IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Evolving the Assessment of the Effectiveness of IAEA Safeguards Implementation INMM Bruce W. Moran, Head Section.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ENTITIES FOR A UN SYSTEM EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 17th MEETING OF SENIOR FELLOWSHIP OFFICERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM AND HOST COUNTRY AGENCIES BY DAVIDE.
Advertisements

Organizational Governance
Policies and Procedures for Civil Society Participation in GEF Programme and Projects presented by GEF NGO Network ECW.
K-6 Science and Technology Consistent teaching – Assessing K-6 Science and Technology © 2006 Curriculum K-12 Directorate, NSW Department of Education and.
Auditing, Assurance and Governance in Local Government
Core principles in the ASX CGC document. Which one do you think is the most important and least important? Presented by Casey Chan Ethics Governance &
Contractor Assurance System AC Overview October 13, 2009.
Development of internal control: methodology and responsibility
Internal Audit : Framework for the Management of Compliance Presentation at FMI meeting Sept
QUALITY ASSURANCE AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (QAIP)
Service Agency Accreditation Recognizing Quality Educational Service Agencies Mike Bugenski
The quality framework of European statistics by the ESCB Quality Conference Vienna, 3 June 2014 Aurel Schubert 1) European Central Bank 1) This presentation.
Quality evaluation and improvement for Internal Audit
Office of the Auditor General of Canada The State of Program Evaluation in the Canadian Federal Government Glenn Wheeler Director, Results Measurement.
Chapter 4 IDENTIFYING RISKS AND CONTROLS IN BUSINESS PROCESSES.
Purpose of the Standards
National Inventory System in Finland Workshop on QC and QA of GHG Inventories and the Establishment of National Inventory Systems 2-3 September 2004, Copenhagen.
Security Assessments FITSP-M Module 5. Security control assessments are not about checklists, simple pass-fail results, or generating paperwork to pass.
TC176/IAF ISO 9001:2000 Auditing Practices Group.
Protection Against Occupational Exposure
COSO Framework Update IIA Columbus Chapter May 17, 2013
Conducting the IT Audit
REVIEW AND QUALITY CONTROL
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT
Introduction to ISO New and modified requirements.
An Educational Computer Based Training Program CBTCBT.
D-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2005 by the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Module D Internal, Governmental, and Fraud Audits “I predict that audit.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of PricewaterhouseCoopers Introduction of Panel Members The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 What Companies Should Be Doing Now.
Security Assessments FITSP-A Module 5
Professional Certificate – Managing Public Accounts Committees Ian “Ren” Rennie.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Reviewing Management System and the Interface with Nuclear Security (IRRS Modules 4 and 12) BASIC IRRS TRAINING.
The Audit Process PRESENTED BY:.
IMFO 5 AUDIT & RISK INDABA Fostering better service delivery through governance service (MPAC Oversight) Presented by: PR Mnisi East London ICC.
Agency Risk Management & Internal Control Standards (ARMICS)
Building and Recognizing Quality School Systems DISTRICT ACCREDITATION © 2010 AdvancED.
Bank Audit. Internal Audit Internal audit is an independent, objective assurance activity and can give valuable insight in providing assurance that major.
Project Guideline for Auditing Internal Control Systems Claudia Kroneder-Partisch Austrian Court of Audit.
RTI, MUMBAI / CH 101 CRITICAL ISSUES IN PERFORMANCE AUDIT DAY 10 SESSION NO.1 (THEORY ) BASED ON CHAPTER 10 PERFORMANCE AUDITING GUIDELINES.
Quality Management in the Finland’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory Leena Raittinen, Statistics Finland UNFCCC Workshop on National Systems April 2005 Bonn,
Specific Safety Requirements on Safety Assessment and Safety Cases for Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste – GSR Part 5.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
Model of Measuring State’s Intention of Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy - as a tool of supporting IAEA integrated safeguards - 1. Introduction When we consider.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Methodology and Responsibilities for Periodic Safety Review for Research Reactors William Kennedy Research Reactor.
ICASA and USSASA Predetermined Objectives – 2013/14 March 2013 Portfolio committee.
1 Project Management C53PM Session 3 Russell Taylor Staff Work-base – 1 st Floor
The common structure and ISO 9001:2015 additions
Quality Assessment of MFA’s evaluations Rita Tesselaar Policy and operations Evaluation Department Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Company: Cincinnati Insurance Company Position: IT Governance Risk & Compliance Service Manager Location: Fairfield, OH About the Company : The Cincinnati.
Fundamentals of Governance: Parliament and Government Understanding and Demonstrating Assessment Criteria Facilitator: Tony Cash.
Quality Milestones Elaborate quality system developed over the years “Joint Agenda Building” (JAB) group “Strategic Quality” – Progress report CA/80/04.
Copyright © 2007 Pearson Education Canada 9-1 Chapter 9: Internal Controls and Control Risk.
The State Evaluation Process Therese Renis Section Head Division of Operations B Department of Safeguards 08 February 2007.
Research and Test Reactor Decommissioning Inspections Gerald A. Schlapper, PhD, PE, CHP Health Physicist Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region I.
The Role of the Internal and External Evaluators in Student Assessment Arthur Brown Advisor to the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Project Republic.
TC176/IAF ISO 9001:2000 Auditing Practices Group.
Shared Services and Third Party Assurance: Panel May 19, 2016.
1 Auditing Your Fusion Center Privacy Policy. 22 Recommendations to the program resulting in improvements Updates to privacy documentation Informal discussions.
An Integrated Approach to the Future Role of the RCARO in Support of the RCA Programme.
Chapter 6 Internal Control in a Financial Statement Audit McGraw-Hill/IrwinCopyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
SUNY Maritime Internal Control Program. New York State Internal Control Act of 1987 Establish and maintain guidelines for a system of internal controls.
CPA Gilberto Rivera, VP Compliance and Operational Risk
GS-R-3 vs. ISO 9001:2008 Requirements - 4
EIA approval process, Management plan and Monitoring
Seminar on Evaluation of Internal Control Systems
Audit & Risk Management
Level - 3 Process Areas (CMMI-DEV)
Monitoring and Evaluation using the
How to conduct Effective Stage-1 Audit
GSBPM AND ISO AS QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM TOOLS: AZERBAIJAN EXPERIENCE Yusif Yusifov, Deputy Chairman of the State Statistical Committee of the Republic.
An overview of Internal Controls Structure & Mechanism
Presentation transcript:

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Evolving the Assessment of the Effectiveness of IAEA Safeguards Implementation INMM Bruce W. Moran, Head Section for Effectiveness Evaluation Department of Safeguards

IAEA Starting with the State-Level Concept A holistic approach to safeguards implementation − Applicable to all States with SG agreements − Based on a comprehensive and continual State evaluation and a State-level approach, including a specific combination of safeguards measures for an individual State − Executed through an annual implementation plan Considering the State as a whole provides the opportunity to take State-specific factors into consideration during all stages of safeguards implementation Implementation of the State-level concept is responsive to changes in the analysis, ensuring that safeguards conclusions remain soundly based and up-to-date

IAEA Implementing the State-level Concept Enhancement of the implementation of the Agency’s State-level concept requires: An expanded use of State-specific factors and a structured acquisition path analysis to define and prioritize State-specific technical objectives State-level approaches that specify and provide options for Headquarters and in-field activities required to meet the technical objectives Identification and selection of activities in the annual implementation plan Linkage of the State evaluation process with conduct of safeguards verification activities

IAEA Implementing the State-level Concept Evolving the safeguards system to be more: ObjectivesAs opposed to criteria driven; allows for based:customized State-level approaches to meet State-specific objectives InformationUse of all information, including State driven: factors, to determine objectives andconduct safeguards activities Focused:At the State level and on issues of concern; putting resources where the risks are Adaptable:Responsive to changes in information and analysis for conducting safeguards

IAEA Assuring Continued Effectiveness Each DIR-SGO is responsible and accountable for the implementation of safeguards for each State assigned to the Division and the conclusions arising therefrom Each DIR-SGO must ensure that the implementation of the activities is consistent with procedures or guidelines established for such purpose any changes to the activities achieve the objectives

IAEA Assuring Continued Effectiveness State Evaluation Reports Prepared by the relevant State Evaluation Group Reviewed by a Departmental Committee State-Level Approaches Prepared by the relevant State Evaluation Group Reviewed by Departmental Sub-Committee Annual Implementation Plan Prepared by the relevant State Evaluation Group Reviewed by the relevant Operations Division Director (DIR-SGO) Quality Management System Evaluate departmental processes and procedures and their implementation Oversee the corrective action programme

IAEA Assuring Continued Effectiveness State Evaluation State-Level Safeguards Approach Safeguards Processes and Safeguards Approaches Annual Implementation Plan and Safeguards Implementation

IAEA SEE Responsibilities are cross-cutting State Evaluation State-Level Safeguards Approach Safeguards Processes and Safeguards Approaches ) Annual Implementation Plan and Safeguards Implementation

IAEA Section for Effectiveness Evaluation (SEE) SEE will operate as the central quality control tool of the Department for implementation and evaluation issues SEE will perform the quality control activities on statements, surveillance, and seals, among others SEE will perform an independent and in-depth assessment for each State of safeguards verification activities goal or objective attainment safeguards conclusions and recommendations SEE will lead assessments of selected State evaluation reports to ensure that the conclusions drawn are sound

IAEA SEE Responsibilities SEE will Conduct selective evaluations of the effectiveness of the State evaluation process Conduct selective evaluations of specific safeguards verification activities across a selection of States, such as inspections, complementary access, design information verification and other safeguards activities, such as information analysis Conduct selective evaluations of the effectiveness of safeguards measures, such as monitoring activities (e.g., seals and surveillance), measurement activities, and information collection activities Conduct selective evaluations of annual implementation plans Conduct technical reviews of anomalies Prepare the Safeguards Implementation Report and Data Evaluation Report

IAEA SEE Evaluation Activities Selection process will be random and information- driven Evaluations will be performed through Document and information reviews Quality control tests Observations and interviews Periodic reports to DDG and Management Committee on findings SEE findings identify where process audits and corrective actions may need to be initiated

IAEA Evolving the Safeguards Implementation Report Purpose of the SIR is to provide safeguards conclusions and information to enhance confidence in those conclusions SIR should provide more analysis and explanation of the data SIR is to be aligned with the State-level concept for safeguards implementation. The report should demonstrate how the Agency is using all relevant information to draw safeguards conclusions SIR is to be focused on safeguards implementation Activities formerly presented as “safeguards strengthening” are now routine safeguards tools

IAEA Summary Safeguards effectiveness evaluation is independently performed by Departmental entities for all aspects of safeguards implementation SEE quality control activities will assure that Verification activities were correctly performed Data was correctly generated and analysed All information was considered in the State evaluation Assurance is provided to States that safeguards activities met their objectives and support the safeguards conclusions