1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, 12-13 October 2009 Risk of Error on 2000-06 Closure Ljubljana,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EN Regional Policy - Finance & Budget EUROPEAN COMMISSION Annual Meeting with managing authorities of crossborder programmes Brussels - 25 Octobre 2011.
Advertisements

Ministry of Finance of Estonia Auditing Structural Funds in a new Member State: the case of Estonia Helen Petrov.
The Managing Authority –Keystone of the Control System
Public Procurement ESF ECA DAS 2011 Case studies
A d d V Alue to public management Winding-up declaration Portuguese experience Carlos Trigacheiro Inspecção-Geral de Finanças (IGF) General Inspection.
Management and control systems Franck Sébert, DG Regional and Urban Policy, Head of Unit C1 SEVENTEENTH MEETING OF THE EXPERT GROUP ON.
Towards reform of the EU Budget _________________________________________________________________________________Accountability, the aching tooth ? European.
Performance Framework
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Social and economic cohesion OPEN DAYS 2006 The European Week of Regions and Cities Brussels, 9 – 12 October 2006 _________________________.
Technical Meeting Closure : Winding-up declaration Commission Audit Approach Mark Schelfhout DG EMPL/I/4.
MINISTRY OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS DG “PROGRAMMING OF THE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT” OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME “REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT” EVALUATION.
AUDITING COHESION AND STRUCTURAL FUNDS IN SLOVENIA Nataša Prah Ljubljana, 
Single Audit Strategy LATVIA. Audit System The Audit Authority functions are carried out by the Internal Audit Department of the Ministry of.
ESIF Business Process and Simplification Nic Suggit Department of Communities and Local Government 24 April 2014.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Draft information note on the Annual.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Workshop 3 Audit of State Aids Ljubljana,
SAI India September  Sampling is used by SAI-India extensively in ◦ Financial Audit ◦ Compliance Audit ◦ Performance Audit.
WMO UNEP INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE NATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES PROGRAMME WMO UNEP IPCC Good Practice Guidance Simon Eggleston Technical.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Sampling and small populations Ljubljana,
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Introduction to IT audits PART II IT.
1 INTERREG IIIB “ATLANTIC AREA” Main points of community regulation 438/2001 financial management and control systems EUROPEAN COMMISSION SPAIN.
SEMINAR on the EEA Financial Mechanism THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE- GENERAL REGIONAL POLICY Brussels 13 June 2005 Control and Audit Nicholas Martyn.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 System evaluation and sampling – first.
Introduction to JASPERS and reflections on Sustainable Roads Kristian DUUS, JASPERS Roads Division, Vienna Regional Office.
Annual Governance Report North Dorset District Council September 2010 Audit 2009/10.
How does the ECA assess Member States’ internal control systems? Workshop on Audit/Evaluation of Public Internal Financial Control Systems (PIFC) Ankara,
Rigsrevisionen The National Audit Office of Denmark.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Implementation of Article 73 Ljubljana,
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Carmine Di Nuzzo Ministry of Economy.
© OECD A joint initiative of the OECD and the European Union, principally financed by the EU. Quality Assurance José Viegas Ribeiro IGF, Portugal SIGMA.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Simplification Task Force Results for Audit Authorities Ljubljana,
S7: Audit Planning. Session Objectives To explain the need for planning To explain the need for planning To outline the essential elements of planning.
Audit Planning. Session Objectives To explain the need for planning To outline the essential elements of planning process To finalise the audit approach.
Namur, 28 October th Conference of the Directors of EU Paying Agencies Recent Developments regarding the Management and Control of Agricultural.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Internal Quality Assessment Process Internal.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 EC rules on state aid Ljubljana,
Regional Policy Management and control systems Draft Delegated Act Franck Sébert, DG Regional and Urban Policy, Head of Unit C1 TWENTY-FOURTH.
Projects spanning over two programming periods Department for Programme and Project Preparation Beatrix Horváth, Deputy Head of Department Budapest, 5.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika Slovenija European Union Ljubljana, October.
Project Monitoring System SEMESTER PROGRESS REPORT May 8th, 2009 Barcelona CLAN – Continuous Learning for Adults with Needs LLP IT-GRUNDTVIG-GMP.
Regional Policy Management and control systems Franck Sébert, DG Regional and Urban Policy, Head of Unit C1 NINETEENTH MEETING OF THE EXPERT.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Coordination between the Commission and.
29 March 2011 Audit Authority Audit Department Ministry of Finance 1.
Click to edit Master title style 1 WINDING-UP DECLARATION Practical experience PORTUGAL Carlos Trigacheiro Inspecção-Geral de Finanças (IGF) General Inspection.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union IT audits Workshop 2 – Report Ljubljana, October 2009 Mr. Gilles.
Structural Funds in Ireland Structural Funds in Ireland Financial management, Financial management, control & audit - Ireland Dermot Byrne Head of Unit.
Results orientation: audit perspective Jiri Plecity, Head of Unit H1, Relations with Control Authorities, Legal Procedures, Audit of Direct Management.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika Slovenija European Union Ljubljana, October.
Closure of the Programming Period ESF TWG Luxemburg 2 nd December 2015.
Structural Funds in Ireland Structural Funds in Ireland Financial control & audit - Financial control & audit - ERDF & Cohesion Fund operations Dermot.
EN Regional Policy EUROPEAN COMMISSION 1 DG Regional Policy’s evaluation of the compliance assessment process for the programming period COCOF.
EN EUROPEAN COMMISSION Budgetary Control Committee of European Parliament Budgetary Control Committee of European Parliament Brian Gray DG BUDGET Workshop.
1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Report from Workshop No. 1 Systems evaluations.
EU Cohesion Policy and its implementation in the Czech Republic Zuzana Kasáková Department of W European Studies Charles University in Prague.
AUDIT QUALITY AND ASSURANCE 2 ND AND 3 RD OCTOBER 2014 HILTON HOTEL MATERIALITY IN PLANNING AND PERFORMING THE AUDIT (ISA 320) 1.
© Shutterstock - olly Simplified Costs Options (SCOs) The audit point of view.
Regional Policy Management and control systems Franck Sébert, DG Regional and Urban Policy, Head of Unit C1 NINETEENTH MEETING OF THE EXPERT.
TAIEX-REGIO Workshop on Applying the Partnership Principle in the European Structural and Investment Funds Bratislava, 20/05/2016 Involvement of Partners.
Residual Risk Rate: Concept and implications for the AA and the Commission at closure Carmine Mollica DG Regional and Urban Policy – Unit C1.
Simplified Cost Options: DG EMPL audit approach
Structural Funds Financial Management and Control, Romania
Experiences of Audits of the European Commission in the Region of Saxony-Anhalt Mechthild v. Maydell Head of the Audit Authority for the Region of Saxony-Anhalt.
INTERACTION AND COOPERATION
Introduction to JASPERS and reflections on Sustainable Roads Kristian DUUS, JASPERS Roads Division, Vienna Regional Office.
Performance Framework
Management Verifications & Sampling Methods
INTERACTION AND COOPERATION
Random Sampling + RAT-Stats.
Management Verifications & Sampling Methods
Sampling and estimation
Presentation transcript:

1 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Risk of Error on Closure Ljubljana, October 2009 Graeme Waterhouse ESF Audit Authority for England & Gibraltar Risk Assurance Division Department for Work & Pensions Graeme Waterhouse ESF Audit Authority for England & Gibraltar Risk Assurance Division Department for Work & Pensions

2 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Introduction Our experience of trying to shut the programmes. How we will communicate to the Commission: Frequency of error Materiality Whether there is a high/low frequency of error Financial impact

3 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Background 12 programmes to shut in England & Gibraltar by 31 March 2010 ESF is delivered by the Department for Work & Pensions De-centralised system – delivery and A10 checks through 9 regional Government Offices Central coordinating bodies: Managing Authority in ESF Division Paying Authority in ESF Division Risk Assurance Division (for A10 & A15)

4 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Approach Apply the Commission’s Guidelines on the Closure of Assistance for Apply professional standards Explore options Minimise any potential financial damage Keep it simple

5 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Guidance Low frequency = “financial implications fall below a level of materiality considered appropriate by the independent body” High frequency = “confidence in entire management system is seriously affected and therefore no opinion can be given. To determine frequency a distinction must be drawn between the different categories of error”. Materiality = “The materiality level should generally not exceed 2% in order to be consistent with the methodology of the ECA. Specific justification should be provided in case a higher level is applied”. If high we must estimate the financial impact

6 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Frequency of Error Article 10 Purpose: To provide an independent assessment of the effectiveness of the management and control systems operated by the Managing Authority & Implementing Bodies for European Structural Funds

7 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Frequency of Error CALCULATE TWO ERROR RATES Programme Error Rate: Error that exists in the Managing Authority’s control environment Before any audit intervention Includes results of random & risk-based Article 10 checks & other Community & national controls. Cannot be used for extrapolation Representative Error Rate: Based on randomly selected Article 10 controls Can be used for extrapolation

8 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Programme Error Rate Population/ Sample (£/Є) Error RateWeightingWeighted Error Rate A10 – Risk Sample4010%40 0.8% Other Community & National Controls 1010%10 0.2% A10 – Random Sample502.5% = % PROGRAMME ERROR RATE % Representative of the unchecked population 10% x (40/500)

9 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Programme Error Rate Conclusion. The programme error rate is 3.25%

10 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Representative Error Rate Based on randomly selected Article 10 checks only. Representative: Geographic spread Time (annual coverage) Type/size Measure Randomly selected Can be used for extrapolation as it reflects the error that exists in the unchecked population

11 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Representative Error Rate Population/ Sample Error Rate WeightingWeighted Error Rate A10 – Risk Sample4010%40 0.8% Other Community & National Controls 1010%10 0.2% A10 – Random Sample 502.5% = % PROGRAMME ERROR RATE %

12 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Representative Error Rate Conclusion. The representative error rate is 2.5%

13 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Materiality Materiality = “The materiality level should generally not exceed 2% in order to be consistent with the methodology of the ECA. Specific justification should be provided in case a higher level is applied”. Conclusion: The level of error in the programme is material if the value of errors remaining in the claim exceeds 2% of the final claim value (total population)

14 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Financial Impact A Population (final claim value)£500 B Less A10, national & Community controls -£100 C Unchecked population£400 D Representative Error Rate2.5% E Financial impact (CXD)£10 F Materiality Level (AX2%)£10 G Material Impact (E-F)£0 The checked population has already been corrected so no error remains The value of error in the Final Claim Are the errors in the final claim material?

15 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Conclusions The programme error rate is 3.25% The representative error rate is 2.5% The value of the errors that remain in the final claim is within the Commission’s 2% materiality level Conclusion – there is a low frequency of error

16 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Another Example A Population (final claim value)£500 B Less A10, national & Community controls -£100 C Unchecked population£400 D Representative Error Rate3.5% E Financial impact (CXD)£14 F Materiality Level (AX2%)£10 G Material Impact (E-F)£4 The checked population has already been corrected so no error remains The value of error in the Final Claim Are the errors in the final claim material?

17 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Conclusions The representative error rate is 3.5% The value of the errors that remain in the final claim exceeds the Commission’s 2% materiality level Conclusion – there is a high frequency of error

18 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Other Considerations Stratifying the population? Unrepresentative Samples Off-Setting

19 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Stratifying Basis of stratification must be set from the start of the programme Different strata types give different overall results Consistency across programmes Sample sizes often too small

20 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Unrepresentative Samples Our definition: An Article 10 check where the audit trail is completely lost (100% error) as a result of insolvency or natural disaster (fire/flood). Implication: These can be removed from error rate and financial impact calculations Assumptions: These are circumstances beyond the Managing Authority’s control The audit trail did exist at the time the project operated and the likely level of error is in line with the representative error rate.

21 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Off-Setting Off –setting of positive and negative financial impacts Argument: 1)Commission may make corrections based on the Article 15 body’s estimated financial impact 2)The corrections should take account of the Managing Authority's control environment as a whole (i.e. across all programmes)

22 Homologues Group Meeting Slovenia, October 2009 Republika SlovenijaEuropean Union Ljubljana, October 2009 Thank you for your attention! Tel: (0044)