Photo by Alvaro Reyes on Unsplash
The PKPT, or Annual Oversight Work Program, is a work plan that answers four questions: what is overseen, when, by whom, and with what budget. For the Inspectorate, the PKPT determines where limited auditor resources are directed. Since Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026, the targets and focus of oversight must be based on priorities and risk, not just a repeat of last year's list of objects.
Regulatory changes in 2025 to 2026 that affect this topic are summarized in the article audit and oversight regulation update 2026.
This article covers the definition of the PKPT, its legal basis, the three types of PKPT, the minimum contents under Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026, the risk-based preparation flow, an example risk assessment format, and common mistakes. References checked as of 23 October 2026. For the PKPT of a university oversight unit, read the article University SPI PKPT because the legal basis is different.
What Is the Inspectorate PKPT?
Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 Article 1 point 3 defines the PKPT as the work plan of ministries and regional governments. The PKPT is the detailed form of the current-year plan for guidance and oversight of regional government administration. In practice, the Inspectorate PKPT contains a list of oversight assignments such as audits, reviews, evaluations, monitoring and evaluation, and follow-up monitoring, complete with schedules, teams, and budgets.
These forms of oversight are in line with Government Regulation 12/2017 Article 17, which states that the Regional Head oversees Regional Apparatus (Perangkat Daerah) with the assistance of the regional inspectorate through audits, reviews, monitoring and evaluation, follow-up monitoring, and technical guidance. A general discussion of government internal oversight is in the article public sector internal audit.
What Is the Legal Basis of the Inspectorate PKPT?
| Regulation | Provisions relevant to the PKPT |
|---|---|
| Government Regulation 12/2017 on Guidance and Oversight of Regional Government Administration | Article 12: the Minister coordinates the five-year and annual guidance and oversight plans. The annual plan is determined by the Minister no later than the end of April each year and may be changed as needed. Article 16: APIP oversight is competency-based, with the principles of being professional, independent, objective, non-overlapping, and oriented toward improvement and early warning. |
| Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 on Planning of Guidance and Oversight of Regional Government Administration for 2026 | Issued on 19 January 2026 and promulgated on 2 February 2026 (State Gazette 2026 Number 74). It regulates the definition of the PKPT, the three types of PKPT, minimum contents, determination, reporting, and funding. It is derived from Government Regulation 12/2017 Article 12 paragraph (5). |
| Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 2/2025 (2025 edition) | The predecessor with the same title. The 2026 edition adds the definition of the PKPT, the three types of PKPT, minimum contents, coordination before determination, and reporting and escalation. |
| Government Regulation 18/2016 as amended by Government Regulation 72/2019 on Regional Apparatus | The Inspectorate is the oversight element that assists the Regional Head in guiding and overseeing the implementation of government affairs by Regional Apparatus (Perangkat Daerah) through audits, reviews, evaluations, and follow-up monitoring. |
Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 23/2007 on guidelines for oversight procedures is still listed in the regulation database, but it is derived from Government Regulation 79/2005, which has been revoked by Government Regulation 12/2017. Check its suitability first before using it as the sole reference for the PKPT format.
What Are the Main Provisions of Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 on the PKPT?
- Based on priorities and risk. Article 4 requires the targets and focus of oversight to be prepared based on priorities and risk.
- Three PKPTs. Article 6 paragraphs (1) and (2): the oversight plan is set out in the ministry PKPT, the provincial PKPT, and the regency or city PKPT.
- Considering auditor capacity. Article 6 paragraph (3): the PKPT is prepared on a risk-based approach, taking into account the availability of functional overseers of regional government affairs and/or functional auditors.
- Determination. Article 7: the ministry PKPT is determined by a ministerial decision, while the provincial and regency or city PKPTs are determined by a decision of the Regional Head. The provincial PKPT is determined after coordination with the Minister through the Inspectorate General. The regency or city PKPT is determined after coordination with the governor through the provincial inspectorate.
- Reporting. Article 8: the provincial inspector reports to the Minister through the Inspector General, and the regency or city inspector reports to the governor through the provincial inspectorate. Where there are indications of abuse of authority or state or regional losses, reporting is mandatory.
- Funding. Article 9: sourced from the state budget (APBN), the provincial regional budget (APBD), and the regency or city regional budget (APBD).
Two points should be noted. First, the text of Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 contains no specific calendar deadline for preparing the PKPT. The stated deadline is for the national annual plan in Government Regulation 12/2017 Article 12, namely the end of April. Second, the text does not explicitly state that the Inspectorate prepares the PKPT; what it states is that the PKPT is determined by the Regional Head. In practice, the technical preparation is done by the Inspectorate as the regional APIP, while the determination rests with the Regional Head.
Annex IV of Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026, for the Regional Head's oversight track over Regional Apparatus (Perangkat Daerah), also contains supporting targets such as APIP capability level 3, SPIP maturity, risk management, and continuing education of at least 120 hours per year. An explanation of the capability levels is in the article APIP capability.
What Are the Minimum Contents of the PKPT?
Article 6 paragraph (4) sets four minimum parts. The right-hand column gives examples of materials commonly prepared, not standard requirements.
| PKPT part under Article 6 paragraph (4) | Contents under the regulation | Examples of materials prepared by the Inspectorate |
|---|---|---|
| a. Introduction | Background, objectives, scope | Legal basis, summary of last year's oversight results, regional priority issues |
| b. Oversight policy direction | Objects of oversight; risk level calculation; priorities; forms of oversight; technical matters and provisions; resource calculation | List of oversight objects, risk score of each object, priority order, choice of form (audit, review, evaluation, monitoring), person-day calculation against the number of auditors |
| c. Implementation planning | Schedule and budget | Monthly assignment calendar, budget per assignment |
| d. Closing | Conclusion | Provisions for changes and reporting mechanism |
What Is the Flow for Preparing a Risk-Based PKPT?
The regulation does not set a single standard flow, but the elements in Article 6 paragraph (4) letter b form a logical sequence. Below is a commonly used workflow. The approach is in line with the principle of a risk-based audit plan in GIAS Standard 9.4, which requires a risk assessment to be performed at least once a year. A general explanation is in the article risk based audit.
- Map the oversight objects. Compile a list of Regional Apparatus (Perangkat Daerah), programs, activities, and other units within the scope of oversight, including villages because Government Regulation 12/2017 Article 19 places village oversight under the responsibility of the regent or mayor, assisted by the sub-district head and the inspectorate. The concept of this list is discussed in the article audit universe.
- Set the criteria and risk values. Commonly used criteria: budget size, public impact, previous findings, control assessment results, and policy changes. The assessment method is discussed in the article risk assessment.
- Rank the priorities. High-risk objects come first, while low-risk objects are overseen in a lighter way or on a rotating basis.
- Calculate capacity. Convert the number of functional auditors and effective working hours into person-days. Article 6 paragraph (3) requires auditor availability to be taken into account.
- Choose the form of oversight and prepare the schedule. Decide whether an object is audited, reviewed, evaluated, or simply monitored, then spread the assignments across the year so the workload does not pile up.
- Prepare the budget, coordinate, and determine. Follow the coordination path in Article 7 before the Regional Head's decision is issued.
- Report and revise when necessary. Government Regulation 12/2017 Article 12 paragraph (6) allows the plan to change as needed, for example because of an urgent request or a complaint. Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 has no specific article on revising the PKPT, so document the reason and approval for each change.
What Does a Risk Assessment Example for PKPT Priorities Look Like?
The table below is only an illustration with fictitious objects and figures. The risk score is calculated as impact (1 to 5) multiplied by likelihood (1 to 5), so the highest score is 25.
| Object (fictitious) | Impact | Likelihood | Risk score | Priority | Form of oversight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agency A: infrastructure capital expenditure | 5 | 4 | 20 | High | Performance and compliance audit |
| Agency B: basic health services | 4 | 3 | 12 | Currently | Evaluation and Inspection |
| Section C: asset management | 3 | 4 | 12 | Currently | Review |
| Agency D: small routine activities | 2 | 2 | 4 | Low | Monitoring and follow-up monitoring |
This example also shows why the priority threshold needs to be set before the assessment, not after. With a clear threshold, leadership and auditors both understand why certain objects are not included in this year's PKPT.
What Are Common Mistakes When Preparing a PKPT?
- Copying last year's PKPT without a new risk assessment, so it is not risk-based as required by Article 4.
- Ignoring auditor capacity. The number of assignments exceeds the available person-days, and the PKPT is then revised many times.
- Not including the risk level calculation, even though it is a minimum part of the PKPT.
- Auditing all objects in the same way, even though reviews, evaluations, and follow-up monitoring can be used for lower-risk objects.
- Leaving no room for urgent assignments, so every complaint shifts the schedule that has already been set.
- No follow-up monitoring. A good plan is of no use if the recommendations from last year's oversight results are not yet resolved. The practice is discussed in the article follow-up on internal audit findings.
How Does Internal Audit Software Help Prepare and Monitor the PKPT?
Audithink is internal audit management software with six main features: risk assessment, audit planning, work program templates, notifications, follow-up monitoring, and automated reports. For the Inspectorate, risk assessment and audit planning help document risk scores and prepare assignment schedules; work program templates help standardize procedures; notifications and follow-up monitoring help track deadlines and the status of recommendations; automated reports help prepare oversight reports from data that has already been recorded.
Audithink does not determine the PKPT and does not replace the Regional Head's decision, the auditor's judgment, or systems required by regulation. An overview of its use for regional APIP is in the article Audithink for Inspectorates.
FAQ on the Inspectorate PKPT
What Is the Inspectorate PKPT?
The PKPT, or Annual Oversight Work Program, is the oversight work plan of ministries and regional governments. Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 Article 1 point 3 describes it as the detailed form of the annual guidance and oversight plan. It covers the objects, risk levels, priorities, forms of oversight, resources, schedule, and budget.
Who determines the PKPT of a regency or city?
Under Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 Article 7, the PKPT of a regency or city is determined by a decision of the Regional Head, after coordination with the governor through the provincial inspectorate.
Must the PKPT be risk-based?
Yes. Article 4 requires the targets and focus of oversight to be based on priorities and risk, and Article 6 paragraph (3) requires the PKPT to be prepared on a risk-based approach, taking into account the availability of functional overseers or auditors.
When must the PKPT be completed?
Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 contains no calendar deadline for the PKPT. Government Regulation 12/2017 Article 12 states that the national annual guidance and oversight plan is determined by the Minister no later than the end of April each year. Check the coordination schedule from the Inspectorate General of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the provincial inspectorate.
What is the difference between PKPT and an audit work program?
The PKPT is the annual plan for all oversight assignments. The audit work program is the plan of testing steps for a single assignment. The full difference is covered in the article internal audit work program.
May the PKPT be changed during the year?
Government Regulation 12/2017 Article 12 paragraph (6) allows the plan to be changed as needed. Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 has no specific article on changes to the PKPT, so document the reason and approval for each change.
Conclusion
A good PKPT is not a long list of assignments, but the result of choices that can be explained: which objects are overseen first, in what form, and why. Home Affairs Ministerial Regulation 4/2026 provides the minimum framework; its quality is determined by an honest risk assessment and capacity calculation.
If your Inspectorate wants to organize planning, scheduling, and follow-up monitoring in one place, schedule an Audithink demo.
