4 – SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS’ INPUT INTO POLICY EVALUATION AND OVERSIGHT – 151
Box 4.8. The SAI of the European Union – assessing management of conflict of interest in EU agencies (continued) Methodology The audit included: a comparative analysis of the selected agencies’ regulatory framework; meetings with management and staff; a desk review of various documents (including the agencies’ policies, procedures, internal guidelines, declarations of interests, minutes of meetings, staff personnel files); and the examination, on a sample basis, of how the agencies applied their policies and procedures to the specific cases.
Criteria The European Union’s (EU) regulatory framework, and the agencies’ own specific policies and procedures, were considered by the ECA as not being sufficiently comprehensive. OECD guidelines and best practices were therefore used as a basis for assessing the adequacy of the policies and procedures in place. Criteria used for part of the audit included: examining the level of implementation of conflict of interest policies, agency-specific policies, and best practice examples.
Resources The audit required approximately 100 auditor weeks to complete.
Outcomes and benefits The ECA found that none of the selected four agencies adequately managed conflict of interest. A number of shortcomings were identified in agency-specific policies and procedures, as well as in their implementation. Eight areas for improvement in the agencies’ policies and procedures were recommended by the ECA. In addition, the EU legislator, possibly in consultation with other EU institutions, was advised to consider further developing the EU regulatory framework dedicated to managing conflict of interest situations, using the OECD guidelines and existing best practices as a reference. In December 2013, the Commission, in close co-operation with the agencies, produced guidelines to provide a clear reference for the policies to be adopted and implemented by each agency. Actions to strengthen policies and procedures and address shortcomings were also undertaken in individual agencies. The audit had an important impact not only on the conflict of interest policies of the four audited agencies, but also on all the other European agencies, including those established after the audit. After publication of the report, the European Parliament discussed and adopted resolutions that stressed issues concerning the management and prevention of potential conflict of interests in agencies.
Good practice The audit was the first to be performed by the ECA on conflict of interest policies, and on the broader field of ethics and integrity. In the absence of clear legal requirements and criteria, the audit successfully used internationally recognised principles and comparative analysis.
Lessons learned Audit criteria should be suitable in terms of relevance and acceptability. By using recognised sources for the definition of the audit criteria, and taking into account the specific situations of the audited organisations, it is possible to gain acceptance of the findings and recommendations on highly complex and sensitive issues and concerns. Furthermore, audit analysis and reporting needs to keep up with the pace of developments, especially in situations where the audited organisation is quick to introduce remedial measures to address the shortcomings identified in an audit.
SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS AND GOOD GOVERNANCE: OVERSIGHT, INSIGHT AND FORESIGHT © OECD 2016
