1

Managing Authority 2007-2013

Conducting a self assessment

10 June 2008

A. Badrichani – DG Regional Policy – Audit Unit J3

2

Conducting a self assessment

– Background and justification– The tool: a questionnaire – How to fill in the questionnaire

and how to use it– Conclusions

3

Conducting a self assessment

Background and

justification

• It is an element of risk assessment / risk management

• It is in the interest of Managing Authorities to evaluate whether the systems meet required standards

4

Background

and

justification

• This exercise is separate from the compliance assessment which is done by an external body and covers only the set-up

• This exercise is for the MA and does not prejudice the work of the Audit Authority to give its independent opinion on the functioning of the system

• The exercise can be done regularly during programme implementation

5

MAMA

AAAA

EC/ECAEC/ECACACA

Risk assessmentRisk assessment

- Audit reports- Compliance assessment- Audit reports- Compliance assessment

- Audit reports- Corrections- Audit reports- Corrections

Feed backFeed back

- Management verif results- Self assessment- Other sources

- Management verif results- Self assessment- Other sources

- Address risks- Address risks

Background

and

justification

Part of a regular risk assessment exercise

6

Objectives for the Managing Authority:

– To evaluate the quality of the system – To detect the areas which need to be

strengthened– To take remedial actions

Tool

A self assessment questionnaire

7

– Focus is on the key requirements auditors would look at

– The key requirements and assessment criteria are the ones identified by the EC and ECA services (see systems evaluation guidance note)

Tool

The content of the questionnaire

8

The practical aspects

– As simple as possible with a minimum of questions (7 key requirements, 23 assessment criteria)

– Covers both design and functioning– Only questions with Yes or No answers– A framework which can be adapted and

completed by each Managing authority

Tool

9

Works well

Works but

Works partially

Does not

work

Key requirement (KR) 1: Clear definition, allocation and separation of functions between and within the managing authority / intermediate body/ies

X 

   

KR. 2: Adequate procedures for the selection of operations  

X    

KR. 3: Adequate information and strategy to provide guidance to beneficiaries  

X   

…        

Overall structure Overall structure

Extracts from the tool 1/2

10

Works well

Works but

Works partially

Does not

work

KR. 4: Adequate management verifications   X     

KR. 5: Adequate audit trail X       

KR. 6: Reliable accounting, monitoring and financial reporting systems in computerised form    

X 

 

KR. 7: Necessary preventive and corrective action where systemic errors are detected by the audit  

X

     

Overall structure Overall structure

Extracts from the tool 1/2

11

How to fill in the questionnaire

- In case of yes answer, please indicate which supporting evidence (document reference, precise date etc) , you would be able to deliver. On the contrary, answer with No

- In case of No, please indicate which mitigating action will be taken

How

12

Example of a key requirement

Questions Guidance from EC

1 - Yes

0 - No

Supporting evidence in case of Yes

answer

Actions to be taken in case of No answer

Key requirement 3: Adequate information and strategy to provide guidance to beneficiaries          

Clear and unambiguous national eligibility rules have been laid down for the programme.          

Is there one document which summarises the national eligibility rules?   1  

document reference xx  

Are explanations given on each eligibility rule?     0  

clarification for eligibility rule nr .. to be prepared

… … … … … …

TOTAL % of YES  85%      

13

Overall assessment by key requirement

Works well

Works but

Works partially

Essentially does not work

Preliminary conclusion

% of Yes > 90%

90% > % of Yes > 75%

75% > % of Yes > 50%

% of Yes < 50%

-Quantitative result is the 1st step of the evaluation- A qualitative evaluation is needed (which are the problematic questions?)

-Quantitative result is the 1st step of the evaluation- A qualitative evaluation is needed (which are the problematic questions?)

How

14

The benefits

1. Internal tool to be used objectively (EC services will not request the assessment)

2. Dynamic and adaptable tool

3. Management tool: Allows the MA to take remedial actions if necessary, and to have its own risk analysis

Conclusion1/2

15

Next steps

- Working document

- Test the questionnaire with 2 or 3 MA which will be willing to participate in a pilot exercise

- Feed back from Audit Authorities on this tool welcome

- Finalised version to be distributed before end 2008

Conclusion2/2