3.5. SAI activities in assessing policy implementation

102 – 3 – SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS’ INPUT INTO POLICY IMPLEMENTATION

the start of the new Congress every two years.3 The list has provided incentives for agencies to make improvements, particularly when it has implications for funding considerations.  Brazil’s TCU report, Maturity Assessment in Risk Management in Public Administration, classifies government agencies by the level of development of their risk management mechanisms, from low formalisation (“initial” and “basic”) to fully optimised (“enhanced” and “advanced”). This allows the agencies to use the comparative data to improve their performance. This is further explored as a case study in Box 3.4.  The Spring Report of the Auditor General of Canada (2012) examines the Department of Finance’s debt- and risk-management strategies. It focuses on the procedures that monitor and report on debt funding strategies for interest-bearing debt (market debt and pension plan liabilities). A major point of discussion is the balance between costs and risks in the government’s debt portfolio.

As discussed in Chapter 2, SAIs play a unique role in relation to internal controls. Auditing compliance with internal controls and regulations inside government is a core task of SAIs, but they are extending beyond verifying basic compliance, as shown below.

It has become common to have continuous, and in some cases elaborate, working relationships between public internal audit and SAIs. In some countries, these relationships are laid down in laws and regulations. Relationships are often based on adhoc initiatives taken by the audit organisations themselves in order to avoid overlap, inefficiencies, and duplication of work, as well as to facilitate the process and ensure the co-operation of the audited entity. Internal audit is well placed to provide the SAI with information on the effectiveness of the systems used. However, the SAI should have full responsibility for the conclusions drawn from such information.

8/10

Of peer SAIs looked at: The effective and efficient application of internal control mechanisms at the entity level, including: for reliability of reporting; for achievement of entity level objectives; for deterring and detecting fraud and corruption within public sector entities.

7/10

Of peer SAIs looked at: Public sector entities for compliance with applicable regulations for internal control and financial management (including regulators).

7/10

Of peer SAIs looked at: The independence and/or capacity of audit and control entities, including: internal audit units; audit committees.

7/10

Of peer SAIs looked at Public entities' application of integrity policies (conflict of interest, asset Disclosure and whistleblowing mechanisms, etc.

SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS AND GOOD GOVERNANCE: OVERSIGHT, INSIGHT AND FORESIGHT © OECD 2016