1 / 16

Working G roup on Quality Assurance O verview of the results achieved

Working G roup on Quality Assurance O verview of the results achieved. Ljerka Crnković Jean-Pierre Garitte Prague, March 22, 201 6. Content QA WG objectives The way of achieving results Final result of QA WG Quality Ass essment Guide for Public Sector Internal Audit

elsiek
Download Presentation

Working G roup on Quality Assurance O verview of the results achieved

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Working Group on Quality AssuranceOverview of the results achieved Ljerka Crnković Jean-Pierre Garitte Prague, March 22, 2016

  2. Content • QAWG objectives • Thewayofachievingresults • Finalresult of QA WG • Quality AssessmentGuidefor Public Sector Internal Audit - A toolkit for qualityimprovement 5. Conclusion

  3. 1.QA WG - objectives Qualityassuranceworkinggroupintends to helpinternalauditorsto: • understand how to apply the International Standards and best practices to improve the quality of the internal audit practice • develop a solid understanding of the process used to complete internal and external assessments of an internal audit function • discover proven quality assessment tools and techniques • learn from country experience on QA methodology - explore the recommended internal and external quality assessment approaches and identify the best approach for their own organization • to ultimately improve the overall quality of internal audit in all the PEM PAL member countries

  4. 2. The way of achieving results • Genesis of QA WG • Skopje, Macedonia October 6-8, 2011 • Workshops • Budapest, Hungary April 17-20, 2012 • Lviv, Ukraine September 24-27, 2012 • Tbilisi, Georgia January 28-30, 2013 • Yerevan, Armenia November 12-15, 2013 • Budva, Montenegro January 28-30, 2014 • Bucharest, Romania December 2-4, 2014 • Yerevan, Armenia October 13-16, 2016 • Studyvisit • Warsaw, Poland November15-16, 2012

  5. 3. Final Result of QA WG

  6. 4. Quality Assessment Guidefor Public Sector Internal Audit - A toolkit for quality improvement Content Preface Acknowledgements Acronyms and Abbreviations • Introduction • Internal Quality Assessment Performed by the Internal Audit Unit 2.1. Ongoing monitoring 2.2.Periodic self-assessment by the internal audit unit 2.3.Audited entity survey • External Quality Assessment Performed by the Central Harmonization Unit • Internal Quality Assessment of the Central Harmonization Unit • Independent External Quality Assessment Performed by an External, Independent Party

  7. 4. Quality Assessment Guidefor Public Sector Internal Audit - A toolkit for quality improvement Annexes • Annex 1 Checklist to Assess Quality Criteria during Ongoing Monitoring of the Internal Audit Activity • Annex 2 Checklist to Assess Quality Criteria during the Internal Quality Periodic Self-Assessment • Annex 3 Audited Entity Survey Template • Annex 4 External Quality Assessment by the Central Harmonization Unit • Annex 5 Checklist to Assess Quality Criteria during Internal Assessment of the Central Harmonization Unit

  8. 4. Annex 4 - External Quality Assessment Performed bythe Central Harmonization Unit 4.1. Questions and review steps for assessment under each Standard

  9. 4. Annex 4 - External Quality Assessment Performed by the Central Harmonization Unit 4.2. Assessment criteria for assessing each question under theStandards • Two types of assessment criteria • Key assessment criteria • non-compliance with these criteria immediately results in a negative score, which heavily impacts the final assessment • Secondary assessment criteria • non compliance with a secondary assessment criteria has an impact on the final assessment if there are many instances of non-compliance with secondary criteria

  10. 4. Annex 4 - External Quality Assessment Performed bythe Central Harmonization Unit

  11. 4. Annex 4 - External Quality Assessment Performed bythe Central Harmonization Unit

  12. 4. Annex 4 - External Quality Assessment Performed bythe Central Harmonization Unit 4.3. Scoring system for each Standard Key assessment criteria (2 questions) Standard 1000 (8 questions) Secondary assessment criteria (6 questions)

  13. 4. Annex 4 - External Quality Assessment Performed bythe Central Harmonization Unit 4.4. Totalscorefor all Standards • Helps to visualize what the areas are that require attention • The scores do not only relate to the Internal Audit Units and their Heads, but also to the Institution failing to implement internal audit as expected by law and good practices • This should be made very clear when expressing a final opinion on the quality of the internal audit function • Gives more weight to the ISPPIAs 1100, 1200, 2000, 2200 and 2300 • this implies that a strong non-conformity (i.e. red ISPPIA score) with these specific ISPPIAs will immediately result in an overall negative score and thus final resultt

  14. 4. Annex 4 - External Quality Assessment Performed bythe Central Harmonization Unit

  15. 4. Annex 4 - External Quality Assessment Performed bythe Central Harmonization Unit The objective of external quality assessment performed by the Central Harmonization Unit is to show the Internal Audit Units where the areas are that deserve due care but not to score the various Internal Audit Units!

  16. 5. Conclusion • Ourvision for the future • to put thecommonmethodologyintopractice

More Related