160902 Cost over Sight Survey .pdf



Nom original: 160902 Cost over Sight Survey.pdfTitre: 160902 Cost over Sight Survey (Read-Only)

Ce document au format PDF 1.3 a été généré par PowerPoint / Mac OS X 10.11.1 Quartz PDFContext, et a été envoyé sur fichier-pdf.fr le 02/09/2016 à 19:52, depuis l'adresse IP 172.98.x.x. La présente page de téléchargement du fichier a été vue 387 fois.
Taille du document: 2.6 Mo (6 pages).
Confidentialité: fichier public


Aperçu du document


06-07 September 2016

}

}

}

}

In 2014,High Level Comiittee for Management
(HLCM) endorsed 3 line of defense model
HLCM requested FBN to conduct an
assessment of costs related oversight and
accountability
Survey developed by a UNFPA led working
group and sent to all organizations
Results Analysed by UNFPA and CEB
Secretariat

}

May 2016, Prelminary results shared with FBN

}

June 2016, Discussed at FBN meeting

}

FBN noted:
◦ Good starting point,
◦ Discussions on the assumptions in completeing survey,
◦ What was expected outcome of survey
◦ Exercise had been challenging
◦ Discussion on whether to aggregate the data

◦ Could be used to educated stakeholders as to costs
of servicing oversight and accountability,
◦ Consideration should be given to determine if there
is a minimum level of oversight
◦ Impact of business model, including centralized vs
decentralized.
◦ KPIs required
◦ Draft report to be prepared for HLCM

Shared with UN RIAS. UN RIAS comments:
}

}

}

}

}

}

Overall, the analysis does not appear consistent and robust enough to provide a reliable comparison between organizations or
between each line of defense;
Whilst the study was initially targeted to oversight and accountability costs, the survey and costs represented in the report also cover
control related activities (1 st LOD and some parts of 2 nd LOD),
There seems to be some confusion over the term “assurance”, its meaning in relation to the lines of defense, as well as the definition
of some of them;
The report would benefit from some clarity in the analysis of the different organizational business models – e.g. centralized or
decentralized rather than “headquarter location” as the major proxy for cost differentiation. Analysis of costs by responsibility
categories i.e. Management (LoD 1 and 2) , Independent assurance (3 LoD), and external bodies, may help to alleviate the differences
in interpretation by the individual Organizations,
There is no discussion on the significance of the different levels of costs in each line of defence (eg, the components that make up the
costs for the individual lines of defense and what is the significance of a higher level of expenditure in 2nd Line of Defense 2 compared
to 1 st LOD?);
Findings which report an 11% increase in investment in the third LOD and a 16% increase in external LOD are significant and there is a
need for triangulation and to provide an understanding of the underlying components that comprise the increase before posting them
as such;

}

The consolidated results framework is broad and needs further refinement to reflect the UN environment; and

}

There appears to be duplication and redundancy of information.

}

What further inputs can we provide on the
draft report if any

}

How can we support any future studies that
may follow this one

}

What advice do we wish to give at next HLCM
meeting in October

}

Other thoughts/suggestions


Aperçu du document 160902 Cost over Sight Survey.pdf - page 1/6

Aperçu du document 160902 Cost over Sight Survey.pdf - page 2/6

Aperçu du document 160902 Cost over Sight Survey.pdf - page 3/6

Aperçu du document 160902 Cost over Sight Survey.pdf - page 4/6

Aperçu du document 160902 Cost over Sight Survey.pdf - page 5/6

Aperçu du document 160902 Cost over Sight Survey.pdf - page 6/6




Télécharger le fichier (PDF)


Télécharger
Formats alternatifs: ZIP




Documents similaires


160902 cost over sight survey
guidance note organisation wide opinion v04 clean
3 lines of defence
gain survey
dao metanalysis one report
summary cs enfinal

Sur le même sujet..




🚀  Page générée en 0.123s