|
Performance audit
|
Review
|
Objective
|
To make an objective assessment of how well an organisation, policy or project has been managed, and/or the outputs delivered, and results achieved.
|
To describe and analyse areas of EU policy or management, using information which is mostly already publicly available.
|
Issue analysis
|
Process to follow during planning to facilitate the development of an appropriate hierarchy of audit questions by applying rigorous structured approach.
|
Process analogous to that applied for performance audits to follow during planning to decide the review scope and approach.
|
Planning document
|
Performance audit task plan.
|
Review task plan .
|
Scope
|
Defines the boundary of the audit, in relation to the audit questions (which are evaluative).
|
Defines the boundary of the review in relation to the review objectives, which do not include evaluative questions.
|
Approach
|
Gathering and evaluating sufficient, relevant and reliable evidence collected using audit methods and techniques in line with professional auditing standards. The evidence is used to address and conclude on evaluative questions by assessing against criteria and using the auditor’s judgment.
|
Compiling and analysing existing or new material from reliable publicly available sources, including the identification of risk, challenges of opportunities. Non-publicly available material, interviews and surveys can be used to gain understanding, provide additional insight or to complete an analysis.
|
Fact checking
|
Check facts with auditees during fieldwork.
|
Check facts with reviewees during fieldwork.
|
Clearing process
|
Clearing through the draft report.
|
Clearing through the draft report.
|
Drawing conclusions
|
Process to follow when fieldwork is complete or nearly complete to formulate main messages, conclusions and recommendations, and to set a structure for presenting the findings in the body of the report.
|
Process to follow when fieldwork is complete or nearly complete, to discuss risks, challenges, opportunities and closing remarks, and set a structure for the draft report. Analogous to that applied for performance audits.
|
Report drafting
|
Uses a standard structure for special reports, and follows the guidance on drafting, including the 10 000-word limit.
|
Uses a specific structure similar to that for performance audits, and follows the same guidance on drafting, including the 10 000-word limit. There is often scope for greater flexibility in the presentation of review reports in order to present the material in the clearest and most relevant way.
|
Body of the report
|
Observations based on audit work, with the findings structured around the audit questions.
|
Description and informative analysis of the area or issue under review, structured in the most suitable way to ensure clarity. Can refer to recommendations from previously published special reports.
|
Conclusions and recommendations/closing remarks
|
The conclusions and recommendations flow from the findings in the report, providing answers to the audit questions.
|
The closing remarks bring together key points from the review in an objective and neutral way and may indicate areas of high risk in need of scrutiny, or key risks, challenges and opportunities. There are no evaluative statements or conclusions, and no new recommendations.
|
Quality management arrangements
|
Supervision and review by the chambers and independent quality review by the AQCC.
|
Supervision and review by the chambers and independent quality review by the AQCC.
|
Adversarial procedure / final consultation
|
The draft report is subject to an adversarial meeting procedure with auditee(s).
|
Unless reviewee(s) agree otherwise, the draft review report is subject to a ‘final consultation’ process.
|
Replies/responses
|
Auditee replies are published in a separate document accompanying the special report.
|
To ensure that all points of view are reflected, reviewee comments are included in the review report directly.
|