished 6. The whistle-blowing/ investigation process is not impartial. 7. Public servants think it is not acceptable to report a colleague. 8. Prefer to avoid conflict 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 88 RC: Reporting Corruption and Unethical Behavior continued Q Question Answer options RC.4 Have you ever witnessed and reported a colleague/supervisor 1. Yes: I have witnessed for unethical behavior? a colleague/supervisor behaving unethically, and reported him/her 2. No: I have witnessed a colleague/supervisor behaving unethically, but did not report him/her 3. No: I have never witnessed a colleague/supervisor behaving unethically 900 = Prefer not to respond RC.4a What were the repercussions of this report? 1. A formal procedure was initiated against [if ever report a colleague] the officer 2. The officer was found guilty and a disciplinary action was taken 3. The officer was not found guilty 4. There was no follow-up to my report 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond RC.4b How protected have you felt when reported a colleague for 01 = Very protected unethical behavior? 02 =Protected [if ever report a colleague] 03 =Neither protected not unprotected 04 =Not protected 05 =Not protected at all 900 = Prefer not to respond RC.4c It you witnessed some unethical behavior by a colleague/ 1. Yes supervisor, would you report him/her? 2. It depends on the [if never witnessed a colleague/supervisor colleague behaving 3. It depends on the unethically] situation 4. No 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 89 RC: Reporting Corruption and Unethical Behavior continued Q Question Answer options RC.A.1 Imagine that a public servant has accepted money, goods, 01 = No probability or services from a private individual in exchange for .. preferential treatment. 10 = High probability 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not In your opinion, what is the probability of a colleague working to respond directly with this public servant to discover this fact? Please indicate your answer on a ladder from 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “No probability” and 10 indicates a “Very high probability”. [To each respondent, show only one between RC.A.1, RC.A.2, RC.A.3, RC.A.4, randomly] RC.A.2 Imagine that public servant has accepted money, goods, 01 = No probability or services from a private individual in exchange for .. preferential treatment. 10 = High probability 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not In your opinion, what is the probability of the immediate to respond supervisor to discover this fact? Please indicate your answer on a ladder from 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “No probability” and 10 indicates a “Very high probability”. [To each respondent, show only one between RC.A.1, RC.A.2, RC.A.3, RC.A.4, randomly] RC.A.3 Imagine that a public servant has accepted money, goods, 01 = No probability or services from a private individual in exchange for .. preferential treatment. 10 = High probability 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not In your opinion, what is the probability of the head of the to respond entity in which the person works to discover this fact? Please indicate your answer on a ladder from 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “No probability” and 10 indicates a “Very high probability”. [To each respondent, show only one between RC.A.1, RC.A.2, RC.A.3, RC.A.4, randomly] RC.A.4 Imagine that a server has accepted money, goods, 01 = No probability or services from a private individual in exchange for .. preferential treatment. 10 = High probability 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not In your opinion, what is the probability of the Audit body to to respond discover this fact? EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 90 RC: Reporting Corruption and Unethical Behavior continued Q Question Answer options Please indicate your answer on a ladder from 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “No probability” and 10 indicates a “Very high probability”. [To each respondent, show only one between RC.A.1, RC.A.2, RC.A.3, RC.A.4, randomly] SN.F.1 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = No probability .. [only non-managers A public servant in the “procurement responsible department” 10 = High probability and non-procurement is responsible for overseeing the purchase of a particular 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] equipment for his entity. This procurement process is to respond conducted through an open tender. The public servant receives a phone call from one of the participating firms, asking for additional information on the tender. The public servant provides this additional information to the firm. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.F.1, SN.F.2, SN.F.3, randomly] SN.F.2 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = No probability .. [only non-managers A public servant in the “procurement responsible department” 10 = High probability and non-procurement is responsible for overseeing the purchase of a particular 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] equipment for his entity. This procurement process is to respond conducted through an open tender. The public servant receives a phone call from one of the participating firms, asking for additional information on the tender. After consulting with the head of the purchasing entity, the public servant provides this additional information to the firm in email. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.F.1, SN.F.2, SN.F.3, randomly] SN.F.3 Please imagine the following scenario. 01 = No probability .. [only non-managers A public servant in the “procurement responsible department” 10 = High probability and non-procurement is responsible for overseeing the purchase of a particular 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not specialists] equipment for his entity. This procurement process is to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 91 RC: Reporting Corruption and Unethical Behavior continued Q Question Answer options conducted through an open tender. The public servant receives a phone call from one of the participating firms, asking for additional information on the tender. After consulting with the procurement specialist assigned to this purchase, the public servant provides this additional information to the firm in email. In your opinion, how justifiable is the public servant’s behavior in the scenario described above? Indicate your response on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 indicates “Unjustifiable” and 10 “Justifiable”. [To each respondent, show only one between SN.F.1, SN.F.2, SN.F.3, randomly] BF: BUDGET MANAGEMENT Section asked only to managers and employees who work on budget. Q Question Answer options BF.1 During the last two years to what extent would you agree/ 01 = Strongly Disagree disagree that, in your entity, decisions relating to the budget 02 = Disagree administration (amounts assigned to the budget, services, 03 = Neutral – Neither agree programs which they were carried out, groups that received or disagree budget allocations) have been: 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond BF.1a Subjected to regular audits by the internal control unit BF.1b Announced/open to public knowledge through various designated channels BF.1c Done transparently (we know who received what and why) BF.1d Subject to regular external audits BF.1e Subject to political pressure BF.1f Based on pressure from superiors within your entity BF.1g Based on specific criteria defined in writing BF.1h Influenced by regional ties BF.2 To what extent do you agree with the following statements on 01 = Strongly Disagree budget audits? 02 = Disagree EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 92 BF: Budget Management continued Q Question Answer options [To each respondent, show only one between BF2a and 03 = Neutral – Neither agree BF2c, randomly] or disagree 04 = Agree [To each respondent, show only one between BF2b and 05 = Strongly Agree BF2d, randomly] 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond BF.2a Internal audits are useful in detecting irregularities in the budget management BF.2b Internal audits on budget are free from political pressures BF.2c External audits are useful in detecting irregularities in the budget management BF.2d External audits on budget are free from political pressures PP: PROCUREMENT Section asked only to managers and employees who work on procurement. Q Question Answer options PP.1 To what extent do you agree with the following statements on 01 = Strongly Disagree public procurement? 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PP.1a In my entity, public procurement procedures are transparent PP.1b In my entity, the relationships between suppliers and the public administration (eg. contract renegotiations, delays, payments, regulations, project supervision) are transparent PP.1c Political influences/interests affect procurement decisions in my entity PP.2 In the last 2 years, do you know of any case in which: 1. A public servant set the technical specifications Select all that apply. in a tender to favor a specific firm [randomized order of options] 2. A public servant has been offered a gift by EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 93 PP: Procurement continued Q Question Answer options a firm for a favorable decision on a public procurement contract 3. A public servant communicated to a bidder some sensitive information not publicly disclosed, such as the details of other bids 4. Official procurement data (publicly available or transmitted to public procurement authority) did not correspond to the actual tender/ contract details 5. Misconduct was identified in procurement processes by auditors 900 =Don’t know / Prefer not to respond PP.4 To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following 01 = Strongly Disagree statements: 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PP.4b In my entity, non-competitive procedures are used only in well-justified circumstances. PP.4c Evaluation and award criteria are typically well-defined in the tendering documents for procurement processes in my entity. PP.4d Public servants in my entity have too much discretion in preparing tender documents. PP.4e Procurement specialists in my entity are able to provide sufficient supervision to the overall procurement process. PP.4f Procurement evaluation committees have too much discretion in the evaluation of bids and awarding contracts. PP.4g In my entity, procurement evaluation committees often contain an objective participant from outside the “procurement [only non-managers] responsible department”. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 94 PP: Procurement continued Q Question Answer options PP.4h Public servants in my entity are willing to take decisions and responsibilities related to public procurement. PP.4i The procurement process in my entity is typically free from undue influences of the head of staff and other senior officers. [only non-managers] PP.4j In my entity, public servants are often approached by firms outside the e-procurement portal (eg. emails, phone calls) PP.4k In my entity, an existing supplier (a firm that was already contracted in the past) is more likely to be awarded a contract than a new firm PP.5 What is the main reason that existing suppliers are more 1. Proven capacity likely to be a awarded a contract than a new firm? 2. Familiarity with the firm’s processes and ways [randomized order of options] of working 3. Existing relationships and established trust 4. Unofficial dealings or cooperation 5. There is not enough competition 6. Bribery 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond P.6a Within your entity, how often are internal audits/ex-post 1. In every contract reviews undertaken? 2. In most contracts 3. For some contracts [To each respondent, show only one between P.6a and 4. For occasional contracts P.6b, randomly] 5. For no contracts 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond P.6b Within your entity, how often are external audits undertaken? 1. In every contract 2. In most contracts [To each respondent, show only one between P.6a and 3. For some contracts P.6b, randomly] 4. For occasional contracts 5. For no contracts 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PP.7a In your entity, which procurement process is subject to 1. Open tender internal audits/ex-post reviews more frequently? 2. Urgent open tender 3. Electronic auction [To each respondent, show only one between P.7a and 4. Closed procedure P.7b, randomly] (Regular and Targeted procurement) EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 95 PP: Procurement continued Q Question Answer options 5. Single source for small value contracts (below 1 million AMD) 6. Urgent single source 7. Other 8. No difference in frequency of auditing/ ex-post reviews between procurement arrangements 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PP.7b In your entity, which procurement process is subject to 1. Open tender external audits more frequently? 2. Urgent open tender 3. Electronic auction [To each respondent, show only one between P.7a and 4. Closed procedure P.7b, randomly] (Regular and Targeted procurement) 5. Single source for small value contracts (below 1 million AMD) 6. Urgent single source 7. Other 8. No difference in frequency of auditing/ ex-post reviews between procurement arrangements 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PP.8 How would you rate the following in helping to reduce 1. Very ineffective corruption risks in public procurement? 2. Ineffective 3. Neither effective or ineffective 4. Effective 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PP.8a Less discretion for sector specialists involved in the procurement process PP.8b More supervision by certified procurement specialists PP.8c Use of open procedures PP.8d Use of the e-procurement system EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 96 PP: Procurement continued Q Question Answer options PP.8e Evaluation committees with representatives from outside the “responsible procurement department” for that purchase. PP.8f1 Fewer people in the evaluation committees [To each respondent, show only one between PP.8f1 and PP.8f2, randomly] PP.8f2 More people in the evaluation committees [To each respondent, show only one between PP.8f1 and PP.8f2, randomly] PP.8g Public disclosure of procurement information & data PP.8h Audits (Internal and External) PP.8i Rules on conflict of interest PP.8j Requirement on disclosure of the beneficiary ownership PII: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION Section asked only to managers and employees who work on project implementation. Q Question Answer options PII.1 In your experience, what are the reasons public projects in 1. The projects are your entity fail to be implemented or are implemented poorly? technically too difficult/unfeasible Select all that apply. 2. Lack of engagement with citizens/ [randomized order of options] project beneficiaries 3. Budgetary issues/ misappropriated funds 4. There isn’t enough engagement between the implementing partners 5. Staffing deficiencies 6. Lack of supervision during contract implementation and weak enforcement of contract obligations 7. Poor managerial/ coordination capacity EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 97 PII: Project Implementation continued Q Question Answer options 8. Projects in my entity are generally well implemented 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PII.2 What is the main reason why projects are technically too 1. They are poorly difficult/unfeasible? designed due to a lack of [If selected “Projects are too information at the central difficult/unfeasible”] [randomized order of options] level of government 2. They are poorly designed due to a lack of information at the local level of government 3. They are poorly designed due to a lack of expertise at the central level of government 4. They are poorly designed due to a lack of expertise at the local level of government 5. Senior public servants made unfeasible requests 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PII.3 What is the reason there is lack of engagement with citizens/ 1. There is mistrust project beneficiaries? between the community [If selected “Lack of and the regional/ engagement with citizens/ [randomized order of options] municipal government project beneficiaries”] due to a prior incident 2. There is mistrust between the community and the regional/ municipal government due to a lack of engagement 3. The community does not understand the specifics of the project/it was not explained to them 4. The community does not agree with or accept the project/the project is not their priority EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 98 PII: Project Implementation continued Q Question Answer options 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PII.4 What is the main budgetary issue? 1. Poor budgetary planning (the project costed more [If selected [randomized order of options] than anticipated) “Budgetary issues/ 2. Funds are unavailable misappropriated funds”] when needed 3. Funds have been diverted to other unplanned projects 4. Fund have been misused by implementing team 5. Rigid regulations 6. Unplanned expenses 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PII.5 What is the main reason there are staff deficiencies? 1. Implementing team does not have the right [If selected “Staffing [randomized order of options] skills/training deficiencies”] 2. Implementing team was appointed based on their connections and do not have the right qualifications 3. There is not enough staff to do all the work 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PII.6 What is the main reason there is insufficient monitoring and 1. The monitoring enforcement of good practices? mechanisms are [If selected “Lack of unclear/not effective supervision during [randomized order of options] 2. There are no contract implementation enforcement and weak enforcement of mechanisms contract obligations”] 3. Monitoring project implementation is not a priority for senior management 700 = Other 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 99 PII: Project Implementation continued Q Question Answer options PII.7 Based on your experience, how common are these practices 01=This never happens during project/contract implementation in your entity: 02=This rarely happens 03=This sometimes happens 04=This always happens 900 = Don’t know/Prefer not to respond PII.7a Contract renegotiations due to implementation delays PII.7b Enforcement of penalties for implementation delays PII.7c Enforcement of penalties for substandard delivery PII.7d Close monitoring and supervision of contract implementation quality PII.7e Payments schedules linked to completion of milestones PII.7f Supervision over compliance with environmental regulations and standards PII.7g Supervision over compliance with labor regulations and standards PII.8 To what extent do you agree/disagree with the 01 = Strongly Disagree following statements: 02 = Disagree 03 = Neutral – Neither agree or disagree 04 = Agree 05 = Strongly Agree 900 = Don’t know / Prefer not to respond PII.8a In my entity, contracts are re-negotiated only in well- justified circumstances. PII.8b Public servants in my entity have too much discretion in contract supervision. PII.8c Public servants in my entity have too much discretion in contract renegotiations. PII.8d Contract supervision and contract renegotiations in my entity are typically free from of political influences. PII.8e Contract supervision and contract renegotiations in my entity are typically free from undue influences of the head of staff [only non-managers] and other senior officers. PII.8f There is sufficient public oversee on implementation of projects carried out by my entity EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 100 END OF QUESTIONNAIRE Q Question Answer options END.1 We are at the end of this survey, please share with us a last [text] personal reflection: What do you think is needed to fight corruption in the public administration in Armenia more effectively? Do you have any other inputs or reflection on this topic? END.2 Thank you for your participation in this study! EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 101 >>> Annex C. Indexes from Public Procurement Data > > > T A B L E C . 1 - Corruption Risk Indicators Calculated from Armenian Public Procurement Data Risk indicator Integrity risk Indicator definition Single bidder contract Single bidding is the simplest indication of restricted 0=more than one bid received competition reflecting our corruption definition when only one bid is submitted for a tender on a 1=one bid received competitive market. Procedure type Using procedure types which are less transparent 0=open procedure and require less open competition can indicate the deliberate limitation of the range of bids received and 1=non-open procedure to exclude bids as well as creating more opportunities (e.g. direct contracting) for contracting bodies to repeatedly award contracts to the same well- connected company. 1=one bid received Length of bids A short submission period (number of days between 0=number of days between publication submission period publishing a tender and the submission deadline) of call for tenders and submission leaves less time and thus makes it harder for non- deadline is in an interval considered a connected companies to bid successfully, whereas a red flag well-connected firm can use its inside knowledge to win repeatedly as the buyer can informally inform the 1=number of days between publication favored bidder about the opportunity ahead of time. of call for tenders and submission deadline is in an interval not considered a red flag Length of An excessively short or long decision period (number 0=number of days between submission decision period of days between the submission deadline and the deadline and the contract award contract award decision) can signal integrity risks. decision is in an interval considered a Snap decisions may reflect premeditated assessment, red flag while long decision periods may signal extensive legal challenges to the tender, suggesting that the issuer 1=number of days between submission attempted to limit competition. deadline and the contract award decision is in an interval not considered a red flag for the country EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 103 > > > T A B L E C . 2 - Description of Main Procedure Types Used in Armenia in 2016-2020 Required Contract Procedure number of value type Description Advertisement length bidders threshold Status Open Tender is the preferable form The time limit for submission None None In force tender of procurement; Procurement of bids shall be at least 40 may be carried out using other calendar days. procedure types, exclusively in cases provided for by the Law. Urgent Where an emergency or The time limit for submission None None In force open unforeseen situation arises of bids shall be at least 15 tender accelerated time limits can calendar days. be applied. Electronic For certain items electronic The time limit for submission None None In force auction auction is mandatory. The of bids shall be at least 15 exhaustive list of the items calendar days. is separately defined by the government. For small value purchases, it can be reduced to 7 calendar days. Framework It could be concluded when The invitation is for unlimited None None Abolished Agreement the procurement item was of time. The bids shall be periodic use and was included submitted within 7 days after in the list established by the the receipt of notification. Minister of Finance. Negotiated In a negotiated procedure, 1st stage – minimum 15 days None None Abolished Procedure the buyer can negotiate to submit the bids with/ with pre-qualified or pre- without selected participants and 2nd stage – minimum 20 days Prior conclude an agreement. It to submit the bids Notice can be applied in specific circumstances only such as purchasing research or satisfying emergency needs. Request The procurement may be Minimum 7 and maximum 15 None Maximum In force for carried out through request calendar days for submission 70 million quotation for quotation from specific of bids. AMD bidders for small value procurement of goods, works and services not designated for electronic auctions or framework agreements. EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 104 Table B.2 continued Required Contract Procedure number of value type Description Advertisement length bidders threshold Status Single Procurement may be carried None None 1 million In force source without competition for AMD specific small value contracts. Urgent Single source procurement The bids shall be submitted At least 3 if None In force single can be carried out at an in 3 days (not earlier than the conducted source accelerated timescale in 2nd and not later than the on paper. cases of emergency or other 5th day after the invitation unforeseen situation. is sent). EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 105 >>> Annex D. Indexes from Survey Data Satisfaction Index: Respondent-level average of answers • There are tools to address underperformance among my (standardized to 0-1 indicators) provided to the questions: employees (Managers) (PM.5c) • The respondent is satisfied with own job (MOT.1a) • There are clearly defined criteria / performance indicators • The respondent feels valued in own entity (MOT.1b) (Managers) (PM.5d) • The respondent believes that own job allows him/her to unleash his/her full potential (MOT.1c) • The existing criteria / performance indicators capture well employees’ performance (Managers) (PM.5e) HRM Quality Index: Average of the individual-level sub-indexes: Quality of Career Management: Respondent-level average of answers (standardized to 0-1 indicators) provided to • Quality of Recruitment the questions: • Quality of Performance Management • Quality of Career Management • The processes used for the last promotion was “competitive • Quality of Compensation Management promotion” (PA.2) Quality of Recruitment: Respondent-level average of answers • The respondent is confident or very confident to be (standardized to 0-1 indicators) provided to the questions: promoted to the next professional grade if performing well (PA.4) • For the FIRST position in the public sector, the respondent was hired through an open competitive recruitment (SR.1) • The 3 most important factors for getting a promotion in own entity do not include “Knowing a politician or someone • The assessment methods used in the selection process with political links”, nor “Having family, friends or other for the FIRST position in the public sector included personal connections in my entity”, nor “Providing gifts or “Interview” or “Written examination” (SR.2) unofficial payments” (PA.3) • The 3 most important factors for being hired in own entity Quality of Compensation Management: Respondent-level do not include “Knowing a politician or someone with average of answers (standardized to 0-1 indicators) provided political links”, nor “Having family, friends or other personal to the questions: connections in my entity”, nor “Providing gifts or unofficial payments” (SR.3) • The 3 most important factors for determining the size of monetary bonuses in own entity do not include “Knowing Quality of Performance Management: Respondent-level a politician or someone with political links”, nor “Having average of answers (standardized to 0-1 indicators) provided family, friends or other personal connections in my entity”, to the questions: nor “Providing gifts or unofficial payments” (SP.2) • At least one performance evaluation during the previous • The respondent is satisfied with own total two years (Employees) (PM.1) compensation (SP.4a) • Performance assessment/evaluation report shared with • The respondent is paid at least as much as the respondent (Employees) (PM.2) other employees in other entities with similar responsibilities (SP.4b) • Performance evaluations are not conducted fairly (Employees) (PM.3) Integrity Risk Index: Average of the individual-level sub-indicators: • Performance evaluation is taken seriously in my entity (Managers) (PM.5a) • Unethical behavior in HRM • Undue pressure • Do not feel pressure to give all members of my team a • Conflict of interest index high performance rating (Managers) (PM.5b) EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 107 Unethical behavior in HRM: Indicator capturing if, in the Conflict of interest: Respondent-level average of answers 3 years prior to the survey, the respondent has witnessed or (standardized to 0-1 indicators; “This often happens” and was subject to unethical behaviors by colleagues or managers “This always happen” are coded as 1, “This never happens” is in at least one of the following HR situations (HRM.1): coded as 0) provided to the questions: • Selection and recruitment • Leaving the public service to work in a private company in • Performance evaluation the same sector (CI.1a) • Promotion and career advancement • Transfers • Working on a politicians’ election campaign, and then • Remuneration and rewards being hired by that same politician to work in the public • Training and professional development service (CI.1b) • Travel authorization, events, training, licenses • Dismissals and disciplinary action • Support the electoral campaign of a political party in the course of his/her duties (CI.1c) Undue pressure: An indicator capturing if, in the 3 years prior to the survey, the respondent has been under pressure in at • Awarding contracts to the firms owned by their or their least one of the following situations (PI.1): colleagues’ family members (CI.1d) • Give bonuses or rewards to a specific individual • Having a second job with a private company or running • Recruit a specific individual their own business (CI.1e) • Promote a specific individual • Award a contract to a specific company • Owning, or owning shares, or managing a business in the • Allocate budget to a specific project same sector (directly or indirectly, for example through a • Ignore an undue act trust fund or an intermediate company) (CI.1f) • Share restricted access information • Make the entity’s rules and procedures more flexible • Hiring a family member or friend (CI.1g) • Other undue pressure EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT <<< 108 >>> Annex E. Analysis of Non-Response Rates The survey results should be interpreted considering the despite the question included a separate “don’t know” relatively high rate of respondents that declined to answer option. These considerations should be considered when some of the survey questions. Despite the survey achieved interpreting the survey results, in particular statistics on an overall high participation rate (Section 2.2), the effective public servants’ experiences of integrity risks. number of informative responses varies across questions, depending on the share of respondents that preferred not ii. Survey Fatigue: The survey’s length and complexity might to answer or that reported not knowing the answer to each have induced survey fatigue among participants. Lengthy question. The average share of non-responses across questionnaires can be overwhelming, leading some questions is 32 percent, which is higher than in public servants respondents to skip or decline questions to expedite the surveys conducted in other countries, and higher than in a survey completion process. The survey data suggests that similar public sector accountability survey conducted online in survey fatigue is not a likely explanation, as the position Brazil in 2021 (World Bank, 2021a), even when considering of the question in the survey does not explain the non- very similar questions (Table D.1). To address the non- response rates across questions. For example, questions response bias, researcher generally use two approaches: on internal/external audits have higher non-response rate 1) constructing question-level weights; and 2) reporting the when they ask about political influences rather than their share of non-responses explicitly within an interval. Both effectiveness, despite being asked next to each other options have their merits, and the choice between them in the questionnaire (Table D.2). While designing the depends on the specific research goals, data quality, and the questionnaire, survey team also placed great emphasis nature of the survey. For the purposes of this analysis, unless on ensuring that each question was not only accurately indicated otherwise, the share of non-responses is explicitly translated into Armenian but also designed to be easily considered and reported in the analysis. Some statistics comprehensible to the target audience. (Section 3) is also reported within an interval defined by the assumptions made on the non-responses. It is a simpler and iii. Trust and Anonymity Concerns: Some individuals may more straightforward approach that explicitly communicates hesitate to share negative views or experiences due to the extent of non-response for each question. We chose doubts about the confidentiality of their responses. This not to interpret the non-response data, as the underlying mistrust can stem from past experiences, or broader reasons are not definitively confirmed and remain speculative. cultural and societal norms related to reporting negative Without concrete information on the motives behind the lack information. The survey questionnaire was thoughtfully of response, we refrained from making any assumptions designed with these trust and anonymity concerns in mind. or conclusions. To mitigate these issues and encourage participation, the survey team took several measures. The team structured There could be various reasons explaining the relatively high the questions to focus on respondents’ knowledge of rate of respondents that declined to answer to some of the experiences rather than directly asking for their personal survey questions. These factors include: views or experiences. This approach helps respondents feel more at ease, as they are not required to reveal their i. Lack of Knowledge: In some instances, respondents own sentiments but can instead provide information about might not have possessed the necessary information observations or knowledge of others’ experiences. The to answer particular questions accurately. This lack of survey explicitly conveyed assurances of confidentiality knowledge could lead to non-response as individuals and anonymity to respondents. Clear statements were may not want to provide incomplete or inaccurate included to inform participants that their individual responses. However, based on the survey results, responses would be kept confidential and aggregated it remains uncertain whether non-responses can be for analysis, further emphasizing the commitment to data attributed solely to a lack of knowledge. On the one hand, privacy. The survey team transparently communicated the non-response rate to procurement-related questions the data handling and reporting processes. Respondents is lower among procurement specialists than technical were informed about how their data would be collected, staff involved in public procurement for their entity but stored, and analyzed. This transparency aimed to instill without a specific public procurement background. confidence that their information would be treated with the However, this explanation cannot easily apply to less utmost care and professionalism. technical questions that concern standard experiences of public servants, and in knowledge questions a non- iv. Low Perception of Utility: Non-response may also be negligible share of public servants preferred not to answer influenced by respondents’ lack belief that reporting issues through the survey will lead to meaningful change. If questions is the respondents’ reluctance to express individuals perceive a lack of government responsiveness negative views or experiences. Non-responses seem to to previous feedback, they may question the utility of be primarily driven by respondents not feeling comfortable participating in the survey. We could not test this theory in sharing negative views or experiences, and indeed the using the survey results. share of non-responses is higher for the most sensitivity questions in the survey (Table D.3). v. Reputation and Organizational Concerns: Fears of reputational harm to their organization can also These considerations were also supported by the inputs discourage respondents from openly sharing negative received by the CPC, the Ministry of Justice, the Civil Service feedback. Individuals may be apprehensive that their Bureau, and the representatives of the entities participating to responses could negatively impact their organization’s the survey during two focus group discussions organized in image. The survey findings also suggest that the most June 2023 in Yerevan. likely explanation for non-responses to certain survey > > > T A B L E D . 1 - Non-response Rates in Armenia and Brazil to Comparable Questions Share of non-responses Armenia Brazil Subject or witnessing unethical practices in the past 3 years* 24% 15% Subject to undue pressure in the past 3 years 14% 8% Type of agents exerting undue pressure (manager, co-workers, etc) 30% 18% (Question asked only to those that reported being subject to some undue pressure) Public servants in own organization engage in unethical behaviors** 30% 14% Factors influencing public servants in reporting cases of corruption*** 60% 7% Factors influencing career progressions in own organization**** 13% 5% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022; Brazil Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2021 (World Bank, 2021a). Note: Both surveys were implemented online and with a focus on corruption and integrity topics. For question *, in Brazil, the questionnaire asked whether respondents have witnessed unethical practice in the public service in the past three years. For question *, in Armenia, the questionnaire asked whether the respondent have been subject or witnessed unethical practices in HRM situations in the last 3 years. For question **, in Brazil, the questionnaire asked how many public servants in own organization engage in unethical practices. For question **, in Armenia, the questionnaire asked the frequency that public servants in own organization engage in unethical practices. For question ***, in Brazil, the questionnaire asked the main difficulties faced by public servants when reporting acts of corruption. For question ***, in Armenia, the questionnaire asked the main factors influencing career progressions in own organization. For question ****, in Brazil, the questionnaire asked the opinion about the progression system own organization, including factors influencing it. For question ****, in Armenia, the questionnaire asked the main factors influencing public servants in not using the whistle-blowing system when they know of cases of corruption. > > > T A B L E D . 2 - Non-response Rates to Internal-External Audit Questions Share of non-responses Internal audits are useful in detecting irregularities in the budget management 20% Internal audits on budget are free from political pressures 56% External audits are useful in detecting irregularities in the budget management 32% External audits on budget are free from political pressures 43% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. > > > T A B L E D . 3 - Non-response Rates across Survey Modules Average share of Modules non-responses per module Public Procurement 43% Assets Declarations 40% Experience of conflicts of interest 37% Whistle-blowing system 36% Anticorruption programs and institutions 36% Awareness on integrity risks 32% Experience of integrity risks 29% Experience of undue pressure 28% Trust 22% Compensation management 22% Career management 18% Performance management 18% Code of Conduct 17% Recruitment management 15% Satisfaction 9% Source: Armenia Public Sector Accountability Survey, 2022. Note: Results unweighted.