Annual Report 2021 Court of Auditors

Before you is the Annual Report 2021 of the joint Court of Audit municipality of Laarbeek and the municipality of Gemert - Bakel. With this report, the Court fulfills the legal obligation to prepare an annual report on activities in 2021.

In this reporting year, the work focused on conducting a citizen survey for both municipalities, a study on debt assistance in the municipality of Laarbeek and the start of the study on subsidizing professional organizations and institutions in the municipality of Gemert - Bakel.

The Court expresses thanks for the support received from the Registry and the professional cooperation of the civil service of both municipalities.

January 2022.

Frits van Vugt Jeroen Sanders Rob Malag

The Court of Auditors Gemert-Bakel - Laarbeek had the following composition as of January 1, 2021:

• Mr. F. van Vugt (chairman)
• Mr. J. Sanders (member)
• Mr. R. Malag (member)

There were no changes in composition in 2021.

In 2021, the Court was provided with technical and advisory support by Mr. R. van Heijnsbergen, Registrar of the Municipality of Laarbeek. The support and advice received has been of added value to the Court Committee. The Court experiences the cooperation as constructive and positive.

The Court of Auditors is an independent body whose tasks and powers are described in the Municipal Law and the Regulation Municipal Court of Auditors Gemert-Bakel and Laarbeek 2015 and Covenant Joint Court of Auditors Municipalities of Gemert-Bakel and Laarbeek adopted by the municipal councils. In addition, the Court has rules of procedure and a research protocol.

The Court conducts research into the effects of municipal policy and the efficiency and effectiveness of municipal policy, municipal management and organization, the legality of municipal management, as well as the efficiency and effectiveness of institutions whose activities are wholly or substantially funded by the municipality.

There is a direction group for the Court. In 2021, the regiegroep included Mr. J. Gruijters (chairman), Ms. D. Methorst - van Kessel, Mr. R. van den Berkmortel and Mr. S. Janszen. The direction group was supported by Mr. R. van Heijnsbergen. In 2021 there was no need for a consultation. In early 2022, the direction group will be involved in the selection of new topics.

The City Council may ask the Court of Auditors to investigate through the direction group, with the Court being independent in its final choice of subject matter. Every year it draws up a research plan and annual report.

The results, conclusions and recommendations of investigations conducted are recorded in a draft report. This draft report is successively submitted to the officials and administrators involved in the investigation. They are given the opportunity to respond to it. After the responses have been processed, the Court of Audit presents the report to the City Council.

Meetings in 2021

During fiscal year 2021, physical meetings were hardly possible. Many contact moments took place by telephone or digitally. During the reporting year, the Court had 21 contact moments for its own meetings and meetings with third parties in connection with the conduct of the investigations. In addition, there were individual contact moments between the members themselves and between the chairman and the registrars, officials and third parties.

Research presented

Prior

The Court of Auditors planned to present four studies in 2021. For both municipalities the citizen survey, for the municipality of Laarbeek the debt assistance report and for the municipality of Gemert - Bakel the research on subsidizing professional organizations and institutions. We were not successful in this. We were unable to complete the research for the municipality of Gemert - Bakel into the subsidizing of professional organizations and institutions in 2021. This requires explanation and justification which we would like to share with you. Unfortunately, personal circumstances prevented us from operating at full stretch as the Court of Auditors for the entire year, fortunately this circumstance has turned for the better. In addition, we experienced a delay of a technical nature with the citizen survey researcher, which resulted in us not being able to complete the surveys until June instead of the first quarter.

The citizen survey: in general

Residents are important because they can best indicate the livability of a municipality and the neighborhood in which they live. In addition, residents are important to the municipality because they are increasingly taking responsibility for each other and for their environment. Initiatives from residents and citizen networks help municipalities solve social tasks. The more responsibility residents themselves take for their environment and the greater their self-determination, the smaller the role of the municipality can become. This requires the municipality to give residents more space, facilitate and work together with them. The citizen survey provides insight into the preconditions for citizen participation, the manifestations of social participation, the needs in the cooperative relationship with the municipality and their own self-reliance. The results of the citizen survey offer concrete starting points for action perspectives. A major advantage of the citizens' survey is the possibility for municipalities to compare results on the Waar staat je website and establish relationships with other municipal data. For each theme, the subjective results of the citizen survey have been juxtaposed with objective data (statistics) from municipalities. Based on the analyses on the Waar staat je website, municipalities can substantiate policy, shape it further or decide to adjust it.

The citizen poll of the Waar staat je website gives municipalities insight into the opinions of their residents. The citizen poll is administered to residents of the municipality via a questionnaire. The questionnaire addresses the following four social issues:

1. Residential and living environment
2. Resident-municipality relationship
3. Municipal services
4. Care and welfare

We commissioned the research firm PON & Telos to conduct this survey. In addition to the standard questions, some specific questions were added (customized questions) for which input was requested from the council groups and the college. The input collected was converted by the Court of Auditors into a few additional questions.

In contrast to other investigations by the Court of Auditors, there has been no mutual hearing, nor has an administrative response been requested. The Court's motivation for this is that no research was done into municipal policy or implementation, but only into the opinions and wishes of residents. There is no point in hearing both sides, because it is a perception survey from which everyone can draw their own conclusions.

The citizen survey: municipality of Gemert - Bakel

'Residents of Gemert-Bakel have spoken ...'

A letter was sent by the Court in May to a sample of 5,827 residents asking them to participate in the survey. Relatively more invitations were sent to the inhabitants of the small(er) centers of Milheeze, Handel, De Mortel, De Rips and Elsendorp in order to get a sufficient response in these centers as well. A total of 1,049 inhabitants from Gemert-Bakel completed the questionnaire (response rate is 18%), most did so online and a limited number by completing a paper questionnaire. The number of 1,049 participants is more than enough to obtain reliable statements based on the responses at the municipal level (maximum margin of error: 3.0%). This also applies to the nuclei of Gemert and Bakel (maximum margin of error: 4.1% and 4.6% respectively). For the other cores this reliability indicator does not apply (max. margin of error is above 5%), yet the response rate for these cores is sufficiently large to assign an indicative value to it. The percentages at the municipality level are weighted by the variable nucleus (to correct for the overrepresentation of small nuclei) and age (because relatively fewer young residents participated in the survey).

The results of the citizen survey can be read in the released report which is posted on the municipality's website or available through the clerk's office.

The report and recommendations were discussed and explained by Mr. Van Vugt at the meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee on September 14, 2021, and the City Council adopted the conclusions and recommendations on December 16, 2021.

The citizen survey: municipality of Laarbeek

'Residents have their say, the municipality of Laarbeek's move'

A letter was sent by the Court in May to a sample of 4,650 residents asking them to participate in the survey. Relatively more invitations were sent to the inhabitants of the small villages of Lieshout and Mariahout, in order to get a sufficient response in these villages as well. A total of 839 residents from Laarbeek completed the questionnaire (response rate is thus 18%), most of whom did so online and a limited number by completing a paper questionnaire. The number of 839 participants is more than enough to obtain reliable statements based on the answers at the municipal level (maximum margin of error: 3.3%). This also applies to the cores Beek en Donk, Aarle- Rixtel and Lieshout (maximum margin of error: below 5%). For Mariahout, this reliability indicator does not apply, yet the response rate for this core is sufficiently large to assign it an indicative value. The percentages at the municipality level are weighted by the variable core (to correct for the overrepresentation of small cores) and age (because relatively fewer young residents participated in the survey).

The results of the citizen poll can be read in the released report which is posted on the municipality's website or available through the clerk's office.

The report and opinions were discussed and explained by Mr. Van Vugt at the July 22, 2021 meeting of the council's General Affairs Committee. The Presidium decided on December 21, 2021 to deal with the report after the elections. In addition to the reports, we also forwarded to the college and council members, through the clerk, the responses to the open questions. These anonymized responses provide a good insight into issues affecting individual citizens.

Research debt assistance municipality of Laarbeek

The Court asked council groups in 2020 for research topics for a new study to be launched. One of the topics mentioned was: debt assistance. This included points of interest about the use of facilities, the effect, client experiences and whether there are good practices in the country to learn from. The fact that in late 2020 debt assistance had been in the media because of a data breach in which confidential data had ended up with third parties proved to be an additional trigger for this study. Debt relief has also attracted national attention due to the recent benefits affair. National figures show that one in five households in the Netherlands has high-risk debts.1 Often they are unable to keep these debts manageable and repay them on their own. The debts become problematic and it takes too long to pay them off, also because residents dare not or cannot ask for help, for example because of shame or powerlessness. Debts are then no longer a temporary, isolated problem of one person. They become major problems with an enormous impact on the lives of a large group of people and institutions directly and indirectly involved. This is why the government has a task to advise and assist residents with problematic debts: debt assistance. The Municipal Debt Relief Act of 2012 (Wgs) placed this task in the hands of municipalities.

Research Objective

The City Council's need to understand efficiency and effectiveness play a large role in the objective of the study. The Court therefore wanted this study to understand the extent to which the goals with respect to debt assistance are being achieved and whether this is being done in an efficient and effective manner. There were three central questions:

1. How is debt assistance organized and set up in the municipality of Laarbeek?
2. To what extent is debt assistance efficient and effective pursuant to the vision, approach and stated goals of the adopted debt assistance policy?
3. How will the city council be informed?

In this investigation, the Court was guided by the agency BMC. Based on the findings, eight conclusions were formulated and a dozen recommendations attached to them. The final report was made available to the college and council members on December 24, 2021. Mr. Van Vugt and the BMC firm presented the report to the Social Domain Committee on January 11, 2022. The city council agreed to the conclusions and recommendations on January 27, 2022.

Research grant granting professional organizations and institutions in the municipality of Gemert - Bakel

Unfortunately, it was not possible to complete and present this study in 2021. In 2022, after the elections, the report will be presented to the new City Council.

In November, the Court oriented itself to possible topics of research. During the reporting year, no new topics were proposed by political groups, individual city council members, agencies and/or citizens. Before the Court makes a decision, on the topics to be investigated 2022, political groups will be consulted. By April 2022, the Court hopes to have made its choice and present it to the steering committee. Naturally, for the municipality of Gemert - Bakel, the subject of granting subsidies is already on the agenda and possibly also the investigation into the provision level.

The Court performs its work within the budget made available for it by the council. In the covenant joint Court of Audit municipalities of Gemert-Bakel and Laarbeek it has been agreed that the participating municipalities make available an annual budget of € 1.00 per inhabitant. The implementation costs of the Court will be charged to this budget. The committee has an official secretary and carries out the investigations together with hired external experts. In short, this results in the following financial accountability.

Balance 2021: € 38,420
To 2022 €26,630

Research costs were largely incurred for studies in 2021.

The members of the Court of Auditors receive a monthly allowance for both audit committees, including expense allowance, of €200 for the chairman and €175 for the members. For in-house research, the hourly rate of € 55 per hour is used. The other costs relate to membership in the Netherlands Association of Courts of Audit and Auditors (NVRR). From the balance 2021, in accordance with Article 12 paragraph 4 regulation -> maximum transfer = 50% of annual budget <- an amount of € 26,630 will be added to the 2022 budget.