Ekuitas: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Akreditasi No.
158/E/KPT/2021
DOI: 10.
24034/j25485024.
p-ISSN 2548 Ae 298X
e-ISSN 2548 Ae 5024
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MONITORING CENTER FOR PREVENTION AS A
MODERATING DETERMINANT OF FRAUD PREVENTION
Endar Pituringsih endar07ringsih@unram.
Prayitno Basuki Akram
Liga Ayun Selatan University of Mataram
ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui pengaruh Gaya Kepemimpinan.
Budaya Manajemen Etis, dan Sistem Pengendalian Internal terhadap Pencegahan Fraud yang dimoderasi oleh Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) pada Kabupaten/Kota di Pulau Lombok.
Populasi dalam penelitian ini berjumlah sebanyak 2.
124 pegawai.
Sampel penelitian ini dipilih dengan teknik non-probability purposive sampling, sehingga diperoleh sebanyak 100 responden.
Data penelitian ini kemudian dianalisis menggunakan metode Partial Least Square-Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM).
Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa secara parsial.
Budaya Manajemen Etis dan Sistem Pengendalian Internal berpengaruh positif terhadap Pencegahan Fraud, sedangkan Gaya Kepemimpinan justru berpengaruh negatif.
Selain itu, hasil penelitian juga mengindikasikan bahwa implementasi Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) belum mampu memoderasi hubungan antara variabel-variabel determinan terhadap Pencegahan Fraud pada Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten dan Kota di Pulau Lombok.
Pemerintah daerah kabupaten/kota di seluruh Pulau Lombok perlu meningkatkan upaya evaluasi dan pengawasan agar tindakan kecurangan .
dapat dicegah dan diminimalisir, sehingga tidak menimbulkan kerugian yang pada akhirnya berdampak pada penurunan kualitas pelayanan kepada masyarakat.
Kata kunci: gaya kepemimpinan, budaya etis manajemen, sistem pengendalian internal, monitoring center for prevention (MCP), pencegahan fraud
ABSTRACT
This study examines the effect of Leadership Style.
Ethical Management Culture, and Internal Control System on Fraud Prevention, moderated by the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) in each Regency/City across Lombok Island.
The population of this study consists of two thousand one hundred twenty-four employees.
Then, the sample was selected using a non-probability purposive sampling technique, resulting in 100 respondents.
The research data were analyzed using the Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) method.
Therefore, this study resulted that, partially.
Ethical Management Culture and Internal Control System positively affect Fraud Prevention.
Whereas this study found that Leadership Style has a negative effect.
Furthermore, its finding indicates that implementing the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) has not been able to moderate the determinants of Fraud Prevention within local governments in the Regencies and Cities across Lombok Island.
So, the local governments throughout Lombok Island need to enhance their evaluation and supervision efforts.
The fraudulent acts can be prevented and minimized, thereby avoiding losses that could ultimately lead to a decline in the quality of public services.
Key words: leadership style, ethical culture of management, internal control system, monitoring center for prevention, fraud prevention.
Ekuitas: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Ae Volume 9.
Number 3.
September 2025 : 338 Ae 350
INTRODUCTION
Corruption affects a country to its economic downturn.
Instead, it has other impacts, such as: reducing investment, increasing income inequality, increasing state debt, hampering the development of public facilities, decreasing state revenue from taxes, and other problems (Corruption Eradication Commission, 2.
Corruption Perception Index (IPK) in 2021 published by Transparency International Indonesia (TII).
Indonesia is still one of the most corrupt countries among other G20 countries with a score of 38 which is ranked 96 out of 180 countries (Transparency International, 2.
Based on a survey conducted by the Central Statistics Agency in 2021.
Indonesia's Corruption Behavior Index (IPAK) is still low, which is in the range of 3.
This Corruption Behavior Index is an indicator to measure the level of public permissiveness towards anticorruption behavior with a focus on the three main corruption phenomena: bribery, extortion, and nepotism.
The Corruption Behavior Index score uses a scale of 0- 5, which indicates that the higher the score, the better, meaning that people have more anticorruption behavior (Central Statistics Agency.
Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) stated that there were 553 corruption cases prosecuted by APH, namely the Corruption Eradication Commission, the Attorney General's Office, and the Police during 2021, with a potential State Loss of 29.
438 trillion.
The Corruption Eradication Commission has handled 1,194 corruption cases from 2004 to These corruption cases comprised 775 cases of bribery, 266 cases of procurement of goods and services, 50 cases of budget abuse, 41 cases of money laundering, 26 cases of extortion, 25 cases of licensing, and 11 cases of obstruction of investigations.
In the last 10 years, data from the Corruption Eradication Commission portal shows that there are 46 regents/ mayors and 10 governors who have been caught in corruption, mostly in the budget management sector with the mode of bribery, followed by the procurement of goods/services and licensing sectors (Transparency International, 2.
The government always prioritizes preventing and eradicating corruption, from preparing regulations to creating a series of systems to prevent corruption.
One of the regulations established is Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 54 of 2018 concerning the National Strategy for Corruption Prevention (Stranas PK, 2.
It aims to encourage corruption prevention efforts to be more effective and There is also a derivative of this Presidential Regulation in the form of a Joint Decree between the Chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission.
Minister of National Development Planning / Head of the National Development Planning Agency.
Minister of Home Affairs.
Minister of Administrative Reform and Bureaucratic Reform, and Presidential Chief of Staff regarding Corruption Prevention Action for The government has also created several applications to prevent fraud, such as procuring goods and services.
Based on Presidential Regulation Number 54 of 2018 concerning the National Strategy for Corruption Prevention (Stranas PK), the Corruption Eradication Commission, as a corruption prevention agency, also makes applications to prevent fraud, one of which is the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP).
The Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) is an integrated application developed by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) to support the coordination, supervision, and monitoring of corruption prevention efforts within regional governments.
Through the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP), the Corruption Eradication Commission can systematically monitor the implementation of corruption prevention programs across various government sectors, such as budget management, procurement of goods and services, licensing, civil service (ASN) From the various corruption cases in Indonesia, the Corruption Eradication Implementation of the Monitoring Center for Prevention.
Ae Pituringsih.
Basuki.
Akram.
Selatan Commission has focused on 8 intervention areas, which are vulnerable points for fraud opportunities in the government.
Research gap .
ifference in research result.
shows that the Internal Control System.
Ethical Management Culture, and Leadership Style can affect or not affect efforts to prevent fraud.
Desviana et al.
states that Leadership Style does not influence The researchers are interested in examining the Internal Control System.
Management Ethical Culture, and Leadership Style in fraud prevention efforts with the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) as Regarding organizational culture.
Suharto .
provides results that organizational culture has no significant effect on fraud prevention.
However, leadership style, whistleblowing system, and employee knowledge significantly positively affect fraud prevention.
Furthermore.
Pratiwi et al.
provide evidence that the transformational leadership style positively affects fraud prevention, where the better the transformational leadership style, the better the fraud prevention is Meanwhile, the internal control system does not affect fraud prevention.
It is due to the relatively low level of SPIP maturity that this tool cannot be used to detect fraud The novelty in this study is to use the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) as a moderating variable in efforts to prevent fraud in the NTB Provincial Government.
Under Stranas PK 2018, maps eight areas that are potentially or prone to corruption.
This research will be conducted in the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) Intervention Area: Planning and Budgeting.
Licensing.
Procurement of Goods and Services.
APIP Capability.
ASN Management.
Local Tax Optimization.
Regional Asset Management.
Village Fund Management .
pecifically for Governments in the Regenc.
Efforts to minimize the occurrence of Fraud in Government, especially in the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) Intervention Area, are one way to realize good governance.
LITERATURE REVIEW AND
HYPOTHESIS GENERATION
Leadership Style According to Dale .
, leadership style is how a leader carries out his leadership functions and how it is seen by the people he leads.
Without good leadership, it will not be easy to achieve organizational Therefore, leadership is the backbone of organizational development.
Meanwhile, according to Gibson .
, leadership styles are various patterns of behavior preferred by leaders in directing and influencing workers.
The better a leader's leadership style, the less fraud his employees will commit.
Research conducted by Desviana .
found a negative influence of the Government Sector on Leadership Style and Fraud.
Management Ethical Culture Robbins .
stated that an ethical organizational culture tends to form high ethical standards among its members.
If a culture is strong and supports high ethical standards, it will have a very powerful and positive influence on the behavior of its When the organizational culture is good, employees will be encouraged to avoid fraud.
Research conducted by Dhany et al.
supports this.
Organizational culture positively affects fraud.
The better and more ethical the organizational culture, the less likely fraud will occur.
Internal Control System Internal control is an organizational plan and business methods.
It is used to safeguard assets, provide accurate and reliable information, encourage and improve the efficiency of the organization's operations, and encourage conformity with established Aviva .
explains that one of the factors for fraud is opportunity.
Fraud that occurs due to opportunity arises from a weak and ineffective internal control system.
It is in line with the results of previous research conducted by Pratiwi et al.
, where their research shows that internal control has a negative effect on fraud tendencies.
Ekuitas: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Ae Volume 9.
Number 3.
September 2025 : 338 Ae 350 shows that the tendency of employees to commit fraud can be reduced by internal The better the internal control, the lower the level of fraud that occurs in an organization or company.
Fraud Fraud is a form of intentional deception, including lying, stealing, and embezzlement .
mproperly changing assets for one's benefi.
This type of fraud cannot often be detected because the parties who work together enjoy the benefits .
ymbiotic mutualis.
includes abuse of authority or conflict of interest, bribery, illegal gratuities, and economic extortion.
Fraud can be classified based on the type of fraud committed.
The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) .
classifies fraud in 3 classifications which are often referred to as the fraud tree.
The first is misappropriation of assets (Asset Missappropriatio.
, as the misuse of assets of the company or other This type is the easiest to detect because it is tangiable or can be measured or calculated .
efined valu.
The second is Fraudulent Statement actions taken by officials or executives of a government agency to cover up the actual financial condition by conducting financial engineering in the presentation of its financial statements to obtain profits.
Instead, it could be analogized to the term window dressing.
The thid is This type of fraud is the most difficult to detect because it involves cooperation with other parties, such as bribery and corruption, which is the most common type in developing countries where law enforcement is weak.
There is still a lack of awareness of good governance, so the integrity factor is still questionable.
Monitoring Center for Prevention The Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) is an integrated application developed by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) to support the coordination, supervision, and monitoring of corruption prevention efforts within regional governments.
Through the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP), the KPK can systematically monitor the implementation of corruption prevention programs across various government sectors, such as budget management, procurement of goods and services, licensing, civil service (ASN) management, and regional revenue The primary goal of developing the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) is to enhance transparency, accountability, and good governance while encouraging systemic improvements in corruption prevention at the regional level.
Regional governments are expected to actively and continuously respond to and follow up on findings or recommendations in the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) dashboard (Stranas PK, 2.
The corruption prevention efforts of the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) focus on improving Local Governance which includes eight Intervention Areas, namely APBD Planning and Budgeting.
Procurement of Goods and Services.
Licensing.
APIP Capability.
ASN Management.
Local Tax Optimization.
Regional Asset Management, and Village Fund Governance .
pecifically for Regional Governments in District.
HYPOTHESIS H1: Leadership style has a positive effect on Fraud prevention efforts H2: Organizational ethical culture significantly positively affects fraud prevention H3: Internal control has a significant positive effect on fraud prevention efforts H4: Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) moderates the influence of Leadership Style on fraud prevention efforts.
H5: Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) moderates the influence of Organizational Ethical Culture on fraud prevention efforts.
H6: Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) moderates the effect of the Internal Control System on fraud prevention Implementation of the Monitoring Center for Prevention.
Ae Pituringsih.
Basuki.
Akram.
Selatan Figure 1
Conceptual Framework of Research
Source: Research model Endar et al, 2025
RESEARCH METHODS
This quantitative research is analyzed using quantitative analysis .
, systematic, planned, and structured from the beginning to the creation of its research design (Ibrahim et al.
, 2.
The relationship used in this study is causal, namely a causal relationship between two or more variables where there are variables that are influencing .
, such as: the variables of Leadership Style (GP).
Ethical Management Culture (BEM), and Internal Control System (SPI).
In addition, some variables are influenced (Endogenou.
, namely fraud prevention and moderating variables, namely the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP).
The population of this study was employees of several OPDs who were directly involved with the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP).
They are the Regional Research and Development Planning Agency (BAPPEDA), the Regional Financial and Asset.
Management Agency (BPKAD), the One-Stop Investment and Integrated Services Office (DPMPTSP), the UKPB ULP, the Regional Personnel Agency (BKD), the Inspectorate, the Regional Revenue Management Agency (BPPD), and Community and Village Empowerment (DPMD) in each district/city on the island of Lombok.
The sample of this study was selected using purposive sampling The number of samples in this study were 3 .
respondents multiplied by 8 OPDs for each district, so the number was 3x8 = 24 samples.
While the Mataram City Government was only 7 .
OPDs so the number was 7x3 = 21 samples.
In this study, the variables involve 3 exogenous variables.
They are Leadership Style (GP) and Organizational Commitment (KO).
1 endogenous variable that is fraud and 1 moderating variable that is the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP).
Ekuitas: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Ae Volume 9.
Number 3.
September 2025 : 338 Ae 350 Table 1 Operational Definition of Variables and Indicators No.
Variables Leadership Style Indicator Source Decision-making ability Kartono .
Ability to motivate Ability to control Responsibility, and Ability to control emotions.
Organizational Ethical 1.
Visible role models Robbins .
Culture Communication of ethical Ethical training Punishment for ethical Ethics protection mechanism Internal Control Control Environment COSO .
System Risk assessment Control Activities Information and Monitoring Cressey .
Fraud Prevention Pressure Efforts Opportunity Rationalization Corruption Monitoring Center The existence of regulations Eradication for Prevention governing fraud prevention.
Commission, (MCP) There is an integrated .
system to prevent fraud.
There is oversight in the area of fraud.
Grain Question Source: Questionnaire indicators adopted from Kartono 2018.
Robbins 2013.
COSO 2013.
Cressey 1973, and Corruption Eradication Commission, 2022
RESEARCH RESULT
The measurement model is evaluated for convergent validity, discriminant validity, and construct reliability.
They look at the outer loading value, outer weight, outer weight significance.
Fornell Larcker criterion, crossloading.
HTMT.
Cronbach Alpha, composite reliability, and AVE.
The validity and reliability test results show that all question items are valid and reliable as This structural model was evaluated by analyzing the Variance Inflated Factor (VIF) value.
R- Square (R.
, t-statistic value, and p-value for hypothesis testing and PLS Predict.
Inner VIF used to see multicollinearity between variables is shown in Table 2 below:
Table 2 CollinearityStatistic (Inner VIF) Management Ethical Culture (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) Leadership Style (X.
-> Fraud Fraud Prevention Implementation of the Monitoring Center for Prevention.
Ae Pituringsih.
Basuki.
Akram.
Selatan Table 3 R-Square Fraud Prevention Prevention (Y) MCP (Z) -> Fraud Prevention (Y) Internal Control System (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) MCP (Z) x Leadership Style (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) MCP (Z) x Management Ethical Culture (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) MCP (Z) x Internal Control System (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) R-squared Adjusted R-square Fraud Prevention (Y) Source: Smart PLS 4, 2025 The R2 value of the structural model This value shows how substantive the influence of variable X is on Y.
These results indicate the amount of endogenous variation that can be explained by exogenous variables as a moderate The R2 has been greater than 0.
but smaller than 0.
About 58.
6% of fraud prevention can be influenced by leadership style and ethical management.
Culture and internal control system, while other variables outside this research model influence the remaining 41.
Furthermore, hypothesis testing is shown in Table 4 below:
Source: Smart PLS 4, 2025 The inner VIF value of all interacting variable relationships in this study has been lower than 5.
It is concluded that the level of multicollinearity between variables is in the low category.
It indicates that the parameter estimates in the model are unbiased or robust, 03ons normally ended.
Table 4 Hypothesis Testing Hypothesis Hypothesis Statement Leadership Style (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) Management Ethical Culture (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) Internal Control System (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) MCP (Z) x Leadership Style (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) MCP (Z) x Management Ethical Culture (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) MCP (Z) x Internal Control System (X.
-> Fraud Prevention (Y) Path Coefficients FValue Statistics Square Source: Smart PLS 4, 2025 Based on Table 4 above, the t-statistic value H1 1.
708> 1.
65 and p-value 0.
044<0.
with a path coefficient of -0.
It indicates a significant negative effect of leadership style Ekuitas: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Ae Volume 9.
Number 3.
September 2025 : 338 Ae 350 as reflected by five indicators.
They are the ability to make decisions (X1.
, the ability to motivate (X1.
, the ability to control subordinates (X1.
, responsibility (X1.
and the ability to control emotions (X1.
on fraud prevention as measured by pressure (Y.
, opportunity (Y.
and rationalization (Y.
), opportunity (Y.
and rationalization (Y.
It means that H1 is rejected because the causal relationship between leadership style and fraud prevention is significant, but not positive as the perceived hypothesis Table 4 above also shows the t-statistic value H2 3.
924 > 1.
65 and p-value 0.
000 < 0.
with a path coefficient of 0.
497, so the second hypothesis is accepted.
It shows a significant positive effect of ethical management culture as reflected by five indicators, namely visible role models (X2.
, communication of ethical expectations (X2.
, ethical training (X2.
punishment for ethical actions (X2.
, and ethical protection mechanisms (X2.
on fraud prevention as measured by pressure (Y.
opportunity (Y.
and rationalization (Y.
Table 4 shows the t-statistic value H3 740> 1.
65 and p-value 0.
000 <0.
05 with a path coefficient of 0.
370, so the third hypothesis is accepted.
It shows a significant positive effect of the internal control system proxied by five indicators, namely the control environment (X3.
, risk assessment (X3.
control activities (X3.
, information and communication (X3.
, and monitoring (X3.
on fraud prevention as measured by pressure (Y.
, opportunity (Y.
and rationalization (Y.
Table 4 above shows the t-statistic value of H4, 0.
671 < 1.
65 and p-value 0.
251 > 0.
with a path coefficient of -0.
088, so H4 is These results indicate that the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) application weakens the effect of leadership style on fraud prevention, but it is not In other words, the interaction between MCP which is proxied by the existence of regulations governing fraud prevention (Z.
The existence of an integrated system to prevent fraud (Z.
and the existence of supervision in fraud areas (Z.
cannot significantly moderate the effect of leadership style on fraud prevention.
cannot significantly moderate the causal relationship between leadership style reflected by five indicators: the ability to make decisions (X1.
, the ability to motivate (X1.
, the ability to control subordinates (X1.
, responsibility (X1.
, and the ability to control emotions (X1.
on fraud prevention as measured by pressure (Y.
, opportunity (Y.
and rationalization (Y.
Table 4 shows the t-statistic value of H5 632 < 1.
65 and p-value 0.
051 > 0.
05 with a path coefficient of 0.
182, so H5 is rejected.
These results indicate that the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) application strengthens the influence of management's ethical culture on fraud prevention, but it is not significant.
In other words, the interaction between Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) proxied by the existence of regulations governing fraud prevention (Z.
, the existence of an integrated system to prevent fraud (Z.
and the existence of supervision in fraud areas (Z.
cannot moderate the causal relationship between the ethical cultures of management.
These are as reflected by five indicators: visible role models (X2.
, communication of ethical expectations (X2.
, ethical training (X2.
punishment for ethical actions (X2.
, and ethical protection mechanisms (X2.
on fraud prevention as measured by pressure (Y.
, opportunity (Y.
and rationalization (Y.
Hypothesis six is rejected because Table 4 above shows the t-statistic value H6 0.
839 < 1.
and p-value 0.
201 > 0.
05 with a path coefficient It shows that the application of the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) weakens the effect of the internal control system on fraud prevention, but it is not In other words, the interaction between Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) which is proxied by the existence of regulations governing fraud prevention (Z.
the existence of an integrated system to prevent fraud (Z.
and the existence of Implementation of the Monitoring Center for Prevention.
Ae Pituringsih.
Basuki.
Akram.
Selatan supervision in fraud areas (Z.
cannot moderate the causal relationship between Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) and fraud prevention.
It cannot moderate the causal relationship between the internal control system proxied by five indicators, namely the control environment (X3.
, risk assessment (X3.
, control activities (X3.
information and communication (X3.
, and monitoring (X3.
on fraud prevention as measured by pressure (Y.
, opportunity (Y.
and rationalization (Y.
Table 4 shows a large and significant positive effect of ethical management culture on fraud prevention (H.
with an f-square of 203> 0.
15, and a moderate effect on H3.
The internal control system has a positive effect on fraud prevention with an f-square = 0.
02 < 0.
139 < 0.
The effect of leadership style on fraud prevention gets f-square = 029, which shows a moderate and significant effect, but the effect is negative.
the result does not follow H.
While the amount of moderation of the application of Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) on the effect of leadership style on fraud prevention (H.
obtained fsquare = 0.
007 and the amount of moderation of the application of Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP) on the effect of the internal control system (H.
obtained f-square = 0.
indicating no significant effect.
For the Monitoring Center for Prevention (MCP), the moderation on the effect of management ethical culture on fraud prevention (H.
obtained an f-square = 0.
029, indicating a moderate but insignificant effect.
Figure 2 shows the bootstraping output path diagram of this study.
Figure 2
Research Path Diagram
Source: Smart PLS 4, 2025
DISCUSSION