How can the use and management of special agricultural funds be strengthened? A few suggestions

In recent years, the Audit Bureau of Pingshun County, Shanxi Province, has firmly established the concept of "people-oriented auditing," making the auditing of special agricultural funds the top priority of its audit work, and has repeatedly organized audit forces to audit or conduct audit investigations into the county's special agricultural funds. The audit investigations found that: with the continuous increase in national investment in "agriculture, rural areas and farmers," the deployment of funds has played a positive role in promoting the adjustment of the agricultural industrial structure, improving the rural ecological environment, village appearance and villagers' production and living conditions, enhancing agriculture's ability to withstand disasters, increasing per-unit grain yields and farmers' incomes, and advancing the construction of a new countryside and the development of various public welfare undertakings. However, audits and audit investigations also revealed that some departments and units have problems of irregularities and disciplinary violations in the allocation, use and management of special funds, such as untimely fund allocation, misappropriation and diversion of funds, low efficiency in fund use, and non-standard management, resulting in special funds being unable to properly deliver their intended benefits and affecting the development of undertakings.

I. Problems existing in the use and management of special agricultural funds

1. Untimely allocation of special funds. Finance departments and some competent departments have too many links in the allocation of special funds, resulting in the untimely arrival of earmarked funds; in addition, the timing of special fund arrangements by relevant departments differs greatly from the timing of project implementation. Both factors affect the progress of project implementation, making it difficult for projects to deliver benefits as scheduled;

2. Neglect of management of construction projects. This is mainly manifested in: failure to supervise the project implementation process, resulting in some projects not being implemented in accordance with project approval requirements and standards, so that projects fail to meet design requirements and project quality is affected; major engineering projects not undergoing bidding and tendering, and not undergoing budget and final accounts. Project implementation units sampled in audits generally have problems such as untimely project final accounts, construction units not issuing official invoices, and project units merely treating advance payment receipts for project funds as expenditure, without transferring to fixed assets, resulting in an unclear base figure for fixed assets;

3. Large funding gaps, causing projects to fail to achieve expected benefits. First, supporting funds for projects are not in place; some units rely only on higher-level subsidies to implement projects, resulting in large funding gaps, forming half-finished projects and causing loss and waste of funds; second, fund investment is scattered and cannot form a joint force, affecting the delivery of fund benefits. Audits found that in some administrative villages, multiple departments sought funds, with more than ten projects in a single village, and some project funds existing in every village. Because these villages have no collective income and rely only on special funds issued by higher authorities to launch projects, scattered fund investment prevents projects from achieving expected benefits or playing their due role, the state's beneficial agricultural policies cannot be reflected, and villagers cannot receive tangible benefits.

4. Some fund-using units have impure motives in seeking special funds, ostensibly requesting funds in the name of projects but actually to fill gaps in unit operating expenses, resulting in funds being misappropriated and diverted;

5. The contradiction between a unit's "finances" and its "tasks." With many tasks and little money, special funds are used as emergency funds to patch things up here and there;

6. Chaotic financial management. First, special funds are not managed through separate accounts or standardized accounting. Sampling audits of village-level projects found that some villages did not account for special funds issued by higher authorities according to the nature of the funds, but instead arbitrarily recorded accounting subjects. Some recorded fiscal funds related to income, such as transfer payment funds, under the public reserve fund and public welfare fund subjects, while some recorded fiscal funds related to assets, such as village cement road funds and drinking water difficulty relief funds, under income subjects. In accounting treatment, no separate accounts were used for reflection, and they were mixed with other village financial revenues and expenditures. In addition, non-standard receipts being entered into accounts is widespread. Most of the receipts for reimbursed expenses in the administrative villages sampled were ordinary receipts; in particular, large expenditures such as material purchases and project settlements were all entered into accounts using receipts without obtaining lawful invoices.

7. Fund-investing departments such as finance, poverty alleviation, and development and reform departments do not supervise fund use and management adequately, resulting in low efficiency in fund use.

The existence of the above problems seriously affects the delivery of fund benefits and is also a hidden danger leading to tense relations between rural cadres and the masses. Analyzing the causes, objectively speaking, county finances are tight, village collective income is scarce, the "blood-making" function is insufficient, the necessary funds to maintain the operation of institutions and organizations cannot be guaranteed, and there is no source for project supporting funds and self-raised funds. These factors objectively lead to problems such as misappropriation and diversion and low project benefits. Subjectively speaking, fund-using units have a weak awareness of earmarked funds, a weak concept of consciously complying with national financial and economic laws and discipline, low professional quality, and impure motives in "requesting" funds, among other factors, causing problems in fund use and management. In addition, weak supervision by fund-allocating units and scattered fund investment are also factors that cannot be ignored in the existence of the problems. Fund-allocating units do not supervise adequately in links such as project inspection, fund allocation, project acceptance, and project benefits, emphasizing allocation over supervision. Funds are invested by multiple departments, most of which require supporting funds, causing project fund-using units to rob Peter to pay Paul, attend to one thing and lose another, and struggle to cope. Multi-channel investment and scattered use cannot form a joint force, preventing funds from achieving maximum benefits.

II. Suggestions for strengthening and improving the use and management of special agricultural funds

In response to the above problems in the allocation, management and use of special funds, the audit suggestions are:

First, take effective measures to strengthen village-level collective economies. The village-level collective economy is the main material basis for advancing the building of a socialist new countryside and plays a very important role in promoting sound and rapid economic and social development in rural areas and realizing common prosperity for farmers. In response to the uneven development of collective economies among villages and the current situation in most villages of "no underground resources, no capable people above ground, and a serious mindset of 'waiting, relying and asking,'" support must be given in light of each village's actual conditions and local circumstances, from aspects such as public opinion guidance, organizational construction, and policy support. Especially in funding support, by increasing investment in village-level fiscal transfer payments and rural infrastructure construction, the burden on village collective organizations in building public welfare undertakings should be reduced, laying the foundation for developing characteristic agriculture and strengthening the collective economy. At the same time, introduce supportive policies for developing the collective economy, such as not requiring supporting funds for poverty alleviation projects and increasing loan support for collective economic development funds, to help economically weak villages develop industries, strengthen income, and strive to form a sound development mechanism of "using blood transfusion to promote blood-making." For some administrative villages with small populations, remote locations and little potential, carry out whole-village relocation to promote the transformation and development of weak villages.

Second, strengthen supervision to ensure that funds are used exclusively for their designated purposes. Units that allocate special fiscal funds must strictly comply with the Measures for the Management of Fiscal Poverty Alleviation Funds, the Measures for the Management of Reimbursement-Based Fiscal Poverty Alleviation Funds and other relevant provisions on special fiscal funds, increase supervision over the use and management of invested funds, and overcome the mentality of "only caring about disbursing funds, not about benefits." Second, allocating units must communicate and coordinate well, integrate special agricultural funds, and implement bundled use of funds. In addition, in fund investment and management, finance departments and competent departments must strictly control the "three gates," namely: the gate of project approval inspection, the gate of fund use inspection, and the gate of fund project benefit acceptance; carefully review relevant materials for project approval, inspect on site the preliminary preparation of projects, and thereby determine the feasibility of project implementation. At the same time, allocate funds promptly according to project implementation progress, reduce as much as possible the links and time of fund allocation, and avoid idle funds and interception. Conduct regular or irregular inspections of project implementation, inspect project implementation on site, and for project units that fail to implement projects as required and fail to use funds according to regulations, in addition to recovering funds, hold relevant personnel accountable, so as to ensure the safety and integrity of special funds, enable state-invested funds to deliver due benefits, and enable farmers to truly receive tangible benefits.

Third, strictly manage village-level finances and standardize financial behavior. With the gradual advancement of new countryside construction, the state's investment in rural infrastructure and social undertaking construction continues to increase; managing and using funds well and ensuring that the state's beneficial agricultural policies are implemented are of great significance. Fund-using units must strengthen awareness of earmarked funds, strictly implement relevant provisions on the management of special funds, and standardize the use of invested funds. In particular, for major project investment used for purchasing and building production, management and public welfare facilities, standardize project contracting, undertaking, project budget and final accounts and other behavior; through formal contracting procedures, sign contracts with winning bidders, and upon project completion, undergo acceptance by relevant units, so that limited funds deliver due benefits. In addition, village-level expenditures must strictly control the "four gates," namely: the village accountant, the village party secretary, the village democratic financial management group, and the township economic management station, to ensure that village expenditure receipts are standardized and facts are clear. Strictly implement the Accounting Law and other financial and economic regulations, standardize village-level financial accounting, truthfully reflect the source and use of government subsidy funds received by village collective organizations, implement separate account management and earmarked funds for designated purposes, and ensure the efficiency of fund use.