<![CDATA[Fraud within regional government agencies (OPD) remains difficult to resolve even though the Inspectorate's supervisory mechanisms have long been in place. This study looks closely at how internal audit, audit quality, and internal control operate in daily practice at the West Java Provincial Inspectorate, and how far these three factors help prevent fraud in OPD, as the Inspectorate continues to strengthen its supervisory role. A descriptive qualitative approach with a case study design was used, with the main data drawn from an in-depth interview with one key informant, a senior auditor who has served the West Java Provincial Inspectorate for more than 27 years, having held a functional auditor position since 2004. The interview shows that risk-based annual supervision planning, auditor independence maintained through audit communication techniques, and consistent follow-up on audit findings are central to detecting and preventing fraud. Potential fraud was found to be spread across three stages: planning (manipulated budget estimates), implementation (fictitious activities, parties, or work contracts), and reporting (manipulated performance figures). Audit quality is supported by 125 mandatory training hours per year, professional skepticism, and an assignment rotation policy among auditors. On the internal control side, OPD rely on the Government Internal Control System (SPIP), duty segregation based on organizational structure, risk management, and an integrated information system (SIPD). Challenges that remain include limited cooperation from some audited parties, the need for more even rotation among OPD activity managers, and a whistleblowing system that employees do not yet fully trust because of concerns over career risk. The study suggests firmer and more proportional disciplinary sanctions, stronger whistleblower protection, consistent risk-based supervision, and a stronger consultative role for the Inspectorate as ways to strengthen fraud prevention in West Java's regional agencies.]]>
