Go content.

What's new?

The ACRC announced the results of the 2021 Integrity Assessment for public institutions


The ACRC announced the results of the 2021 Integrity Assessment for public institutions


- The Comprehensive Integrity Level has increased four years consecutively since the launch of the new administration, recording 8.27 points this year, similar to last year

- From next year, the Integrity Assessment and Anti-corruption Initiative Assessment will be combined to comprehensively assess anti-corruption efforts and achievements


원본 그림의 이름: 211209 청렴도 발표.jpg

원본 그림의 크기: 가로 740pixel, 세로 521pixel

사진 찍은 날짜: 2021년 12월 09일 오후 11:10

카메라 제조 업체 : Canon

카메라 모델 : Canon EOS 5D Mark IV

프로그램 이름 : PhotoScape

F-스톱 : 4.0

노출 시간 : 1/200초

IOS 감도 : 800

색 대표 : sRGB

노출 모드 : 수동

프로그램 노출 : 메

ACRC Chairperson Jeon Hyun Heui, briefing the 2021 Integrity Assessment(IA)


(9th Dec. 2021, ACRC)


The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission conducted the “2021 Integrity Assessment for public institutions” targeting 592 public institutions* such as central administrative agencies, local governments, education offices, and public-service related organizations from July 2020 to June 2021. As a result, the Comprehensive Integrity Level recorded 8.27 points, maintaining the same level as last year.


* 47 central administrative agencies, 243 local governments (17 metropolitan governments, 226 local district governments), 90 education offices, and 212 public-service related organizations.

The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (Chairperson Jeon Hyun-Heui, hereinafter ACRC) announced the “Plan to reorganize the system to assess the integrity level of public institutions” that will be applied starting next year and the result of the “2021 Integrity Assessment for public institutions” at the Central Government Complex on the morning of December 9.

< Integrity Assessment Results (2016~2021) >



원본 그림의 이름: 제목 없음(2).png

원본 그림의 크기: 가로 450pixel, 세로 226pixel


The ACRC is going to combine the “Integrity Assessment for public institutions” and “Anti-corruption Initiative Assessment” into the Integrity Assessment to comprehensively assess the anti-corruption efforts and achievements of the public institutions at various levels.


The results of the Integrity Assessment


The ACRC assessed the comprehensive integrity level of public institutions by reflecting the status of corruption cases as well as the results of the survey answered by both citizens who experienced the public duties of public institutions (External Integrity) and public officials of public institutions (Internal Integrity).


This year, the ACRC conducted the survey (by phone or online) on 206,306 respondents (145,006 for External Integrity and 61,300 for Internal Integrity) for four months from August to November.


For the 2021 Integrity Assessment, the Commission modified some assessment contents, reflecting social changes such as the enactment of the Act on the Prevention of Conflict of Interest Related to Duties of Public Servants and meeting the expectations of the people. Based on the modification direction of the Integrity Assessment system announced in July, it reflected the applicable contents as much as possible to lay the foundation for conducting the 2022 comprehensive assessment system.


First of all, it newly added* various assessment contents related to conflict of interest situations of public servants and also added a new assessment item regarding the power abuse of public servants experienced firsthand by citizens.


* Use of confidential or nonpublic information for personal profit, exercise of improper influence by retired public servants, effectiveness of operating the system to prevent conflicts of interest


Also, it expanded the target institutions of the Integrity Assessment to local public corporations related to city, development, facility management, and transportation.


In addition, it strictly reflected the current status of corruption cases of public institutions by increasing the deduction points on the actual conditions of corruption.


Reflecting the ever-increasing expectations of the people on the integrity of public servants, it also deducted points for the status of disciplinary actions due to passive administration of public servants and the public duty-related sex scandals of heads of public institutions and high-ranking public officials in the same way as corruption cases.


The results of the quantitative evaluation were also reflected in the assessment of the public institutions with many corruption cases that caused a stir in society because a high-ranking official was involved or the members of the institution were systematically involved and that were detected by an external agency due to poor internal audit.


The scores of the External Integrity (8.54, +0.01 point) evaluated by citizens who experienced the service of public institutions and the Internal Integrity (7.57, -0.02 point) evaluated by public servants were similar to the scores of the previous year.


By institution type, the comprehensive integrity level of education offices was the highest (8.54) while local district governments recorded the lowest (8.03).


The score of local governments was lower than that of other types of public institutions as in the previous year, but the score of the metropolitan governments is on the rising trend, jumping the most.

< Comparison of Comprehensive Integrity by type of Institutions ’20~’21 >


원본 그림의 이름: 제목 없음(4).png

원본 그림의 크기: 가로 619pixel, 세로 193pixel



Plan to reorganize the system to assess the integrity level of public institutions


From 2022, the Integrity Assessment for public institutions will be reorganized as a comprehensive assessment that includes anti-corruption efforts and achievements of public institutions as well as their perception level related to corruption perception and experience, and corruption realities related to each institution’s data on corruption cases.


The results of the comprehensive assessment will be released as grades of Comprehensive Integrity. The two existing dual assessment systems, Integrity Assessment and Anti-corruption Initiative Assessment*, will be combined into one, but going beyond a simple integration of two systems, the ACRC has created new measurement & assessment models and indicators to create a synergy effect that induces anti-corruption efforts from public institutions.


* An assessment system to make qualitative and quantitative evaluations on the anti-corruption efforts of public institutions over the period of one year, using assessment indicators reflecting anti-corruption policy directions. It has been conducted since 2002, in addition to the Integrity Assessment.


The number of target institutions will be increased as well. At present, 270 public institutions are subject to both the Integrity Assessment and Anti-corruption Initiative Assessment, while most local district governments and small-scale quasi-government agencies are not subject to the Anti-corruption Initiative Assessment. Therefore, the plan is to include more than 500 public institutions for the new comprehensive assessment, including all local district governments and quasi-government agencies.

Moreover, the target institutions will be re-categorized by type, reflecting more of their nature and functions, unlike the previous categorization that focused on the size of the institutions.


Specific assessment models and indicators and the way to calculate grades and results will be completely re-reviewed by reflecting the opinions of public institutions and then re-organized to be fit for the comprehensive assessment.


The assessment items of the integrity perception level, which measures the integrity level of external duties and internal operation through questionnaires, will be reorganized to reflect social changes and the increased expectations of the people, while the assessment of the integrity effort level will be changed from the existing method that only focuses on performance to the new way of assessing the effectiveness, evaluated by internal members, of whether anti-corruption policies and systems are working properly in the field.


Moreover, reflecting the enhanced expectations of the people, the range of deduction factors will be expanded for the assessment of corruption realities related to the status of corruption cases of public institutions. and the proportion of deduction to be reflected in the comprehensive assessment will also be increased.

Future plans


The ACRC created the “Integrity Map of Public Institutions,” reflecting the results of the Integrity Assessment, and released it on its website (www.acrc.go.kr).


The Integrity Map of Public Institutions was created using different colors for the integrity grades on the maps and tables so that people can easily compare the integrity levels of public institutions at a glance.


Also, the target institutions of the Integrity Assessment should disclose the assessment results on their website for more than one month, in accordance with the relevant laws*.


* Article 27(3) of the Act on the Prevention of Corruption and the Establishment and Management of the Anti-corruption and Civil Rights Commission, and Article 29(2) of the enforcement decree of the same act.


Regarding the reorganization of the assessment system, the ACRC will further collect opinions from the concerned agencies and experts and confirm the specific assessment methods, such as target institutions, weights by indicator, and allotment of scores, after establishing the basic plan and implementation plan for the 2022 comprehensive assessment in the first half of 2022.


Chairperson Jeon stated, “Even though there was a case early this year that caused the people to distrust the public sector, taking this opportunity, the government is working hard to push ahead with more active anti-corruption policies on the frontline.”


She also added, “Based on the results of the Integrity Assessment this year and the reorganization of the assessment system next year, the ACRC will make more efforts to raise the trust of the people by promoting more active and effective anti-corruption policies.”