EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS

1
EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS
INTOSAI Working Group on Accountability for and
Audit of Disaster-related Aid (WGAADA) Presentati
on for Good Humanitarian Donorship Jan Pieter
Lingen Ari-Pekka Jantunen
Geneva, 7 May 2009
2
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Background
• Objectives
• Vision
• Approach
• Strengthening accountability and single audit
• INTOSAI and GHD

3
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Background
• What is INTOSAI?
• World organization of Supreme Audit Institutions
  (SAIs)
• Established in 1953, 189 Members
• Consultative status with ECOSOC
• Regional working groups EUROSAI, AFROSAI, etc
• Issues Standards and Audit Guidelines for all
  SAIs
• Working Group structure to prepare guidelines

4
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Background the Tsunami Taskforce

• Established by INTOSAI Governing Board in 2005,
  17 SAIs, from donor and recipient countries,
  incl. ECA
• Objectives
• to help create a potential audit trail enabling
  aid to be followed from source to destination and
  to capture the results of the aid
• provide guidance / standards / good practice
• Overall conclusions concerning a single
  information structure there is none
• Consequently lack of transparency, risk of lack
  of accountability

5
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Objectives WG AADA

• Development of guidance and good practices in the
  area of
• accountability - for donors and implementing
  bodies (multilaterals, aid organisations,
  governments, private sector etc)
• and auditing for Supreme Audit Institutions
• to promote a single information structure and
  greater transparency of disaster related
  (humanitarian) aid
• and thus improve the efficiency and effectiveness
  of the aid

6
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Why?

• Accountability linked to efficient and effective
  use of resources
• Beneficiaries bear the final cost of
  mismanagement
• Better accountability framework
• better decisions
• more predictability
• better coordination
• better and more desired results
• Harmonized framework streamlined
  administration, less bureaucracy

7
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Vision

• The Working Group could influence the operators
  in the humanitarian aid field so that
• All humanitarian operators committed to a single
  accountability information framework
• Donors report their humanitarian aid
  contributions
• Implementing bodies report their receipts and
  support actions
• A transaction or a organisation is audited only
  once
• There is a global audit trail for aid from source
  to destination but not to track an individual
  euro or a payment

8
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Approach

• Starting point the information assembled and
  analysed by Tsunami task force
• Now approaching international standard setting
  bodies
• multilaterals (UN OCHA)
• aid implementing organisations (HAP)
• donors (GHD, ECHO, OECD)
• auditors (IFAC)
• Avoid re-inventing the wheel, but use existing
  structures and ongoing initiatives

9
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Structure

• New Working Group AADA, chaired by Mr Engwirda,
  Member of the Court
• Limited duration, until end 2010
• The work divided into two Work Packages
• Work Package I, accountability,
• Harmonisation of information, accountability
  standards, reporting, accounting...
• Work Package II, audit
• Single audit, guidance and standards on audits,
  disaster preparedness, Internal audit, use of
  GIS...
• Each task (15) has a Rapporteur SAI

10
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• The role of the European Court of Auditors
• To coordinate the work of the other SAIs
• Chair Mr Engwirda, project manager Mr Lingen
• To work with 5 sub-tasks
• Harmonisation of accountability standards for
  donor organisations
• Harmonisation of accountability standards for
  implementing organisations
• Harmonisation of financial reporting (with
  Norway)
• Auditors awareness of fraud and corruption
• Single audit concept (with Norway)

11
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Strengthening accountability (1)
• EU Consensus on Humanitarian Aid describes
  accountability
• to donor countries citizens on the good use of
  public funds and
• to those facing the crisis that aid is adapted to
  their needs. This commits the aid provider to
  work within a framework of quality standards and
  guidelines
• Accountability measures include financial control
  and reporting on operations, as well as
  evaluating and measuring results and effectiveness

12
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Strengthening accountability (2)
• Through accountability process partners can
• build mutual trust and understanding
• share agendas, objectives and values
• deepen and clarify responsabilities
• focus on achieving results
• be open to external scrutiny for assessing
  results
• Not contradicting happy beneficiary happy
  donor

13
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Towards strengthened accountability and single
  audit
• System for financial and operational reporting
• built upon templates for donors, intermediate
  organizations and implementing bodies
• based on
• adequate accounting standards
• use of standardised reporting formats
• compliance with accountability standards
• and verified only once by auditors using
  standardised audit guidelines

14
Funds and info flow
Fin. Info
donor A
donor B
donor C
Op. Info
100
100
100
intermed
Agency Z
Fin. Info
500
200
Op. Info
50
100
200
Fin. Info
implem.
implem.
implem.
implem.
100
100
Op. Info
XXX
YYY
15
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• Towards strengthened accountability and single
  audit
• Where are we now?
• Financial accountability to be explicitly
  included in HAP Standard (WG is member of HAPs
  Standard review steering committee)
• Templates for financial reporting developed for
  consideration by OECD/DAC
• These templates will be coordinated with UN OCHA
• Standard checklist for auditing by private sector
  auditors in preparation

16
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?

• INTOSAI and GHD
• GHD might be interested
• to support the INTOSAI initiative by promoting
  harmonized financial reporting
• to promote working with certified implementing
  agencies
• to promote compliance with accountability
  standards through the DAC peer review system and
  a refined assessment framework
• or even to include financial accountability as
  an explicit GHD- principle
• INTOSAI through its guidelines may stimulate SAIs
  to assess compliance by donor governments with
  accountability standards

17
INTOSAI Working Group AADA Why?
Thanks for your attention! Questions? Feed
back most welcome janpieter.lingen_at_eca.europa.e
u http//eca.europa.eu/intosai-aada