WFP Presentation .pdf



Nom original: WFP Presentation .pdfTitre: WFP Presentation on Engagement Ratings and Annual Opinions final (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 16:50, depuis l'adresse IP 172.98.x.x. La présente page de téléchargement du fichier a été vue 389 fois.
Taille du document: 723 Ko (5 pages).
Confidentialité: fichier public


Aperçu du document


Harmonization
of engagement-level
audit ratings

September 2016

Objectives of the working group

As defined in UN-RIAS meeting of September 2015:
[ The majority of engagements were rated within the Partially Satisfactory
middle category in using the three tier rating system
[ There are clear benefits in maintaining some harmonization of the
engagement-level ratings (especially with public disclosure)
As further agreed in the working group:
[ Closer alignment to IIA and INTOSAI guidance
[ Applicable to all UN agencies and accommodating their various levels of
maturity.
[ Link to overall audit opinion to be clarified in macro-level guidance
The working group:
[ WFP, FAO, ICAO, PAHO, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF, UNOPS, UNRWA and
WHO,
[ Monthly meetings from Dec 2015 to April 2016.
[ Proposal agreed upon by the Working Group, circulated in June 2016 for
input by UN-RIAS members
[ Revised draft sent in August 2016.

Consideration in the ratings

[ Introduce a four-tier rating system (no middle rating)
[ Include the concept of reasonable assurance in the achievement of
objectives
[ Reference to “the assessed” controls as in scope and to allow various IAS
to adapt to their mandate/coverage
[ Take into consideration the maturity of various organizations, especially
governance and risk management
[ Provide a differentiation of the audit rating based on:
[ The extent of improvement required: “some”, “major”;
[ The urgency of management action required: “prompt”, “urgent”
[ Weakness in the design or/and functioning of controls;
[ The achievement of objectives: not affected, not significantly
affected, significantly affected; seriously compromised;
[ Provide symmetry for the ratings Effective/Satisfactory –
Ineffective/unsatisfactory - some/major improvement

Proposal and next steps
Effective/Satisfactory

The assessed <<governance arrangements, risk management practices
and controls>> were adequately << established and functioning well/
designed and operating effectively >> to provide reasonable assurance
that the objectives of the audited entity/area should be achieved.
Issue(s) identified by the audit, if any, do not affect the achievement of
the objectives of the audited entity/area

Some Improvement
Needed

The assessed <<governance arrangements, risk management practices
and controls>> were adequately << established and functioning well /
designed and operating effectively >> but need some improvement to
provide reasonable assurance that the objectives of the audited
entity/area should be achieved.
Issue(s) identified by the audit do not significantly affect the achievement
of the objectives of the audited entity/area.
Management action is recommended to ensure that identified risks are
adequately mitigated.

Major Improvement
Needed

The assessed <<governance arrangements, risk management practices
and controls>> were generally << established and functioning / designed
and operating >> but need major improvement to provide reasonable
assurance that the objectives of the audited entity/area should be
achieved.
Issues identified by the audit could significantly affect the achievement of
the objectives of the audited entity/area.
Prompt management action is required to ensure that identified risks are
adequately mitigated.

Ineffective/Unsatisfactory The assessed <<governance arrangements, risk management practices
and controls>> were <<not adequately established and not functioning
well / not adequately designed and not operating effectively>>to provide
reasonable assurance that the objectives of the audited entity/area should
be achieved.
Issues identified by the audit could seriously compromise the
achievement of the objectives of the audited entity/area.
Urgent management action is required to ensure that the identified risks
are adequately mitigated.

Each IAS wishing to adopt
the proposed harmonized
rating to engage with their
respective management
Provide feed back to the
UN-RIAS on progress,
variations to the wording
and adoption

THANK YOU!


Aperçu du document WFP Presentation .pdf - page 1/5

Aperçu du document WFP Presentation .pdf - page 2/5

Aperçu du document WFP Presentation .pdf - page 3/5

Aperçu du document WFP Presentation .pdf - page 4/5

Aperçu du document WFP Presentation .pdf - page 5/5




Télécharger le fichier (PDF)


WFP Presentation .pdf (PDF, 723 Ko)

Télécharger
Formats alternatifs: ZIP



Documents similaires


wfp presentation
performance audit ec ias and fao oig 1
guidance note organisation wide opinion v04 clean
joint audit cost recovery concept paper
unfpa remote audit and monitoring
calltoaction2016

Sur le même sujet..