Coa R2013-014
Coa R2013-014
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
RESOLUTION
No. :
2013-014
Date:
SUBJECT
JU N 2 8 2013
Adoption of a Quality Assurance (QA) Policy and a QA Review Handbook; and Creation of a Quality Assurance Office
WHEREAS, the Commission on Aud it (COA) is vested by the Constitution the exclusive authority to "define t he scope of it s audit and examination, establish the techniques and methods required therefore, promulg at e accounting and auditing rules and regulations" (Section 2, Article IX-D, 1987 Constitution); WHEREAS, the COA continually explores and develops different and dynamic techniques and methodologies, processes to ensure high quality audit in an economical, efficient and effect ive way in order to keep pace with the latest developments in the auditing profession and the best practices of its counterparts worldwide; WHEREAS, the COA top management continuously steers the process of reexamining .and refining COA's audit methodologies, processes and procedures and all other institutional factors affecting COA's fulfillment of its mission and goals and adherence to its professional standards and core va lues; WHEREAS, the COA had adopted ISQC 1, International Standards in Auditing 220 and various relevant I SAs that will enable it to ascertain whether its audits and aud it reports are aligned with international best practices and meet the needs of COA's stakeholders; WHEREAS, there is a need to establish a quality assurance process that would evaluate the existing quality control system to ensure that COA and its personnel comply with professional standards and regulatory legal requirements; that COA audit reports issued are appropriate in the circumstances; NOW, THEREFORE, this Commission Proper resolves, as it does hereby reso lve, to establish a Quality Assurance Office (QAO) under the Professional and Institutional Development Sector (PIDS); QAO; RESOLVED further that Directors IV and III positions shall be created for the
Annex B
Republic of the Philippines Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Number Introduction to the Handbook Chapter 1: Basic Concepts and the Quality Assurance Office (QAO) 1. Concepts/Definition of Terms 2. Relationships Among Quality Control System (QCS) Monitoring and Quality Assurance Review (QAR) Figure 1: Relationships Among QCS, Monitoring and QAR 3. Creation of QAO 4. Frequency of the Review 5. Duration of the Review Chapter 2: COA QAR Framework 1. Overview 2. The Commission on Audit (COA)-Quality Management System (QMS) Framework Table 1: Desired Conditions for the Eight Elements of the COA-QMS Figure 2: The COA-QMS Key Elements Framework 3. Elements of COA-QMS 3.1 Independence and Legal Framework 3.2 Human Resources 3.3 Audit Methodology and Standards 3.4 Internal Governance 3.5 Corporate Support 3.6 Continuous Improvement 3.7 External Stakeholders Relations 3.8 Results Chapter 3: Quality Assurance Process 1. Introduction 2. Objectives of the Quality Assurance (QA) Function 3. Audit Process Overview 4. QAR Process Figure 3: QAR Process 4.1 Planning the QAR 4.2 Conducting the QAR 4.3 Reporting Findings and Recommendations 4.4 Follow-up 4.5 Annual Accomplishment Report on QA 3
5 5 6 6 8 9 10 10 11 12 13 13 14 15 16 19 20 21 22 23 23 25 26 26 26 27 29 33 33
Appendix 5: Appendix 6: Appendix 7: Appendix 8: Appendix 9: Appendix 10: Appendix 11: Appendix 12: Appendix 13:
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND OF THE HANDBOOK 1. The handbook has been prepared in fulfilment of the requirements for the completion of the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) Development Institute (IDI) sponsored Workshop on Quality Assurance Review (QAR) in Financial Audit, attended by a four-man representatives of the Commission on Audit (COA) in 2008 at Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia capped by a Review meeting at Jakarta, Indonesia on the same year. In 2007, the Commission, as a member of the Asian Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (ASOSAI), signed a Cooperation Agreement in Cambodia, together with the other member nations to undertake a project to strengthen the quality control systems (QCS) of Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) through the establishment of the QAR process. The representatives were tasked then to customize a handbook on QAR which was developed by a team of trainers from IDI-ASOSAI. The main purpose of this handbook is to provide guidance in conducting QAR. The Commission in its commitment to pursue the initiatives of IDI-ASOSAI, customized the draft IDI-ASOSAI QAR handbook to provide guidance in conducting QAR. The handbook contains concepts related to Quality Assurance (QA), the benefits that one would derive from undertaking QARs at regular intervals and provide practical guidance such as templates, checklists, questionnaires and samples.
2.
3.
4.
OBJECTIVES OF THE HANDBOOK 5. The handbook provides guidance to QAR review teams as they conduct their reviews based on the audit quality frameworks and standards provided for both the institutional level as well as the engagement level, against which their performance will be gauged; and ensures continuous compliance with these quality standards. The handbook seeks to promote adherence to the culture of quality in audit work in all phases of audit among all sectors in the Commission. 3
6.
8.
INTENDED USERS 9. The handbook is directed for the use of the Quality Assurance Office to be created by the Commission Proper (CP).
AMENDATORY PROVISIONS 10. The vibrant structure of the Commission and the audit landscape, effecting changes in the organizational audit implementation, updating policies and procedures to achieve quality in audit may necessitate revisions and updating of the handbook. The handbook shall be regularly updated with the progress of international standards as adopted by the Commission through the issuance of the Philippine Public Sector Auditing Standards (PPSAS).
Chapter 1:
1.
CONCEPTS/DEFINITION OF TERMS Quality Generally, it is the degree to which a set of inherent characteristics of a product or service satisfy stakeholders requirements. In an audit engagement, it is the degree to which an audit is conducted in accordance with professional standards and regulatory and legal requirements, and reports issued by the firm or engagement partners are appropriate in the circumstances. Quality Control System (QCS) QCS consists of policies and procedures designed to ensure that the firm and its personnel comply with professional standards and legal and regulatory requirements and that the reports issued by the firm are appropriate in the circumstances. Monitoring Monitoring is one of the components of the QCS, the purpose of which is to assess the appropriateness of the design and effectiveness of operation of system of quality controls. Quality Assurance Review (QAR) QAR is the process that provides independent assurance to the head of the SAI that the quality control systems, which include monitoring, and practices are designed and working effectively.
2.
RELATIONSHIPS AMONG QCS, MONITORING AND QAR Though at times QCS and QAR are used interchangeably, yet, there is a difference in their scope and meaning.
3.
CREATION OF A QAO An organic office, to be created by the CP, shall be composed of a Head and members who are independent of the operating units. The CP shall determine the size and composition of the QAO. 3.1. Competencies of QAO The members of the QAO should possess the competencies as required by the COA Qualification Standards (QS). 3.2. Functions of QAO The QAO will review the adequacy of, and compliance to, quality controls at the institutional and engagement levels. The QA report should identify weaknesses, offer recommendations for consideration and follow up actions taken. It will assess the outcome of the recommendations that were implemented and identify reasons for non-implementation. 3.3. Roles of QAO members The roles of the different levels of QAO members are briefly explained below:
Director IV The QA Director (Director IV), as the head of QAO, supported by an Assistant Director (Director III), is charged with: Management of the overall operation of all the divisions under the QAO; Determination of the objectives, scope, time, targets and methodology in conducting the QA review and the LRE; Monitoring and assuring that the QAR processes are in accordance with QA standards, policies and procedures. Analysis and review of the QA and LRE findings and formulation of conclusions and recommendations; Formulation of recommendations on the professional development of the staff under the office; Overall evaluation of the QA review and LRE results; Review and discussion of the QA review/LRE report findings with the concerned COA officials and follow-up on outstanding/unresolved issues; Transmittal of the QA Review/LRE Report to the Directors concerned; Reporting the QA review/LRE results to the Assistant Commissioner, PIDS; and Ensuring the accuracy of the Annual Performance Summary Report (APSR) of the divisions and its prompt submission.
Director II The Director II, as Chief of the Learning Results Evaluation Services (LRES), assisted by a Training Specialist V, supported by the rest of the LRES staff, is responsible for the: 4. Management of the overall operations of the division; Development of LRE work plan; Development of evaluation or assessment tool kits and templates; Conduct of the LRE; Analysis of the results of LRE; Preparation of recommendations based on the results of LRE; Submission of LRE Report; and Preparation of the APSR for the division.
FREQUENCY OF THE REVIEW QAR will be conducted as follows: Institutional level once every three years Engagement level continuous
1.
OVERVIEW The COA is responsible to perform its mandate to the satisfaction of its stakeholders needs. A useful means to evaluate the achievement of this responsibility is through the establishment of a Quality Management System (QMS) designed to provide reasonable assurance that: (a) (b) the COA and its personnel comply with professional standards and regulatory and legal requirements; and the COA reports issued are appropriate in the circumstances.
2.
THE COA-QMS FRAMEWORK The COA-QMS Framework consists of structures and processes relating to certain key institutional management functions pertaining to the following elements: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Independence and Legal Framework Human Resources Audit Methodology and Standards Internal Governance Corporate Support Continuous Improvement External Stakeholder Relations Results
These elements were taken from the SAI-QMS Framework developed by IDIASOSAI. The effectiveness of the COA as an institution and the quality of its services are reasonably ensured if the eight elements are functioning. The COA aims to achieve the desired condition for each element presented in Table 1.
10
11
The COA-QMS framework with the eight (8) key elements and subelements is shown in Figure 2. The sub-elements are described in detail in the subsequent pages. The COA should consider the subelements level when making changes for improvements of its performance. Figure 2: THE COA-QMS KEY-ELEMENTS FRAMEWORK1
1 2 Independence Human and Legal Resource Framework 3 Audit
Methodology
4 Internal Governance
5 Corporate Support
6 Continuous
Improvement
7 External
Stakeholder
8
Results
and Standards
Relations
Independence Mandate
Leadership & Direction Strategic & Operational Planning Oversight & Accountability Code of Conduct Internal Controls Quality Assurance
Professional Staff Development Research and Development Organizational Development Change Management
Impact
Media
Professional
12
2 3
Adopted from the Lima Declaration on Auditing Precepts, paragraph 3 Section 5 Adopted from the ASOSAI-IDI QA Handbook, Section 3.1.2 4 Adopted from the Lima Declaration on Auditing Precepts, paragraph 2 Section 5
13
c. Financial independence of the COA Parameters: The COA should be provided with the financial resources to enable it to accomplish its tasks.7 The COA should be entitled to request for the necessary financial resources from the government agencies deciding on the national budget.8 The COA should have fiscal autonomy in the utilization and re-allocation of its budget.9
3.2.
Human Resources Desired Condition: The COA should have adequate number of competent and motivated staff to discharge its functions effectively.
5 6
Adopted from the Lima Declaration. on Auditing Precepts, paragraph 2 Section 6 Adopted from the Lima Declaration. on Auditing Precepts, paragraph 3 Section 6 7 Adopted from the Lima Declaration. on Auditing Precepts, paragraph 1 Section 7 8 The Department of Budget and Management (DBM), President of the Philippines and Congress has specific roles in the national budget process. 9 Adopted from the Lima Declaration on Auditing Precepts, paragraph 3 Section 7
14
3.3.
Audit Methodology and Standards Desired condition: The COAs audit should be based on international promulgated by IFAC and INTOSAI international best practices. (ISSAI 200 1.13) processes standards and other Paragraph
10
15
3.4.
Internal Governance Desired condition: The COAs top management should ensure that the institutions decision making and control mechanisms function economically, efficiently, and effectively to be a model organization in promoting good governance. (ISSAI 200 Paragraph 1.15) Continuously improving quality through various policy measures remains the most important role for the top management. SAIs should ensure that their human and financial resources are used in the most efficient way to secure the effective exercise of their mandate. To this end, SAI management will need to develop and institute appropriate policies and measures to help guarantee that the SAI is competently organised to deliver high quality and effective audit work and reports.11
11
Prague recommendations on Quality Management Functioning of SAIs in the context of European integration.
16
Parameters: Leadership and direction The COA should formulate its: Vision Mission Core values Strategic and operational planning The Commission Proper should lead the regular holding of strategic planning conference; The strategic planning conference should be held every three years and participated in by the Directors III and above; The results of the planning conference should be cascaded to the operational level.
17
18
Parameters: Financial resources The COA should have adequate funds to sustain its operations. The COA should maximize the use of its available financial resources.
Infrastructure The COA should provide adequate infrastructure to all offices including those in the regions composed of: adequate office space basic office furniture, fixture and equipment
Technology To function efficiently and effectively, the COA should adapt to modern technology such as: telecommunications information technology (IT) systems internet and intranet
19
Continuous Improvement Desired Condition: The COA should be abreast and ready to address current and emerging issues and take advantage of new opportunities. The sub-elements of continuous improvement follows: Professional Staff Development Research and Development Organizational Development Change Management
Parameters: The Government Auditing Code of the Philippines (PD 1445) should be kept abreast with the international standards. The Government Accountancy Sector (GAS) should be able to address emerging issues in the rapidly changing accounting environment. The COA should update its strategic plan at periodic intervals to make sure that its efforts are aligned to the major auditable issues facing the country. 20
3.7.
External Stakeholder Relations Desired condition: The COA should establish and sustain effective working relationship and communication with external stakeholders to ensure higher impact of its audit reports and services. The COAs stakeholders include the audited entities, congress, political executives, public, peers (other SAIs), donors, international organisations, media, professional and academic institutions, private sector auditing firms and others who have an interest or are affected by its products and services. Parameters: The COA should sustain effective working relationship and communication with external stakeholders to ensure impact of its audit reports and other products and services. The COA should conduct stakeholder analysis to identify its significant stakeholders and their interests and influence on the COAs functioning. The COA should implement measures to establish and maintain such relations with them that will help to leverage its efforts without compromising its independence and objectivity. The COA should develop and disseminate a standard document on external stakeholder protocols to sustain effective working relationships with them.
The inter-relationship between the COA and the external stakeholders is presented in Appendix 1.
21
12
22
The COA has the power, authority, and duty to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property, owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the Government, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original For that reason, it is charters, and on a post-audit basis.13 required that the COA has its QA policies and procedures and a system in place.
2. OBJECTIVES OF THE QA FUNCTION
Consistent with ISQC1 and AQMS of ASOSAI, the main purpose of the quality assurance function is to identify weaknesses and/or breakdowns in quality controls at both the institutional and engagement levels and suggest strategies for addressing those weaknesses and /or breakdowns. To achieve this, some of the main issues for consideration are: Institutional level If the COAs legal framework is sufficient to meet the independence and mandate expectations of the Philippine Constitution, PD 1445 and Lima Declaration; If the quality of system and practice contribute to the governance of the COA; If the process and system to recruit, develop and manage the human resources meet the mandate of the COA to ensure that there are sufficient, competent, motivated staff to discharge its function effectively; If the audit methodology and practices are based on international auditing standards and aligned with the international best practices;
13
23
24
Under the Integrated Results and Risk Based Audit (IRRBA) methodology being adopted by the COA, the steps in the audit process can be broadly grouped into the following phases: Phase 1- Strategic Planning and Risk Assessment This phase covers the first integration point wherein all the COA audit services namely: Financial and Compliance Audit, Agencybased Performance Audit, Government-wide and Sectoral Performance Audit and Fraud Audit, will meet through a common strategic planning and risk identification process. The IRRBA requires the COA to conduct Strategic Planning annually. The elements and processes used under this phase are captured from the Planning, Finance and Management Sector (PFMS) manual to show the linkage of Strategic Planning of the COA as an agency to the IRRBAs Strategic Planning and Risk Identification of the COA as an auditor. The IRRBA Manual does not supersede any activity presented in the PFMS Operations Manual. Phase 2- Agency Audit Planning and Risk Assessment Agency Audit Planning and Risk Assessment, is designed to promote the consistent implementation of the IRRBA methodology and standard disciplined team-based approach to audit planning, emphasizing the early development of risk assessments and the audit strategy. Phase 3- Delivery Delivery phase is divided into two parts: (1) Execution and (2) Conclusion and Reporting. This phase covers procedures in designing and executing audit tests, evaluation of results and communicating the same to the agency management.
25
The QAR process generally involves the standard four phases of a project cycle as shown in the diagram below. Figure 3: QAR Process
PLANNING
FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS
QAR Plan
CONDUCTING QA REVIEW
QAR PROCESS
REPORTING
4.1. Planning the QAR
The planning process involves preparation of an operational plan and selection of the type of review to be conducted according to the conditions present at the SAI.
26
27
3. Update the Quality Assurance Review Questionnaire (QARQ) - Institutional Level (Appendix 6) by considering the requirements under existing policies and procedures on quality control. 4. Determine if the existing COA policies and procedures on quality control are complied with by accomplishing the updated QARQ. 5. Determine if the existing COA audit methodology meet the requirements of international standards by accomplishing the Financial Audit Methodology Checklist (FAMC-Appendix 7). 6. Determine if the existing COA audit methodology is complied with by accomplishing the QARQ Engagement Level (Appendix 8). 7. Validate deficiencies noted under the no columns in the QARQ, both at the firm and financial audit level, and identify root cause/s by employing other data gathering techniques such as: Document review Physical Observation Focus group discussion Interview Getting information from the COAs external stakeholders Content analysis of qualitative data
QA findings and observations must be supported by sufficient, relevant and reliable evidence. Working papers of the QAR team should be documented methodically for easy referencing.
28
29
The Assistant Commissioner, PIDS must ensure that all observations are completed, correctly stated, signed off and dated on the Form(s). 2. Consolidate the individual findings for institutional level assurance review in the Template for QAR Report Outline Institutional Level and the individual findings for engagement level in the Template for QAR Report Outline Engagement Level (Appendix 10) by providing the following information: Template for QAR Report Outline Institutional Level. This form records each material finding, the corresponding risk assessment, likely impact, probable causes, SAs comments and the QA teams recommendations. The reviewer should evaluate the error/risk using the following categories: a. High risk signifying fundamental failures where for example, the audit opinion or key conclusions are incorrect; b. Medium risk identifies where information provided to the reader of the audit report is omitted or information that is not important is included; c. Low risk other matters such as poor referencing or evidence of review. Template for QAR Report Outline Engagement Level. This form summarises all findings (including positive findings). The form should be accomplished by providing the following: a) Quality Assurance Questionnaire (QAQ) reference: QAQ reference has a combined reference consisting of:
30
32
33
A summary of the findings (observations) common issues effects causes recommendations and action address the shortcomings
plans
to
Conclusion As a good practice, a periodic progress report shall be submitted to the COA Chairperson to bring to his attention important matters such as break down in QC.
34
Appendices
35
Congress Public
International Organisations Media Professional & Academic Institutions Private sector auditing firms
36
37
38
PEER REVIEW
A peer review is performed by an independent normally external entity to evaluate whether an organizations internal quality control system is suitably designed and is operating effectively. The peer review involves testing the entire quality control system and the peer reviewers will have to allow the entire system to operate before reaching their conclusion. The peer review is designed to provide reasonable assurance that SAIs quality management policies and procedures are suitably designed and operating effectively. Scope of peer review The scope of the peer review should cover the determination of whether: the auditing services performed are in accordance with the SAI's auditing standards, departmental manuals and policy instructions; the standard, manuals, instructions and systems enable the SAI to fully execute the audit mandate and its duties; and the auditing methodologies and practices conform to the best international practices.
Requirements for peer review To be eligible to review, the peer should meet the following requirements: Each member of the review team should have good knowledge of auditing standards, the government environment relative to the work being reviewed and the methods and techniques of performing a peer review; The review team should be independent of the audit organization reviewed, its staff and the audits selected for peer review; and Separate TOR need to be drawn up for each of the areas to be reviewed and the scope of review should be clearly defined.
Conducting peer review The peer review team will develop a plan and programme for conducting the work. The SAI will provide the review team with all necessary documentation, manuals, policy instructions and guidelines
39
40
41
42
8. REPORTING The review team will give a verbal debriefing to the COA Chairperson and the management at the end of the assignment. A written report will be presented to the COA Chairperson not later than two weeks after completion of the assignment. Team Member 1 will be responsible for compiling the report.
43
10. Ensure that appropriate analytical procedures are used and the reliability, independence and quality of relevant supporting data is assessed during audit process; 11. Sampling methods are used according to QA standards and manuals; 12. All tests of transactions clearly indicate QA objectives, adequately explain the nature and extent of QA work and provide an overall conclusion as to results of QA work; 13. QA steps and procedures have been designed to obtain sufficient, reliable, and relevant evidence; 14. Full investigation is made of all queries during QA; 15. Existence of adequate working papers in respect of: Evaluation of internal controls systems; QA tests of routine procedures; and Tests of controls.
44
OFFICE/CLUSTER DIRECTOR DATE OF REVIEW FINDINGS DISCUSSED ON DIRECTOR/ ASST. COMM. REVIEWER
DATE DATE
If the finding to a particular question is positive, a tick mark should be inserted in the YES column. If the finding is negative, a tick mark should be inserted in the NO column, followed by an appropriate reason/explanation in the remarks column. In such an instance, reference should be made to either the minutes of the discussion of the findings with management. Instances may be found where the answer to a question is NO, but that the situation was still within the scope of INTOSAI Auditing Standards (e.g. non-compliance with the COA methodology, although still within scope of INTOSAI Auditing Standards). This should clearly be spelt out and reported accordingly. If a question is not applicable, a tick mark should be inserted in the not applicable column, together with an adequate explanation. I. INDEPENDENCE AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK (Inclusive of Ethical requirements) The COA should maintain its independence and perform its mandate as provided for under the 1987 Constitution and PD 1445 consistent with ISSAI 1, INTOSAIs Lima Declaration on Auditing Precepts, and ISQC1 YES NO N/A COMMENT W/P Ref.
45
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
46
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
47
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
48
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
49
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Recruitment
6. In recruiting personnel, does the COA specify minimum qualifications as per job description? 7. Are position profiles being tailored to take cognizance of the individual requirements of all positions?
50
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Retention
In cases where the COA requires expert staff who cannot be recruited on the basis of conditions of the civil service, special arrangements should be concluded with them, placing them outside the regular wage scales. 11. Is retaining qualified staff a problem? 12. Does the COA have a reward mechanism in place that provides incentives to staff members? 13. Which of the following incentives is provided by the COA? a. Naming and honoring the Auditor(s) of the Year. b. Certificate of Excellence for outstanding performance c. Financial remuneration / benefits d. Staff remunerations and promotions to be based on considered assessments of competencies, performance and experience, e. Other incentives. Please specify
51
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
52
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Well Being
20. What type of program is/are in place for staff well being? a. Health care program b. Social activities c. Recreational & sporting facilities d. Fitness programs e. Housing f. Conducive environment g. Counseling services h. Other. Please specify
Performance Management
21. Are performance appraisals being performed on a regular basis? 22. Is remuneration linked to performance? 23. Does the COA have a mechanism for communicating job functions or areas of responsibility to its staff?
53
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
54
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Audit Tools
Do staff use audit tools (e.g. Checklists, Computer-Assisted Techniques (CAATS) and Others)? 4. Does the COA use audit automation Software (e.g. Audit Command Language (ACL), Teammate, Case ware & others)? Please specify.
Audit Performance
5. Assignment of Audit Teams Does the COA assign an audit team director/leader (ATL) to each engagement to take responsibility for that audit on its behalf? Does the COA establish policies and procedures requiring that: a. The identity and role of the ATL are communicated to key members of auditee management and those responsible for governance; b. The ATL has both the necessary capabilities, competence, authority and
55
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Are staff assigned to the team: a. Conversant with all new and revised audit standards? b. Conversant/up to date with the latest audit methodology? c. Conversant with all the COA guidelines? d. Given access to the up to date audit standards documentation, the COA approach and guidelines on documentation and other relevant documentation? e. Complying with the requirements of Continued Training (CT)? f. Knowledgeable of the relevant sectors in which the clients operate? g. Knowledgeable of the COAs control policies and procedures? 6. Consultation Does the COA establish policies and procedures to provide it with reasonable assurance that: a. Appropriate consultation takes
56
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
57
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
58
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
59
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
The COAs top management should ensure that the institutions decision making and control mechanisms function economically, efficiently, and effectively to be a model organization in promoting good governance. (ISSAI 200 Paragraph 1.15) W/P Ref.
NO
N/A
COMMENT
60
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
5. 6.
7.
8.
61
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
62
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
63
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
64
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Code of Conduct
32. Is there a documented Code of Ethics, adapted to the COAs environment, in place covering the issues in INTOSAI Code of Ethics? 33. Is the above code adhered to? 34. Are there procedures to ensure that the
65
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Ethical Requirements
36. Does the COA establish policies and procedures designed to provide it with reasonable assurance that the COA and its personnel comply with relevant ethical requirements such as the following: a. Integrity; b. Objectivity; c. Professional competence and due care; d. Confidentiality; and e. Professional behaviour? 37. Does the COA establish policies and procedures designed to provide it with reasonable assurance that the COA, its personnel and, where applicable, others subject to independence requirements (including experts contracted by the COA and other personnel), maintain independence where required by the Code and national ethical requirements? Do these policies and procedures enable the COA to: a. Communicate its independence requirements to its personnel and, where applicable, others subject to them; and b. Identify and evaluate circumstances and relationships that create threats to independence, and to take appropriate action to eliminate those threats or reduce them to an acceptable level by applying safeguards, or, if considered appropriate, to withdraw from the engagement?
66
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
ii.
iii.
39. Does the COA have policies and procedures to provide it with reasonable assurance that it is notified of breaches of independence requirements and appropriate actions are taken to resolve such situations? 40. Does the COA obtain, at least annually written confirmation of compliances with its policies and procedures on independence from all personnel
67
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Quality Assurance
44. Does the COA evaluate the effect of deficiencies noted as a result of the monitoring process and determine whether these are either: a. Instances that do not necessarily indicate that the COA's system of quality control is insufficient to provide it with reasonable assurance that it complies with professional standards and regulatory and legal requirements, and that the reports issued by the COA are appropriate in the circumstances; or b. Systemic, repetitive or other significant deficiencies that require prompt corrective action? 45. Does the COA communicate to relevant ATLs and other appropriate personnel deficiencies noted as a result of the monitoring process and recommendations for appropriate remedial action?
68
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
69
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
70
V. Corporate Support
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Infrastructure
8. Does the COA own office premises? 9. Does the COA have sufficient office space? 10. Is the lighting condition appropriate in the COAs office? 11. Does the COA have well-equipped meeting rooms? a. Multimedia - PA system, Projector b. Computer c. Telephone d. Chairs and tables e. White board f. Flip Charts 12. Does the COA have well-equipped training rooms? 13. Are the COA Departments/Sectors/ Divisions/Sections located together?
71
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
72
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
73
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
74
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Organizational Development
23. Does the COA review and redefine organizational structure in accordance with strategy and environment? 24. Does the COAs organizational structure clearly define lines of authority and responsibility? 25. Does the COA encourage staff to participate in improving the organization?
Change Management
26. Does the COA have a management unit or section? 27. Does the COA have a management plan? change change
75
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
COA should establish and sustain effective working relationship and communication with external stakeholders to ensure higher impact of its audit reports and services. W/P Ref.
YES
1. Does the COA have strategy for establishing and maintaining effective working relations with external stakeholders? 2. Does the COA have a formalized mechanism to follow up on feedback on its performance received informally or formally from external stakeholder?
NO
N/A
COMMENT
76
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Audited Entities
10. Is the role of COA appreciated by the audited entities? This can be established through customer satisfaction survey by the COA. a. Completely b. To a large extent c. To a little extent d. Not at all 11. Does the COA have a policy for communicating with audited entities? 12. What is the extent of response of audited entities to the COA? a. Completely b. To a large extent c. To a little extent d. Not at all 13. What is the extent of the acceptance of the audit recommendations? a. Completely b. To a large extent c. To a little extent d. Not at all 14. What is the extent of the implementation of the audit recommendations? a. Completely b. To a large extent c. To a little extent d. Not at all
77
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Internal Audit
20. Does the COA have internal audit department or equivalent? 21. Does the internal audit department report directly to the Chairperson? 22. Does the internal audit department have a charter? 23. Does it have qualified personnel?
78
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Consultation
35. Has the COA designed policies and procedures to ensure that appropriate consultation takes place on difficult and contentious issues? 36. Do the audit team and management have access to experts either within the COA or outside, pertaining to areas such as IT, taxation, technical, etc? 37. Is there proof of consultation with other management members in instances of high risk / uncertainty (peer reviews)? 38. Is there a technical department responsible for research into complex technical or public sector specific matters? 39. Are internal technical publications being prepared on a regular basis? 40. Are all technical publications adequately circulated?
Aid Donors
42. Does the COA deal with any donor agencies? 43. Does the COA meet regularly with donor
79
NO
N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
VIII. RESULTS
The COA should deliver timely quality audit reports and services that will: promote accountability and transparency in the public sector; result in more efficient management and utilization of public resources; and contribute towards good governance. (ISSAI 11 principle 5 and 6) YES NO N/A COMMENT W/P Ref.
1. Does the COA have a system to objectively measure its results? 2. Is there a system to assure that performance measures are of acceptable quality? 3. Is performance measurement conducted by staff independent of those responsible for delivering the audit reports (and other products, if any)? 4. Does the COA follow up on its performance measurement results?
Outputs
5. Are products delivered by the COA in accordance with its audit mandate? 6. Does the COA have targets with regard to number of products of each type? 7. Does the COA measure performance against the targets? 8. Does the COA have performance measures to assess the quality of the products?
80
NO N/A
COMMENT
W/P Ref.
Impact
13. Does the COA have performance measure to assess the impact of its products? 14. Does the COA regularly assess impact against these measures?
81
NO
COMMENTS
W/P Ref.
82
NO
COMMENTS
W/P Ref.
IV.
Pre-Engagement Phase
1. Code of Ethics a. Integrity (adherence to high standards of behaviour) b. Independence (independent from audited entity and other outside interest groups) c. Conflicts of interest (care should be taken that services do not lead to conflict of interest) d. Confidentiality (information obtained in the auditing process not disclosed to third parties) e. Professional competence and due care 2. Assessment of Capacity(skills and resources) 3. Engagement letter with audited entity
83
NO
COMMENTS
W/P Ref.
84
NO
COMMENTS
W/P Ref.
2.
3.
85
NO
COMMENTS
W/P Ref.
4.
5.
6.
7.
86
NO
COMMENTS
W/P Ref.
87
NO
COMMENTS
W/P Ref.
88
NO
COMMENTS
W/P Ref.
89
90
INTRODUCTION: The INTOSAI Audit Standards requires that an auditor should conduct an audit in accordance with the necessary standards. This implies that a certain standard of work should be evident in all audit files. In ensuring a consistent level of quality of audit work throughout an audit entity, it is necessary to ensure that: All personnel adhere to the principles of independence, integrity, objectivity, confidentiality and professional behaviour (professional requirements); The audit entity is staffed by personnel that have attained (and maintain) the technical standard and professional competence required to enable them to fulfil their responsibilities; Audit work is assigned to personnel that have the degree of technical training and proficiency required in the circumstances; There is sufficient direction, supervision and review of work at all levels to provide reasonable assurance that the work performed meets appropriate standards of quality; Whenever necessary, consultation within or outside the firm is to occur with those that have appropriate expertise; The continued adequacy and operational effectiveness of quality control policies and procedures is monitored.
This review document focuses on the evaluation of quality at the engagement level. The document takes cognisance of the requirements of IRRBA Manual. Wherever possible references have been made to the source of the requirements tested. The review document is to be used for all types of audit. If the finding to a particular question is positive, a tick should be inserted in the YES column. If the finding is negative, a tick should be inserted in the NO column, followed by an appropriate reason/explanation in the remarks column. In such an instance, reference should be made to either the minutes of the discussion of the findings with management and/or the final QAR-report. Instances may be found where the answer to a question is NO, but that the situation was still within the scope of ISA/INTOSAI (e.g. non-compliance with Office methodology, although still within scope
91
Quality Assurance Review of ISA/INTOSAI). This should be clearly spelt out and reported accordingly. If a question is not applicable, a tick should be inserted in the N/A column, together with an adequate explanation. All questions should, as far as possible, be referenced to the relevant working papers in the audit file.
COA Manual YES and Guidelines
Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA) I. Strategic Planning and Risk Identification
1. Was there an assessment and identification of government risks using Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP), State of the Nation Address (SONA) of the President, Medium-Term Public Investment Program (MTPIP), Government Risks Model (GRM) Previous Annual Audit Reports (AARs), media releases and media reports, fraud and geographic risks, government-wide and sectoral programs and activities, etc.? Was it conducted annually, supervised by the Assistant Commissioners and attended by directors from the following sectors/offices: National Government Sector Corporate Government Sector Local Government Sector Regional Offices Special Audit Office Information Technology Office Technical Services Office Fraud Audit Office
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
IRRBA Manual
2.
1.
Form 01-01
92
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA) Government Risk Identification Template
1. 2. 3. Was the Government Risk Identification Template prepared? Was the COA Strategic Planning conducted? Were the elements of PFMS Operations Manual observed in the COA Strategic Planning?
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
Form 01-02
COA Memo 79-205 dated July 6, 1979 ISSAI 1230 Form 02-01
II.
1. 2.
Agency Audit Planning and Risk Assessment Agency Audit Workstep (AAW)
Was the AAW prepared? Is the AAW approved by the Supervising Auditor and submitted to the Cluster Director/Regional Cluster/Office Director responsible for the audit? Was the approval of the AAW timely? Were all significant changes to the AAW approved?
3. 4.
Form 02-01
93
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
5.
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
6.
7.
OPIF/Program Accountability Model (PAM) MFOs/Key Performance Indicators Accounting Policies Previous Audit Findings Recent Developments Analytical Reviews UTA Summary Did the audit team perform an analysis of the following key elements affecting the auditees success or failure and the dynamic interrelationships between them: - Environment? - Information? - Users? - Suppliers? - Public? - Value? - Management? - Processes? Was there a logical relationship among the observations, analysis and key success factors and changes presented in the template for each of the elements of the UTA?
94
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
8. Were the significant points of the UTA discussed with senior agency management to confirm understanding of critical success factors, points of strategic focus, significant events and plans and potential risks? Were analytical procedures performed during the planning phase of the audit in order to identify risks? Are there audit working papers that correspond to the income statement/ appropriation account? Are there evidences that accounts with significant changes from: Prior years results Variations from budget
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
9.
10.
11.
1.
Form02-03 Form02-04
4. 5.
95
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA) AgencyLevel Controls Checklist (ALCC)
1. Did the audit team use Probing Questions to assess Control Environment, Risk Assessment Information and Communication, Monitoring and Control Activities in understanding the agency-level controls? Were observations documented using the ALCC Summary? Did the audit team issue an Audit Observation Memorandum for deficiencies noted on the design of agency-level controls or red flags to call the attention of Management?
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
Form02-05
2. 3.
Form02-06
1.
Audit Risk Assessment and Planning Tool (ARAPT) A. Financial and Compliance Audit:
Were significant and material financial statement accounts identified? Was there an assessment of inherent risk? Control Assessment?
Form02-07
2.
96
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
3. Was an acceptable materiality level used to detect quantitative material misstatements as indicated in Materiality Template? Were qualitative factors considered for materiality? Is the planning materiality figure still appropriate for the evaluation of the results of audit procedures and were the reasons for changes properly documented? Was materiality considered during the evaluation of the results of procedures performed and were proper conclusions reached in this regard? Where indications of fraud were discovered during the audit, was it adequately followed up? Was audit strategy determined and indicated in the ARAPT? (Test of controls will be the audit strategy for accounts assessed as Minimal or Low (we are intending to rely on the controls), whereas, substantive procedures will be the audit strategy for accounts assessed as Moderate or High.) Were the prioritized risks discussed with management for confirmation? Was the timing of the audit indicated in the ARAPT?
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
4. 5.
6.
7. 8.
9. 10.
B. Performance Audit
1. 2. Were the agencys significant Programs, Activities and Projects (PAPs) identified? Was the basis for assessment and selection factors of PAPs indicated in the ARAPT?
97
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
3. Were significant PAPs subject to performance audit listed in the ARAPT?
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
III.
ISSAI 1230
Form03-01
1.
2. 3.
98
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA) Execute Audit Test Part I: Test of Controls (TOC)
1. Was audit evidence obtained through tests of control to support any assessment of control risk which is minimal or low? (TOC is performed only for accounts assessed as Minimal or Low (wherein we rated control risk as Low which means we are intending to rely on controls). Does it appear that the tests of controls over the internal controls are appropriate in the circumstances? Does it appear that the tests of control over results are properly assessed and evaluated? In cases where the assessed level of control risk was revised, were the nature, timing and extent of planned substantive procedures modified? ISSAI 1330
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
2.
3. 4.
1.
2.
Were substantive analytical reviews designed to obtain assurance regarding the reasonableness of account balances or series of transactions and were all criteria met in this regard? Where any analytical reviews were performed to restrict the nature, timing and/or extent of substantive procedures, are the results from such an analysis appropriately measured against materiality? Was corroboration obtained for explanations received?
99
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
3. Were appropriate substantive procedures designed and performed for each transaction, account balance and disclosure per ARAPT? Are there evidences that results of confirmations received back were compared to the clients records and differences investigated? Regarding the timing of the substantive procedures, Was the most efficient manner of conducting the substantive procedures taken into account? Were the samples selected for testing reasonable and representative of the population? Test Audit Scheme (TAS) and the Simplified Sampling Scheme (SSS)
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
4.
5.
6.
ISSAI 1530
3.
4.
100
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA) IV. Communicate Audit Results
1. Were all audit observations discussed with appropriate level of agency management to confirm the audit team understands of the nature and cause of the audit observations? Where in the opinion of the audit team the evidence provided by the agency do not support the agencys position, was the Supervising Auditor (SA)/Cluster Director (CD) consulted to determine final audit action? Were all audit findings communicated to Management through the issuance of any of the following? Audit Observation Memorandum (AOM) Notice of Suspension (NS) Notice of Disallowance (ND) Notice of Charge (NC)
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
2.
3.
4.
Are AOMs and Audit Queries (AQs) issued for resolution of queries and exception arising from audit tests? Delivery B. Conclusion and Reporting 1. Summary of Audit Results and Recommendations Were all accumulated results of financial, compliance, and performance audits summarized at the end of the audit? Were all significant findings, issues and observations, including misstatements, summarized and discussed with management? ISSAI 400 Form 03B-01
1.
2.
101
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
3. Were all findings, observations, and issues that have significant impact on the financial statements considered before finalizing the conclusion of the audit? Did the Minutes of discussions with the counterpart audit team (e.g., Fraud Audit Office (FAO) and/or Special Audit Office (SAO) form part of the audit working papers? Did the following evaluation factors considered : Materiality factors? Indications of significant weakness in internal control? Indications of possible fraud or illegal acts? 2. Prepare Audit Report ISSAI 400 COA Memo No. 2002047 dated August 13, 2002 COA Memo No. 2010015
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
4.
5.
102
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
1. Are the guidelines on the preparation, submission and transmittal of the AAR observed?
ISA Ref.
ISSAI 1700
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
COA Memo 2002047 COA Memo 2009028 COA Memo 2010015 COA Memo 2010020
2.
3.
4.
Does the AAR contain gist of the observations and recommendations for performance audit undertaken which is still on-going? Does the AAR contain gist of the observations and recommendations for fraud audit which is still ongoing? Does the AAR contain the following: Executive Summary Audit Certificate Financial Statements Observations and Recommendations Status of Implementation of Prior Years audit Recommendations
ISSAI 3100
103
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
3. Perform Overall Audit Review Quality Inspection Tool (QIT) Did the Supervising Auditor conduct overall review and approval of the engagement to document and confirm that: Engagement has been completed in accordance with IRRBAM? Sufficient appropriate audit evidence has been obtained? Audit documentation provides a basis for audit opinion? Was the QIT used by the team in performing overall review and approval of the audit engagement prior to the release of the audit report? Was the QIT signed and dated by appropriate members of the audit team? Were adequate procedures designed in respect of auditing the budgetary process of the auditees? Are events subsequent to the balance sheet date adequately documented and are significant events considered for disclosure/adjustment to the financial statements? If audit reports are delayed beyond a reasonable period is the subsequent events review extended? Are all commitments and contingent liabilities properly considered? Is the ability of the auditee to continue as a going concern for the foreseeable future properly and adequately considered?
ISA Ref.
ISSAI 1220
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
Form 3B-02
1.
2.
3. 4. 5.
6. 7. 8.
ISSAI 1560
ISSAI 1570
104
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
9. Are management representation letters obtained, signed by the appropriate members of management, or other forms of representation obtained? Were attorneys letters requested and obtained where an indication was found that the auditees are involved in any legal matter/ litigation? Were adequate procedures designed and executed to be able to ensure compliance with laws and regulations? Are the financial statements properly presented and intelligible and do they meet the applicable standards? Are the notes to the financial statements in accordance with professional standards and sufficient and appropriate in the circumstances? Are the accounting policies and the nature and effect of any changes therein clearly disclosed in the financial statements? Are the audit reports in accordance with the applicable standards?
ISA Ref.
ISSAI 1580
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
10.
11.
12. 13.
14.
15.
16. 17.
Were procedures performed to ensure the completeness of financial statements? Were the work performed by other auditors, properly evaluated and taken into consideration during the current audit? (Computer audit, Performance audit and Forensic audit)
105
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
4. Wrap-up and archive the engagement Were all the account area lead schedules (for each account/component) correctly completed and cross-referenced to the financial statements of the Auditee? Are well supported conclusions stated for each component audited? Is there evidence of audit objectives having been met in each procedure? Are financial statement amounts readily traceable to a working trial balance and lead schedules? Are adjusting entries adequately supported by the working papers and cross-referenced to appropriate schedules? Is there adequate support in the working papers for all the information contained in the notes to the financial statements? Generally, do the working papers: Include indexing/signatures and dating by preparer and reviewer? Indicate the meanings of audit tick marks? Indicate source of information? Indicate the purpose of photocopied documents? Containing memoranda or other evidence covering significant and unusual accounting and reporting matters? Indicate that all schedules, prepared by the auditees, have been cast and cross cast?
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
ISSAI 1230
2. 3. 4. 5.
6.
7.
106
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
8. Where appropriate, do the audit working papers have evidence of consultation procedures with those who have appropriate expertise? Do the audit working papers demonstrate adequate CD/ SA involvement in planning/ supervision/review process of the audit? 5. Follow-up Agency Action Plan Action Plan Monitoring Tool Did the Agency Action Plan contain the following information? Reference Audit Observation and Recommendation Agency Action Plan Persons/Department Responsible Target Implementation Date Did the Action Plan Monitoring Tool include the following information? Date of follow-up Implementation status Actual Implementation Date Reason for Delay/Nonimplementation Comments/Action Taken
ISA Ref.
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
9.
1.
2.
107
Quality Assurance Review Integrated Results and Risk-based Audit Methodology (IRRBA)
V. 1. MONITORING (Quality Control System) Does the COA has a system of quality control system to provide reasonable assurance that: The organization and its personnel comply with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements in the delivery of its audit services? The reports issued by the COA are appropriate in the circumstance?
ISA Ref.
ISSAI 40 ISSAI 1220
NO N/A REMARKS
WP Ref.
108
Appendix 9
Negative observations:
{Insert the description of the finding}
Impact:
{What can be the effect of the risk occurring}
Cause:
{Reason of finding or problem}
Director IV feedback:
{Insert the Director IV response}
109
Element No Finding No
Negative
Observation
Cause
110
Appendix 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION SAI BACKGROUND AND PARTICIPANTS APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Element 1: Independence and Legal Framework Element 2: Human Resource Element 3: Audit Methodology and Standards Element 4: Internal Governance Element 5: Corporate Support Element 6: Continuous Improvement Element 7: External Stakeholder Relations Element 8: Results ANNEXES
111
Since there could be shortcomings and recommendations related to the policy decisions or requiring amendment to the existing policies or introduction of new policies, it would be appropriate for the head of SAI to chair the session. The final Action Plan should, however, be signed by the head of the SAI. Although Action Plans are normally prepared after receiving the QAR Report, it can also be prepared during the Exit Meeting of the QAR and incorporated in the final QAR Report. Depending on the level of the QAR, the recommendations or the areas needing improvements must be prioritized for their effective implementation. Although the QAR team may rate the risk of each of their findings and observations as High, Medium and Low, the SAI management should again go through the same process of prioritizing the same findings and observations. However, besides prioritizing as High, Medium and Low, it must also see whether they are applicable given the circumstances under which the SAI is operating. Further the criterion for prioritizing/rating is also different and is normally decided during the brainstorming session. The following are some of the commonly used criteria: a) The expected impact on the SAI and the individual audit which will include both the positive impact from
112
Quality Assurance Review implementing the recommendation and negative impact from not implementing the recommendation or not taking actions; b) Seriousness of the deficiency; c) The applicability in relation to the SAI mandate, overall government policy and the countrys development stage; e.g. one cannot expect the SAI to use latest auditing software when there is hardly any IT development in the country itself; and d) Availability of resources such as time and money. Based on the above criteria including other criteria identified during the brainstorming session, the recommendations or area needing further improvements can be rated as High, Medium, Low and Not Applicable (N/A). Follow-up actions Based on the Action Plan, the follow-up can be undertaken to see whether the actions have been taken by the concerned person, units, divisions or departments within the given time frame. Wherever possible, the follow-up team should also comment on the impact of the actions on the SAI or an individual audit. The team should also look for reasons for not taking the actions and suggest alternative options wherever possible. It could be possible that although the SAI may have the will and desire to implement the actions but due to certain constraining factors like time, resource, etc. the actions remain unimplemented. The follow-up action report should be submitted to the head of the SAI for taking further actions. The further actions may include, but not restricted to, the following: a) Seeking explanation against those who have not taken any action/done anything to implement the proposed actions; b) Cautioning those who are lagging behind the scheduled deadlines;
High - Very important and Action to be
taken immediately;
Low
- Not so important but good to have it, so can be included in the SAIs future strategies. - Not Applicable, so no need to take any action
N/A
113
Quality Assurance Review c) Looking into the alternative options and making relevant persons/s or units to study the options for their applicability and practicality; d) Re-prioritizing and dropping certain proposed plan of actions which cannot be implemented at all. The follow-up on QARs can also be done by the internal QAO on a continuous basis by monitoring their implementation against the scheduled deadlines. Therefore, it is important to involve people from the internal QAO during any QARs. The results of the follow-up can be utilized as input for the next planning process
114
115
Quality Assurance Review ACRONYM LRE LRES LORMA MFO MTPDP MTPIP NC ND NS OP OPIF PAM PAP PD PFMS PIDS PPSAS PRC QA QAFAP QAO QAQ QAR QARQ QARRF QCRP QCS QCSC QIT QMS QS R&D RD SA SAI SAO SONA SSS TAS TOC FULL NAME Learning Results Evaluation Learning Results Evaluation Services Low Risk Material Accounts Major Final Outputs Medium-Term Philippine Development Program Medium-Term Public Investment Program Notice of Charge Notice of Disallowance Notice of Suspension Office of the President Organizational Performance Indicator Framework Program Accountability Model Programs, Activities and Projects Presidential Decree Planning, Finance and Management Sector Professional and Institutional Development Sector Philippine Public Sector Auditing Standards Process Risk Control Quality Assurance Quality Assurance Follow-up Action Plan Quality Assurance Office Quality Assurance Questionnaire Quality Assurance Review Quality Assurance Review Questionnaire Quality Assurance Review Recording Form Quality Control Review Plan Quality Control System Quality Control System Checklist Quality Inspection Tool Quality Management System Qualification Standards Research and Development Regional Director Supervising Auditor Supreme Audit Institutions Special Audit Office State of the Nation Address Simplified Sampling Scheme Test Audit Scheme Test of Controls
116
Quality Assurance Review ACRONYM TOR UTA FULL NAME Terms of Reference Understanding the Agency Template
117