The evolution and future of performance audit

By Mike Scott, Director Performance Audit, PASAI

It is a privilege and a pleasure to be sharing my experience with colleagues in the Pacific. I have been a performance auditor since 1987. Although the precise origins of performance auditing are debatable, performance audits became more recognised as a type of audit relatively recently, during the 1970s. So, I feel like I have been a performance auditor almost since the start of time!

Making a difference for people

I am often asked why I have been a performance auditor for so long. For me, it is because performance audits are ultimately about making a difference for people. They shine a light on how well public funds are managed and used to provide what matters to people.

The 200 or more (I haven’t done a precise count) performance audits that I have had a direct hand in have had many faces. They have covered the spectrum of public services across education, law enforcement, healthcare, defence, the environment, housing, roads, welfare support and much more. What they have had in common is providing transparency and accountability, and promoting improved performance for people.

I have valued the opportunity on each audit to offer insights and recommendations for effective delivery of public services for people. To now be able to support performance audits in the Pacific to make a difference for Pacific people is a great privilege.

Broad and deep examination of issues

Another question I am sometimes asked is what has changed in the time I have been doing performance audit. The biggest shifts I have observed are audits becoming broader and more ambitious in the range of issues they examine, and deeper and more sophisticated in how they analyse those issues.

Performance audits have shifted from primarily looking in at how well the processes, procedures and systems within public organisations are operating, to looking out at how well they are delivering. I think that performance audits now give a more rounded view of both the operational performance of public organisations and their success in delivering outcomes for people.

At the same time, performance audits have shifted to become more analytical by using more sophisticated techniques to gather evidence, drill into issues and generate insights. Interviews and document reviews, although still core evidence sources, are now augmented by techniques such as data analysis and understanding people’s ‘lived experience’.

As technology continues to rapidly advance there are new opportunities to explore for enhancing the value of performance audit, such as considering how artificial intelligence might be applied.

Strengthening performance audit in the Pacific

In my role I am focused on supporting SAIs to complete performance audits that provide transparency and accountability, and make a difference for Pacific people. I am working with SAIs to strengthen performance audit practice that is high-quality and sustainable.

Some of the ways I am doing this are by running a series of webinars and a workshop, and building an online resource bank, about applying good practice to plan, conduct and report on performance audits. We held the first webinar on 29 February and will hold the rest regularly through the year.

The five-day, in-person workshop will prepare participants to contribute to a cooperative performance audit, and the resource bank is already available to member SAI staff within our Learning Platform.

Our collective goal is Strengthening performance: making a difference in the lives of Pacific people. This is also the theme for the upcoming Congress in the Cook Islands. If I don’t meet you there, I hope there will be many other opportunities to interact in the future.

Turning the tide – SAIs respond to 2023 Accountability and Transparency Report findings

By Angela Drake, Principal Advisor International Engagement, Office of the Auditor-General, New Zealand 

Transparency International’s annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) has confirmed that, for the fifth year in a row, there is stagnation in the Pacific CPI scores. [1] This will be no surprise to PASAI members who strive to turn the tide on these low scores through their daily work.

Nine months ago, PASAI published its fourth Accountability and Transparency Report, exploring the effectiveness of the work of Pacific SAIs between 2018 and 2022. The report found that there is work to do to overcome a range of integrity threats facing Pacific SAIs. SAIs, and the context they work in, both need to change if we are to see better accountability of governments in the Pacific.

As the Accountability and Transparency Report points out, there is a need for consolidated, collaborative action – across both the public financial management system and the national integrity system – to achieve meaningful progress towards good governance, accountability, transparency and integrity in the Pacific. 

Challenges facing Pacific SAIs

There are four leading themes in the issues discussed in the report:

• Investment is needed in the capability of those responsible for preparing accountability information (for example, financial statements of government) for SAIs.

• A clear and aligned view needs to be established by those with power to influence the public financial management and integrity systems.

• Independence is fundamental to enabling SAI effectiveness.

• SAIs in the Pacific are under sustained pressure to build and maintain both their capacity and the capability to play an ongoing and impactful role in their national integrity systems. Additional investment and support to SAIs to continue to build their capability and capacity remain vital.

Small steps to create change

Talking about the challenges we face

PASAI has already started to address the most significant weaknesses identified in the report.

Over the last nine months, PASAI Secretary-General, John Ryan, has hosted a webinar series on Building strong national integrity systems in the Pacific. Drawing on expertise from across our region, these panel discussions evaluate progress, issues and risks involved with building and maintaining accountability and transparency in the Pacific.

Communities of practice

PASAI also offers facilitated communities of practice after each panel discussion.

These discussions support SAI heads and emerging SAI leaders to consider what practical steps their SAI can take to improve collaboration with other players involved in the public financial management and integrity systems. Participants are encouraged to apply the one-degree rule: they share reflections on how their SAI might raise its appetite or ‘temperature’ by one degree to increase their impact or the effectiveness of their work.

Creating a strategy together

The communities of practice have been an instrumental forum to capture and discuss the ambitions of member SAIs in the next 10 years. Important perspectives and contributions shared continue to shape the development of PASAI’s future strategic priorities.

PASAI is also working with current and potential development partners to secure funding for the PASAI 2024–2034 Strategy.

In September 2023, PASAI jointly hosted a Funder’s Forum in Fiji at the Australian High Commission in partnership with the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Potential future partners were able to provide feedback on, and contribute to, the development of PASAI’s strategic intentions.

Communities of practice in action

What topics have been covered in the webinars and communities of practice?

The May 2023 panel explored how to raise the level of public participation in the allocation, distribution and management of public funds with two prominent Pacific civil society organisations (CSOs) – Transparency International Papa New Guinea and the Pacific Islands Association of Non-governmental Organisations (PIANGO).

In July 2023, we built on this dialogue through a second panel discussion with three investigative journalists from TV, radio and print media across the region. Panellists described how the media and SAIs can be allies in their pursuit of bringing accurate, independent information about public sector spending to the community.

The third panel, held in December 2023, focused on how the United Nations Convention Against Corruption and the Teieniwa Vision have supported countries to develop inter-agency approaches to detect and prevent fraud and corruption. Panellists partnering with the UN Office on Drugs and Crime shared challenges common to small island states. These include addressing conflicts of interest, lack of powers to investigate and challenges in prosecuting and sentencing. The value of increasing public understanding was expressed – specifically, mobilising young people to seek accountability and justice when behaviours do not meet integrity standards.

Warming up by one degree

In August 2023, at the Leadership Community of Practice, SAI heads committed to increase their SAI’s engagement with the public, CSOs or local media by one degree, including by:

• Planning one face-to-face outreach with citizens so that members of the community are more able to understand the role of the SAI and its work. Proposals included outreach events to outer island communities, engaging with high school leavers and hosting community groups at the SAI.

• Building the SAI’s relationship with local media over a coffee or a phone call to ensure they understand what government auditors do and the frequency of audit reporting.

• Working as a team to be more effective and timelier at providing short summaries of audit findings to media and weblinks to audit reports for CSOs.

• Leading proactive engagement with media to explain why an audit report has been delayed (for instance, if the legislature has not yet released it or auditees have not provided enough detail to audit) to create visibility of issues and pressure/momentum for changes to be made.

• Increasing social media posts relating to published audit reports to provide citizens with another avenue to access information.

• Encouraging colleagues to participate in PASAI’s Communications training programme, especially for teams that do not have the resources to appoint a communication officer.

What’s next?

Developing strong relationships

In the next panel discussion on 23 February 2024, we will focus on the importance of developing strong relationships with legislatures, parliamentary accounts committees and other legislative committees.

Panellists from across the region will provide practical advice on how to build and enhance the working relationships between SAIs and legislatures. We will consider how public access to information is a critical part of the democratic process, allowing people to contribute to the scrutiny of government performance. The effectiveness of the relationship between the legislature, its committees and the SAI plays a major role in the integrity of this scrutiny. The legislature’s deliberations on audit findings support better public awareness of issues, improved transparency by public organisations and more accountability from the government to the public.

Can you play a part?

We welcome new members to join our communities of practice in 2024 and look forward to delving deeper into what each SAI considers may be its next practical step to enhance engagement with its legislature and committees.

We encourage you to consider what steps you can take in 2024 to best influence other players in your national integrity systems to promote public trust and to hold power to account. May our collective efforts soon turn the tide on the region’s Corruption Perceptions Index scores.

The Office of the Auditor-General of New Zealand has made past webinar recordings in the series available on its website.

References

[1] Annual corruption report reveals fifth year of stagnation in the Pacific

Challenges faced by our SAIs in ensuring audit quality

By Meresimani Vosawale-Katuba, Director (South Pacific), PASAI

Supreme audit institutions (SAIs) in small island developing states (SIDS) face unique challenges in capacity to adhere to international standards. A major factor is the small pool of qualified and experienced supervisors to provide a robust system of quality controls for their audit engagements. This is exacerbated by the small size of the SAIs, for whom it may not be a sustainable option to establish a dedicated quality assurance (QA) function.

Only the two largest SAIs out of our 20 SAI members in SIDS have a QA function. Audit quality is therefore a major issue that we need to address. Our recent independent QA reviews of the seven SAIs participating in an audit programme revealed only two had satisfactory compliance with the ISSAIs.

Factors such as high inflation in SIDS have resulted in experienced SAI staff migrating to more developed countries for better pay and quality of life for their families. This depletion of financial audit experience and training/mentoring has made it very challenging to fill supervisory roles.

The remaining supervisors not only have fewer staff resources available to complete audits on time but often have to train and mentor new recruits on top of their increased workload. While SAIs are faced with the challenge of a limited local pool of experienced and qualified financial audit supervisors, performance auditing technical expertise is in even shorter supply.

Creative solutions needed

However, a history of limited resources for these remotely located SIDs has made their SAIs rather resilient as they have always needed to improvise solutions. Because of this, Pacific Island SAI heads have ideas and thoughts on how assistance can be structured. They may need flexibility from donors on the eligibility of their gratefully received interventions. Support can be tailored to meet SAI needs and address their challenges after consultation with the SAIs.

How the SoAQM initiative can help

One intervention to the challenge of ensuring audit quality is a collaboration between us and the INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI) to support SAIs in setting up a System of Audit Quality Management (SoAQM).

Such systems will be consistent with the organisational requirement of the revised ISSAI 140 Quality Management for SAIs (currently under exposure draft), which requires SAIs to move towards a holistic and systemic risk-based approach to quality management.

Through the IDI–PASAI SoAQM initiative, we will provide regionally customised support to SAIs to transition from the old concepts of quality control/assurance into systemic, dynamic, scalable and risk-based quality management. [1]

What happens next?

IDI has also developed a draft playbook to support SAIs in setting up a SoAQM. We will work with IDI to deliver the SoAQM programme to six SAIs from our region. The SoAQM focuses on key processes in quality management, rather than on defining what should be in specific components of the quality control system in a SAI. These processes include quality risk management, monitoring and remediation, and evaluation which provide scalable solutions to SAIs. [2] The programme will involve integrated professional education as well as an implementation phase for participating SAIs. Letters of commitment from SAIs are to be finalised this month.

References

[1] and [2] The SoAQM Pilot for SAIs

The ClimateScanner project – How Pacific SAIs can help address climate change

By Jane Rogers, Sector Manager, Office of the Auditor-General, New Zealand 

In October this year, I was privileged to represent the PASAI region’s Working Group on Environmental Auditing (WGEA) at a workshop on climate change and specifically how SAIs can contribute, in Santiago, Chile. This blog post is about the ClimateScanner project, which was a focus of that workshop, and some of the other themes emerging from SAIs’ work in the climate area.

ClimateScanner project

SAI New Zealand, as well as being the PASAI region’s WGEA representative, is part of a group of 18 SAIs from across the world that have been working with SAI Brazil on the ClimateScanner project. The ClimateScanner is a web-based tool that allows SAIs to carry out a rapid review and assessment of government climate actions in three areas:

• public policies,

• governance, and

• climate finance.

The tool involves researching the climate-related actions in these areas and making an independent assessment of their adequacy using a grading scale.

Among the project’s aims is for SAIs to become more familiar with climate actions in their jurisdictions and to enable them to conduct climate-related audits in the future. SAIs from all INTOSAI regions are encouraged to participate in the ClimateScanner project for maximum impact.

SAI Brazil’s workshop presentation on the ClimateScanner project

Each SAI assesses its own government and completes the web-based tool. The information collected will then be consolidated into a global picture. This will be presented at the 29th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) at the end of 2024 and will show strengths and challenges in governments’ climate actions around the world.

The results for each country at a national level will help governments identify vulnerable areas. They will also help SAIs identify important topics for their future work. The information can also be used to inform work at a regional level, which is important in a region like ours that is especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

It is vital that we get as complete a picture as possible of our region’s climate actions. Therefore, we encourage all Pacific SAIs to participate in the ClimateScanner project. The results will give us a useful assessment of the legal and policy framework for addressing climate change in the Pacific, as well as climate finance arrangements, and can help draw attention to these issues and lead to more climate action.

PASAI and the regional WGEA will be coordinating with SAI Brazil to organise training and support for SAIs that choose to take part. The training is expected to be in June 2024, with the aim of completing the tool by that September.

We will provide more information about the project in due course, including seeking a commitment from each SAI to take part in the ClimateScanner project next year.

Inter-regional workshop on climate change: The contribution of SAIs

The workshop I attended in Chile was organised by the Special Technical Commission for the Environment (COMTEMA) which is part of OLACEFS (Organization of Latin American and Caribbean Supreme Audit Institutions). As well as a focus on the ClimateScanner, there were sessions on other climate and environmental audit-related issues, including presentations from the WGEA’s regional representatives.

I spoke at the workshop about the earlier PASAI co-operative audit on climate change and the Pacific SAIs involved in the global co-operative Climate Change Adaptation Actions (CCAA) audit. I also spoke about the work we are doing at SAI New Zealand, which includes preparations to provide assurance over greenhouse gas emissions and a performance audit on climate change and local government.

The themes that came across in the other presentations included:

• Complexity: Climate change involves many different disciplines that often don’t speak the same language, as well as both public and private organisations. It is also important to not just think in environmental terms, as the effects of climate change are also social and economic.

• Co-ordination: This is key at all levels (nationally, regionally and globally), but is also one of the greatest challenges.

• Inclusion: Climate change is an additional factor in inequality. Not all communities have the same vulnerabilities or resources to help them adapt, and those most affected are generally contributing the least to the problem.

• Data: Accurate and understandable information is important to decision makers, but also to the public who must be part of the solution.

The presentations also considered the role of SAIs in climate change. They noted that environmental auditing is becoming a priority for many SAIs who have an important role in raising awareness about climate change through their work.

For more information

You can find more information about the ClimateScanner project online and you can email me or Jonathan Keate (Pacific RWGEA Coordinator) if you have any questions or comments.

PASAI develops its first Competency Framework

By Danial Sadeqi, eLearning Specialist, PASAI

Background

We at PASAI promote transparency and accountability in the use of public sector resources in the Pacific by building the capability of our member SAIs. We help SAI staff to become professional auditors who can conduct timely audits and publish reports to ensure accountability in their jurisdictions. We do this through a host of programmes and activities which have evolved over the years.

Feedback from development partners and stakeholders highlighted the need for a Competency Framework to guide and streamline our capability development initiatives. The framework will provide a structure for our capacity building interventions by clarifying the required skills, identifying skill gaps and creating targeted training programmes. It will also guide staff in member offices on which training programmes to access to build the skills required to do their jobs effectively.

While international frameworks are available, there was a need for a framework that reflects the learning and development requirements of the Pacific region and is tailored to that context (including existing capacity, job descriptions and resourcing set-ups).

We have used our unique understanding of this context to develop a framework that supports a coordinated approach for our members. This also helps to attract development partner funding and achieve economies of scale.

The framework outlines core competencies for all audit roles within a SAI and contains functional competencies for each specific position.

Methodology

We completed a comprehensive review of existing international and SAI-level competency frameworks and adopted the following approach.

First, we collected role descriptors and knowledge required for different audit roles. We analysed competency frameworks and relevant documents from:

• internationally recognised audit entities [1]

• developed SAIs within the Pacific region [2]

• internationally recognised institutions [3] and

• other institutions in the Pacific region. [4]

Second, we collated and analysed audit, communications, human resource and information technology job descriptors from job advertisements across New Zealand, Australia and Pacific SAIs. We also conducted interviews with SAI heads, senior auditors, human resource staff and other stakeholders. SAIs who participated in our interviews included those of Fiji, the Marshall Islands, Solomon Islands, Kiribati, the Cook Islands, Sweden (HR team), Western Australia, New South Wales and New Zealand. We also used interviews with Secretariat staff and existing data from PASAI surveys to collate the relevant information.

We grouped this information into competency areas and developed dimensions accordingly. We adjusted the proposed competency areas in response to feedback during Congress to better match the competency areas required at SAI level.

The Competency Framework

1. Key concepts

There are three measurable or observable competencies critical to successful job performance:

a) knowledge (the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject)

b) skills (the proficiencies developed through training or experience) and

c) personal attributes (the qualities, characteristics or traits of a person).

The extent to which a specific competency is measured or observed depends on what the framework is being used for (the purpose).

The competency framework, then, is the conceptual model that details and defines the competencies expected of individual/collective human resources contributing to the successful implementation of PASAI’s mission and strategy at any given point in time.

Competency frameworks are not static but rather dynamic in nature and seek to define the elements needed to drive success. These elements will change depending on the circumstances.

2. Components of the Competency Framework

The PASAI Competency Framework is organised into three levels:

Level 1 core competencies will cover the knowledge, skills and personal attributes of any person entering the SAI and working at any audit technical role.

Level 2 functional competencies is where specific knowledge, skills and personal attributes will be developed in the three main audit streams – financial, compliance and performance audits. Other areas that can be added to this level include investigations and information technology.

Level 3 professional competencies further enhanced knowledge and skills for the main audit streams, leading to professional certification. We also endeavour to build the leadership, human resource management and office management competencies of senior staff to ensure the sustainability of SAI performance.

Competencies

Core competencies	Functional competencies	Professional competencies
Mandate of the SAI	Financial audit	Financial audit certification
SAI independence	Performance audit	Performance audit certification
Internal governance and ethics	Compliance audit	Compliance audit certification
Public sector auditing	Special audits and investigations	Continuing education
Public finance management system	Information technology	Leadership
Audit methodology	Communication	Human resources and office management
Skills - audit, IT, comms, management		Communication with stakeholders
Attributes - integrity and commitment

3. Proficiency levels

Competency level	Proficiency level
Core competencies	Level 1 - Junior Auditor
	All auditors entering the SAI must understand: - Mandate of the SAI (Domain A) - SAI independence (Domain A) - Internal governance and ethics (Domain B) - Fundamentals of public sector auditing (Introduction to Domain C) - Public Financial Management (related to Domain C) - Audit methodology - Cross-cutting audit skills - Skills - audit, IT, comms, time management - Attributes - integrity and commitment
Functional competencies	Level 2 – Senior Auditor
	Develop skills of auditors in the following work streams: - Financial audit (Domain C) - Performance audit (Domain C) - Compliance audit (Domain C)
	Learn skills for other audit work: - Investigations and audits of projects etc - IT audits
	Learn communication skills: - Clients - Stakeholders
Professional competencies	Level 3 – Advanced Auditor
	Attain professional certification in the following work streams: - Financial audit (Domain C) - Performance audit (Domain C) - Compliance audit (Domain C) - Continuing professional education – accounting and auditing standards, IT and emerging issues (Domain E)
	Learn other skills for advanced auditor training to be SAI heads: - Leadership - Human resource, financial and office management (Domains D & E) - Communications with stakeholders (Legislature, civil society and media) (Domain F)

4. Next steps

Given the nature of competencies required in an ever-changing world and the complexity of a framework that is relevant to SAIs with different mandates, staffing, resources, etc., we are making the framework available to SAIs and working closely with them to ensure that the framework is and will continue to be relevant in the future. We are also working on aligning our existing training programmes to the Competency Framework as well as ensuring that our suite of trainings covers all competency areas.

References

[1] INTOSAI’s Competency Framework for public sector audit professionals at Supreme Audit Institutions, INTOSAI’s The Future Relevant Value-adding Auditor, INTOSAI GUID 1950, INTOSAI GUID 1951, ISSAI 200 Financial Audit Principles, ISSAI 300 Performance Audit Principles and ISSAI 400 Compliance Audit Principles.

[2] Audit New Zealand, the Australian National Audit Office and the Territorial Chamber of Accounts of New Caledonia.

[3] The World Bank, United Nations, UN Women, UNESCO, International Atomic Energy Agency, UNICEF and Talent OECD.

[4] Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, Civil Defence and Emergency Management NZ, New Zealand Transport Agency, University of Otago, New South Wales Public Service Commission, Victorian Public Sector Commission, Australian Health Informatics and Australian Evaluation Society Inc, Northern Territory Government (Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment).

New quality management standards for the North Pacific

By Doris Flores Brooks, Director (North Pacific), PASAI

The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) has issued a new standard on a Firm’s System of Quality Management. To be compliant with the standard, systems are to be implemented by 15 December 2025, and will be effective for audits and reviews of financial statements for periods beginning from that date.

The standard applies to firms who perform audits of financial statements. It does not apply to government audit offices. However, they may find the standard useful in improving their overall internal quality control system and quality assurance.

INTOSAI has also issued an exposure draft of ISSAI 140 Quality Management for SAIs. The new ISSAI provides guidance on establishing and maintaining an appropriate system of quality management to cover all audit and other assurance work performed by each SAI.

SAIs operate under different mandates and models with their size varying greatly around the world. The guidance may not be equally applicable to all SAIs but is intended to lead SAIs towards the common goal of audit quality.

Here, I will outline some of the characteristics of the new AICPA standard and not the ISSAI 40 exposure draft.

The AICPA standard follows a new risk-based approach to include a risk assessment process, tailored quality management, revised components of systems of quality management, more robust leadership and governance requirements and an enhanced monitoring and remediation process.

The components of quality management

There are eight components of quality management:

• Risk assessment process

• Governance and leadership

• Relevant ethical requirements

• Acceptance and continuance of client relationships and specific engagements

• Engagement performance

• Resources

• Information and communication

• Monitoring and remediation process

Risk assessment process

Establish quality objectives, identify and assess quality risks, design and implement responses.

Governance and leadership

Office culture, leadership responsibility and accountability, office organisational structure, assignment of roles and responsibilities, resource planning and allocation and the tone at the top.

Relevant ethical requirements

Know the requirements and follow them.

Acceptance and continuance of client relationships and specific engagements

Establish the necessary objectives to make appropriate judgements.

Engagement performance

The office’s actions to promote and support consistent performance of quality engagements.

Resources

Obtain, develop, use, maintain, allocate and assign resources in a timely manner to enable the design and use of the system of quality management and performance engagement, including technological, intellectual and human resources.

Information and communication

Obtain, generate and use information about the system of quality management, and communicate information to internal and external parties on a timely basis.

Monitoring and remediation process

Provide the office with relevant, reliable and timely information about the design and use of the system of quality management and take appropriate action to remediate deficiencies on a timely basis.

An audit firm should design and use a system of quality management to provide it with reasonable assurance that its personnel:

• fulfil their responsibilities in accordance with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements;

• conduct engagements in accordance with standards and requirements; and

• issue engagement reports that are appropriate in the circumstances.

For more information

Refer to AICPA’s Statements on Quality Management Standards A Firm’s System of Quality Management and Engagement Quality Reviews.

SAIs who operate in a congressional system (which is predominant in the North Pacific) can now pick and choose between the AICPA quality management statements or the ISSAI 40 exposure draft.

References

I acknowledge Dr Jeanne Yamamura. I obtained much of the above information from the session she presented on AICPA Quality Management Standards at the 2023 APIPA Conference.

Taking a regional approach to good governance and public accountability

By Susana Laulu, Programme Director, PASAI

I was privileged to attend the 34th annual APIPA Conference in Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands, from 28 August to 1 September 2023.

The Association of Pacific Islands Public Auditors (APIPA) was formed to achieve the following objectives:

• Establish an organised body to act as one voice in support of the goal of promoting efficiency and accountability in the use of public resources of emerging nations of the Pacific.

• Provide a forum for exchanging ideas, experience, problems, and identifying solutions, which are often unique to the Public Auditors in the Pacific.

• Sponsor auditing and accounting training workshops in cooperation with established associations of the staff of member offices.

• Identify scholarship sources for Pacific Islanders needing financial assistance to study auditing and accounting at the post-secondary level.

• Promote public awareness for the purposes of conducting audits of public resources. [1]

Building on the theme, “Shining a Light on Public Accountability”, the conference signalled a continuous commitment to raise awareness of the importance of public audits. The primary objective of these audits is to strengthen the accountability of governments by reporting on the use and management of public resources.

In his keynote address, His Excellency David Kabua, President of the Marshall Islands, reiterated this commitment. He acknowledged the fundamental role of SAIs to report on and inform the work of government and what the leaders are doing. This, more importantly, holds the leaders accountable for the wise and prudent use of public funds to better serve the interests of citizens. With the significant challenges brought by rapid economic, technological, social and environmental changes, the insight of credible SAIs has never been so crucial as now.

HE David Kabua, President of the Marshall Islands

The commitment of public auditors to promoting good governance and accountability requires proper resourcing, capacity and capability of their respective SAIs. Equally important is for SAIs to uphold and maintain ethical values and to protect the independence and integrity of their offices.

The conference provided training on specific and cross-cutting topic areas to strengthen and enhance the skills and knowledge of SAI staff. Ideally, SAIs should be able to do more than just conduct quality audits on the government’s use and management of public resources. They should also raise awareness of their work and publish timely, accessible reports to inform the citizens of what their leaders in government have been doing. Transparent reporting on the activities of government promotes and strengthens good governance and accountability.

The conference theme echoes the PASAI vision which refers to the work of SAIs leading to increased accountability in the Pacific. The training offered was a good complement to the activities we undertake through our own strategic priorities.

Regional events such as this conference, which involve other active participants in the public financial management system, are needed to support Pacific SAIs effectively deliver their mandates and be champions of good governance and public accountability.

In the words of HE David Kabua, “Our collaboration and collective efforts are pivotal to promote good governance, responsible spending and accountability in all sectors of the public service within our respective nations and our Blue Pacific.”

APIPA Principals

References

[1] About the Association of Pacific Islands Public Auditors

Non-standard audit reports

By Logan Moore, Senior Advisor – Public Sector Finance and Reporting, Office of the Auditor-General, New Zealand 

Audit reports are the vital end products of audit engagements. Audit reports enable auditors to communicate findings of entities’ financial and non-financial information.

Ideally, an auditor will be able to issue a report expressing a “clean” or unmodified opinion of the information. However, if an auditor following the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions has identified matters they wish to draw the reader’s attention to, they will issue a “non-standard audit report”.

A non-standard audit report is one that contains:

• an “emphasis of matter” or an “other matter” paragraph; and/or

• a “modified” opinion.

It’s important that entities understand and address any matters raised in a non-standard audit report. They present opportunities to improve systems, processes or the presentation of the financial statements.

Parliamentary and legislature committees, the public, civil society organisations and the media should consider the matters auditors raise in audit reports and ensure entities are held to account to act on them.

Additional recommendations that don’t meet the criteria of being included in the audit report are typically included in the management letter. Similarly, entities should act on the recommendations in that letter, to take full advantage of the auditor’s independent feedback.

Emphasis of matter and other matters

Without modifying the audit opinion, auditors can include an “emphasis of matter” or “other matter” paragraph in the audit report. These paragraphs draw attention to matters such as:

• fundamental uncertainties

• breaches of law or

• concerns over probity or financial prudence.

Auditors can use these paragraphs to bring to the readers’ attention matters that are important to their understanding of the financial statements. But they’re only for when the matter isn’t “material” (significant) to the financial statements. An issue is material if it will affect a reader’s view or understanding of the information.

The key consideration for an auditor in choosing between an emphasis of matter paragraph and modifying the audit opinion is whether the matter is material.

Over the last few years, the audit reports for most public entities in New Zealand have included an emphasis of matter paragraph. The paragraph has drawn attention to disclosures in the financial statements about the COVID-19 pandemic, given the significant uncertainty the pandemic has caused.

Across the Pacific, auditors have often referred to the adoption of new accounting standards in an emphasis of matter paragraph.

Modifications to the audit opinion

Auditors give a modified opinion when either:

• There’s a disagreement between the auditor and management. It could be a material misstatement about the treatment or disclosure of a matter in the financial and/or non-financial information.

• There’s been a limitation in the scope of the audit. This can happen when the auditor has been unable to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence to support an issue or disclosure. As a result, the auditor is unable to express an opinion on the financial or non-financial information, or a part of the financial or non-financial information.

The auditor needs to determine whether the misstatement or limitation in scope is pervasive. This determination enables the auditor to select the type of modified opinion to issue. There are three different types of modified opinions:

• an “adverse” opinion

• a “disclaimer of opinion” and

• a “qualified opinion”.

An adverse opinion, in which an auditor concludes there are pervasive misstatements of information, is the most serious type of non-standard audit report. However, management should resolve matters raised in any type of opinion as soon as possible.

The following chart from the PASAI Regional Financial Audit Manual shows how to determine which type of modified audit opinion to issue.

Audit reports (especially non-standard) should be viewed as a valuable resource by all stakeholders. They’re a tool for the auditor to communicate and encourage improvements to the accountability and transparency of the public sector.

Further reading

The Kiwi guide to audit reports

Partnership is pivotal to SAI capacity building

By Sinaroseta Palamo-Iosefo, Director Practice Development, PASAI

Last month, I had the privilege of attending the INTOSAI Capacity Building Committee (CBC) Annual Meeting in Kingston, Jamaica. Other meetings held jointly with the CBC meeting were the INTOSAI Donor Cooperation (IDC) and the International Federation of Accountants’ (IFAC) MOSAIC [1]. The overall theme of the weeklong contiguous meetings was “Partnering for Stronger SAIs and Enhanced PFM”.

The deliberations in each meeting collectively anchored on the important role that SAIs play in ensuring government accountability and strengthening effective public financial management (PFM) systems. It was acknowledged that the quality of the SAI’s work is dependent on the SAI having full autonomy to deliver its mandate without fear or favour, having appropriate systems and processes in place to govern its operations as well as having quality people. Further, it was recognised that the impact of the SAI’s work is dependent on the work of other key players who have responsibilities in the various phases of the PFM cycle, such as the legislature, the executive and government entities.

PFM cycle

Image source: Adapted from an IFAC presentation

Smaller SAIs in developing countries often lack resources (financial, human, capital) and capability to effectively perform their mandated duties. Therefore, it’s imperative that SAIs strengthen and deepen the relationships and collaborative efforts with other “players” in the PFM system, to achieve quality outcomes and impact people’s lives in their respective jurisdictions. SAIs should build and/or strengthen alliances at the national, regional and global levels.

Key partners

Image source: A presentation by SAI Kenya

Key takeaways from the meeting

There was a strong recognition of the value of INTOSAI regions in SAI capacity development. Reflected in the Kingston Agreement, the IDC Steering Committee agreed to maximise the involvement of the INTOSAI regions to facilitate country-level capacity development by leveraging on their knowledge and experience.

• SAIs need to build capacity and capability, keep up to date with emerging issues such as new ISSAIs [2], climate finance and sustainability reporting, and establish alliances with other players in the PFM value chain to be able to conduct the relevant audits and have an impact on society.

• Cooperation at the regional and country levels in support of the professionalisation of public sector accountants and auditors to enhance PFM systems. This premise hinged on the fact that strengthening accountability in the public sector is the responsibility of many players in the PFM system, not just the SAI (external auditing) and the Ministry of Finance (accounting and reporting). It means having the right people with the right skills and competencies across governments and public sector entities. It is not enough to have frameworks and standards alone.

• Enhancing PFM systems requires cooperation and collaboration with all players in the whole PFM ecosystem. Key players include legislature, government, judiciary, SAIs, civil society organisations (CSOs), donors, development partners and the public. This could include establishing country working groups that cooperate with the education community, including professional accounting organisations, universities and government schools, towards achieving professionalisation goals.

• CSOs can play a critical and value-adding role in the PFM value chain by lobbying for government actions to ensure audit report recommendations are implemented and SAI independence is maintained.

Attending the CBC annual meeting was an excellent opportunity to share the work of PASAI in building SAI capacity and learn from others with a common goal, shared values and similar challenges. The global forum exhibited new interventions and modalities to build SAI capability through the various CBC subcommittees and workstreams. Attendees were able to consider the perspectives of donors, development partners and the global accountancy profession on the role of the SAI in enhancing PFM.

It was also an opportunity to establish new networks with SAIs, regional organisations, international organisations and donors in the INTOSAI community who are potential partners that we may collaborate with in the future in our pursuit to build stronger SAIs and enhance PFM in the Pacific.

References

[1] Memorandum of Understanding to Strengthen Accountancy and Improve Collaboration

[2] For example, ISSAI 150 – Auditor Competence

Audit quality management – changes in perspective for our SAIs

By Meresimani Vosawale-Katuba, Director (South Pacific), PASAI

For a SAI to be credible, trustworthy and effective, its audits must comply with applicable standards and its reports must be of a high quality.

INTOSAI is currently revising ISSAI 140 - Quality Control for SAIs, with plans to move towards a holistic and systemic risk-based approach to quality management. [1] The Forum for INTOSAI Professional Pronouncements has developed an Exposure Draft of ISSAI 140 Quality Management for SAIs which is now open for comments. [2]

The changes emphasise that the auditor’s objective is about managing quality and associated procedures in a risk-based and dynamic way in order to achieve the required level of quality, rather than implementing a defined set of quality control procedures.

The SoAQM pilot initiative

The INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI) has developed the System of Audit Quality Management (SoAQM) pilot. In this system, the SAI designs and implements at the organisational level to enable it to conduct high quality audits, fulfil its responsibilities in accordance with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements, and contribute value.

There is a proposed collaboration between us and IDI to support interested SAIs in our region in this initiative, for which we held an awareness session with SAI heads.

We recently facilitated a workshop to assist SAIs in sustainably planning, executing and reporting on their financial statements of government (FSG) audits in accordance with international standards. [3] This training was the final stage of a programme of capability-building support to conduct FSG audits in accordance with the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions (ISSAIs). We started this programme in 2020 in collaboration with IDI.

Quality assurance reviews were carried out by independent reviewers for the participating SAIs' completed FSG audits. The workshop focused on the quality assurance review findings and provided some practical, immediate and long-term solutions for audit teams to implement in future financial audits.

It was also an opportunity for participants to share the challenges faced in audit methodology and processes, and implementing audit quality controls. They could also gain insights from their peers in other SAIs on suggested solutions.

Following these learnings, we introduced participants to the SoAQM pilot initiative to create awareness on the proposed changes to the audit quality management process for SAIs and also to assist them in planning their future activities on audit quality management. 

The future of audit quality control

It is proposed that the new ISSAI 140 take effect one year after the endorsement by the INTOSAI Governing Board. The effective date for the revised ISSAI 140 is estimated to be 1 January 2025.

The effective date will be important for SAIs that wish to be able to state that an audit has been carried out in accordance with the ISSAIs. From the effective date such claims can only be made if the SAI fully complies with the requirements of ISSAI 140. [4] In light of this, we are working with our member SAIs to begin shifting our perspectives towards managing quality in a risk-based and workable way.

References

[1] The System of Audit Quality Management: Pilots for SAIs
[2] Revision of ISSAI 140 – Quality management for SAIs
[3] Twenty-one Pacific Island government audit office staff in Fiji for improved financial auditing
[4] Explanatory memorandum professional pronouncement on quality management for SAIs and related revision of ISSAI 100 – fundamental principles of public sector auditing

Understanding the GAGAS audited financial statements

By Doris Flores Brooks, Director (North Pacific), PASAI

Ten of our member audit offices must audit their government’s financial statements in line with the Generally Accepted Government Audit Standards, known as GAGAS or the Yellow Book.

In a blog post last October we discussed the audit opinions of the financial statements of the Government of Guam (GovGuam) that Deloitte and Touche issued for fiscal year 2021 [1]. Now let’s take a look at the other parts of these audited financial statements, namely: the Management Discussion and Analysis (MD&A), the Basic Financial Statements and the Schedules of Required Supplementary Information (RSI).

GAGAS financial statements are complex, so this is just meant to provide an overview of how to read and start to understand such reports.

Management Discussion and Analysis

The MD&A introduces the basic financial statements and provides an analytical overview of the government’s financial activities. It’s presented before the basic financial statements and highlights the most significant financial issues. It is management’s version of what happened during the fiscal year. The MD&A also includes comparisons of the current year to the prior year based on the government wide information, an analysis of the government’s overall financial position and results of operations, significant fund changes and budget variances.

Basic Financial Statements

GovGuam’s basic financial statements are comprised of three components: 1) government wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements and 3) notes to the financial statements.

The government wide-financial statements consist of the Statement of Net Position (formerly the balance sheet) and the Statement of Activities (formerly the profit and loss statement). These statements are recorded on a full accrual basis.

One column in these statements is the Primary Government and the other column is for Component Units, which are legally separate government entities. The Guam Memorial Hospital, Guam Power Authority and Guam Waterworks Authority are some examples of the latter.

GovGuam has total assets of $2.5 billion and total liabilities of $5.1 billion for a negative net position of $2.5 billion. The unrestricted deficit was negative $3.6 billion. Of the total liabilities, the three largest liabilities are bonds outstanding of $1.05 billion, a net pension liability of $1.08 billion and an Other Post Employment Benefits liability of $1.7 billion.

In order to pay the pension liability, GovGuam’s required pension contribution rate is now at 26.97%. In other words, for $1 of salary, GovGuam contributes 27 cents into the Retirement Fund. The net pension liability is expected to be paid off by 2033.

For the statement of activities there were general fund revenues of $825.3 million, operating grants and contributions of $1.1 billion and fees for services of $78.5 million for total revenues of $2,031.8 million. Total expenditures were $2.07 billion. This resulted in a negative change in net position (loss) of $35.9 million.

The fund financial statements are recorded on a modified accrual basis (cash) consisting of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds and Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances (Deficit). The Balance Sheet reflects only current assets and current liabilities leaving the fund balance.

The General Fund is the chief operating fund of GovGuam, where major government functions such as education, public safety and fire protection are recorded. The Balance Sheet includes not only the General Fund but also certain special funds, such as the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act Unemployment Assistance, which record the receipt and expenditures of federal funds. There are eight separate columns for the various governmental funds. GovGuam has more than 100 other governmental funds.

The Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances (Deficit) reflect the government’s main activities from taxes to expenditures on services such as public health, protection of life and property, public welfare and so on.

In 2021 the General Fund reported a fund balance of $30.4 million, the first positive balance (surplus) since 2013.

Notes to Financial statements are explanatory and extended information to the financial statements. GovGuam’s notes are 93 pages, the first 18 pages of which is the Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. There are sixteen major notes. Other explanatory information includes long-term obligations, general information about pension plans, capital assets, other post employments benefits, commitments and contingencies. As they say, the devil is in the detail. Have fun reading the notes!

Schedules of Required Supplementary Information

As was mentioned in the audit opinion, GovGuam management did not include the Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Deficit – Budget and Actual in the RSI. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board requires this schedule to supplement the basic financial statements. It is one of the more helpful schedules for lawmakers.

The final part of the audited financial statements is Other Supplementary Information, at 55 pages in length.

Although a subset of our member offices must outsource the auditing of their government’s financial statements, you can see from the example we’ve just examined that such reports are nevertheless comprehensive and precise. Having the ability to deliver high-quality and timely audits is a cornerstone of a functional public integrity framework.

References

[1] https://www.opaguam.org/sites/default/files/2_-_govguam_fs21_final_jul_18_2022_0.pdf

Environmental audit opportunities for the PASAI region

By Jonathan Keate, Senior Solicitor Sector Manager, Office of the Auditor-General in New Zealand

This blog post covers recent and upcoming environmental auditing events and opportunities ahead for the PASAI region including two global climate change projects.

WGEA’s 19th Steering Committee Meeting

SAI New Zealand represents the PASAI region on INTOSAI’s Working Group on Environmental Auditing (WGEA), participating in meetings of its Steering Committee, which delivers the work programme of the group.

This March, the committee met in person in Rabat, Morocco, with participants from 20 different member SAIs discussing and approving the scope of the projects in the new work plan for 2023-25. SAI Morocco hosted the meeting, which began with an excursion to a new wastewater treatment plant. They use the treated water to irrigate parks and reserves in the city.

Wastewater management technology and water reuse in Rabat, Morocco

WGEA Work Plan 2023-25

The WGEA ensures each work plan includes a mix of projects, with hands on support for those SAIs doing their first environmental audit, and more ambitious projects to serve the needs of more experienced SAIs and auditors.

The Work Plan 2023-25 reflects this by providing audit support to SAIs in two main areas, namely: Climate Change and Biodiversity; and the Green Economy.

Global projects in the climate change area include:

• A joint INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI)/WGEA global audit of climate change adaptation actions, with scope for collaboration within and between INTOSAI regions including small island states; and

• Brazil’s ClimateScanner project – an innovative approach to undertaking a global rapid review of government climate actions.

There is also a research project into the connections between climate change and biodiversity and how these connections could influence audits in these areas.

The green economy projects are in three areas, focused on more experienced SAIs:

• Sustainability reporting – exploring the role of SAIs in promoting sustainability reporting.

• Environmental accounting – exploring concepts such as natural capital accounting and ecosystem accounting.

• Green fiscal policy tools – how economic tools such as environmental taxes, green investment funds and emissions trading schemes, can be used to improve environmental outcomes.

The Steering Committee will develop guidance, research and training materials in these areas over the next three years, in collaboration with international organisations and experts.

Regional WGEA meeting in Sydney, 9–11 May 2023

All PASAI members have been invited to attend the upcoming Regional WGEA meeting in Sydney, Australia from 9 to 11 May 2023. We have shaped the programme around the themes from the WGEA work plan. The event includes:

• training by Dr Vivi Nienmenmaa, Secretary-General of the WGEA about environmental auditing and the Sustainable Development Goals;

• the chance to learn more about the two global climate change cooperative projects and discuss opportunities for participation from the PASAI region;

• expert speakers on sustainability and climate reporting, and on how traditional knowledge perspectives can inform biodiversity and climate change audits;

• opportunities to share insights about potential or planned performance audits, including on climate change adaptation and biodiversity; and

• workshops to choose topics and scope audits for those that will participate in the global climate change adaptation audit.

To maximise participation, there is an option to join the morning sessions online for the training and to hear from guest speakers. Afternoon sessions involve practical workshops for those who attend in person. To participate please register your interest by Monday 24 April 2023.

Global climate change audit projects

National audit offices in the PASAI region have recently received an invitation from the IDI and WGEA to participate in a global cooperative audit of climate change adaptation actions (CCAA), with responses requested by 1 May 2023. The IDI and WGEA are working in cooperation with PASAI for the rollout of this initiative in the Pacific.

The main objective of this initiative is to help SAIs provide a relevant audit response to climate change. The programme offers support to SAIs for auditing a thematic area related to:

• disaster risk reduction,

• water resource management,

• sea level rise and coastal erosion, and

• implementation of climate change adaptation plans or actions (linked to SDG 13).

This will be a very supported audit process with the audits done and reported between December 2023 and July 2024 and a global report of results in 2025.

Given the importance of climate change to the PASAI region, this is a good opportunity for members to undertake their first environmental audit or to resume environmental auditing activities. Members that took part in PASAI’s cooperative performance audit on disaster risk recovery and climate change adaptation in 2010–2011 would be well-placed to do further audit work in this area, including follow ups.

We were pleased to hear that around 11 SAIs expressed interest in participating in this global cooperative audit at PASAI’s 24th Congress in Palau.

By attending the regional WGEA meeting in Sydney, members who are interested in taking part in the audit will be able to discuss and plan their involvement and seek assistance with topic selection with support from the group and their Australian and New Zealand twins present at the meeting. PASAI and the regional WGEA will be pleased to offer ongoing regional support to SAIs who participate in the global cooperative audit of CCAA.

The regional WGEA meeting will also feature a session from SAI Brazil about its Climate Scanner project. This is an innovative project over a three-year period for SAIs to undertake rapid reviews of their governments’ climate actions and for the results to be consolidated and reported globally.

For more information

Please follow the WGEA on Twitter and LinkedIn to keep up with WGEA activities. There is also a lot of up-to-date information on the INTOSAI WGEA website.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at  jonathan.keate@oag.parliament.nz.

Embracing the media to increase the impact of audit work

By Luke Eaton, Communications Advisor/Editor, PASAI

Making an issue hard to ignore

About a year ago, one of our members published an audit report [1] which reviewed the integrity of the assessment and approval processes for two government grant programmes. It was not about embezzlement or public money gone missing. There was nothing illegal found about how the money was allocated. However, the impact of this report is arguably still being felt in New South Wales.

Ordinarily, grant administration would not be likely to capture the public’s attention. There’s no obvious civil society organisation that would find such a topic central to its cause. How then did this report avoid the fate of so many others that end up gathering dust on the shelf, despite their notable findings?

There’s no one answer of course but I think it’s fair to say the media did some of the heavy lifting.

When the audit office published the report in its necessarily impartial and measured language, the media realised the findings didn’t pass the ‘pub test’, as many Australians would say. This means that average citizens chatting about the relevant facts of a matter (at say, a pub) would agree there was something unjust about it, even if it might be technically compliant.

And so, having recognised the potential interest in the report, the media gave it ‘legs’ and reported on it with some rather attention-grabbing headlines over several months.

A collage of some of some of the articles related to the audit in question, centre

The benefits of earned media

Now I know many of our members don’t operate in an environment where they can rely on a well-resourced local media to recognise their audit work as potential news stories. Some countries face restricted media freedoms and few media outlets. However, many SAIs simply haven’t prioritised the media as one of their key stakeholders.

Engaging with the media does carry risk. After all, you don’t have editorial control over what an external media outlet will publish or broadcast. However, this separation is what gives extra credibility to your messages. Consider how differently you feel learning about a product on a seller’s website, compared to seeing, hearing or reading about the product in the media. The former is ‘owned media’ and the latter is ‘earned media’. Incidentally, if you learn about something through an advertisement, that’s ‘paid media’.

A SAI’s owned media are its website and emailed content like notifications and newsletters, over which it has full control. As useful as they are, there are limits to the level of public engagement a SAI can have with these tools.

On the other hand, a SAI’s earned media is likely to reach many more people. SAIs should pursue opportunities to have the media amplify the impact of their audit work. This is not to say it’s easy, but the results can be profound.

Pacific Island SAIs should be greatly encouraged by the lead story in our latest newsletter. In it, another of our member SAIs hosted a media conference for journalists representing all of the media outlets. After explaining the role and functions of the SAI, the SAI Head gave on-the-record briefings about his COVID-19 audits, [2] taking questions throughout. The result was four front-page lead articles in the two national daily newspapers and at least 15 other follow up media reports across radio, TV, print and online platforms in the days after the workshop. This extra attention has now boosted the likelihood of the recommendations in the reports being implemented.

Learning how to help the media help you

We were extremely pleased with the interest in and engagement with the communications and media training we offered our members in Fiji last month. For almost all participants, it was the first time they had been trained to prepare for and do a media interview. As they now know, even in earned media, there is still much that is within your control and there are many ways to make the relationship with the media win-win.

Given the success of this programme, we hope to deliver similar training on a more regular basis. This will help put SAIs at ease about actively engaging with the media, minimising the risks and maximising the rewards.

Accountability in action

And what about the report mentioned earlier in this blog post? As well as receiving extensive media coverage it attracted the attention of parliamentary committees and contributed to much public debate. By the time we published an article about the report in the June 2022 edition of our newsletter the audit office had already participated in a related forum moderated by a prominent journalist livestreamed to the public.

After convincing election losses just last week, [3] it’s fair to assume the former government rather regrets the attention the media gave the audit report’s revelations about the dubious ways it allocated $352 million (USD 235,000,000) of grants.

References

[1] Integrity of grant program administration. The Audit Office of New South Wales.
[2] Auditor General calls for strengthening of procurement processes in light of COVID19 Audits. Solomon Islands Office of the Auditor General.
[3] McGowan, Michael; Rose, Tamsin (25 March 2023). "'Back and ready': Chris Minns leads Labor to power after 12 years in opposition at historic 2023 NSW election". The Guardian.

The power of language to create a culture of equity and inclusion

By Annie Subactagin-Matto, Director – Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting, PASAI

The role of language and its impact on organisational culture and stakeholder engagement

Language and communication enable us to connect with and engage others. Both can be powerful drivers of inclusion, and represent an organisation’s values, vision and mission. This is true for internal and external communication. However for communication to be effective, it needs to resonate with the intended audience.

We can use language inside the workplace to make everyone feel respected and valued. This includes conversations during meetings and formal communications cascaded from senior management to the wider organisation, as well as informal day-to-day conversations in the kitchen or cafeteria.

Language and messaging used for an external audience demonstrates what an organisation stands for, and the value that it adds to its diverse range of stakeholders including local and regional communities. We can use external communication to connect with stakeholders by building rapport and creating trust and confidence in an organisation. This is best achieved using effective messaging made with inclusive language. We can also use inclusive imagery to amplify the impact of the messaging.

Equity, diversity and inclusion

“The term equity refers to fairness and justice and is distinguished from the concept of equality. Whereas equality means providing the same to all, equity means recognizing that we do not all start from the same place and must acknowledge and make adjustments to imbalances. This requires us to identify and overcome intentional and unintentional barriers rising from bias and systemic structures.” [1]

© Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

Your organisation is likely to have people from different backgrounds, skillsets and with different personalities. As a result, your organisation and the business units and teams within it are diverse in their experiences and expectations by default. The challenge is to create an organisational culture that values diversity and fosters the inclusion of everyone in your diverse workforce, so that they feel valued, accepted and engaged. This is especially important as inclusion has been linked to increased employee engagement, wellbeing, productivity and retention. [2–6]

What is inclusive language and why is it important?

Inclusive language includes phrases and expressions that are respectful and free from bias, assumptions and stereotypes. It acknowledges diversity and promotes the acceptance and value of all people. It aims to foster a sense of inclusion, by including and empowering the audience. It also challenges conscious and unconscious biases, and can be used to shift our beliefs, attitudes and actions. [7]

How can we use inclusive language in the workplace?

You can use inclusive language in the workplace by:

• using words that show others respect and dignity. Avoid words that describe disabled people as sufferers, victims or the afflicted. [8] For example, use the words, “uses a wheelchair,” instead of, “confined to a wheelchair,” and, “was born with a disability,” instead of, “has a birth defect.”

• using genderless terms. For example, use “chairperson” instead of “chairman” and “police officer” instead of “policeman.”

• using universal phrases that are relevant to the cultural context of your communication. For example, if someone were not likely to understand a baseball reference, replace, “Team, let’s work together and hit it out of the park!” with, “Team, let’s work together to achieve something extraordinary/incredible!”

• avoiding language that implies judgement and strengthens stereotypes. An example is reframing the phrase, “Older drivers are dangerous,” to instead say, “As we get older sight loss is more common and as a result driving may become more difficult.” [9]

Other skills related to inclusive communication

We may choose to work on other skills that strengthen our ability to use inclusive language. These include improving our emotional intelligence, empathy and self-awareness. Active listening is an important element of effective interpersonal communication and helps us respond appropriately to both verbal and non-verbal cues. This can be supported by adopting a growth mindset where we make a commitment to continuous learning, development and self-improvement.

Diversity and inclusion at PASAI

PASAI is an equal opportunity employer. We are committed to providing an inclusive working environment that values diversity and where all employees have equal access.

We have mainstreamed gender equality and inclusion by teaching inclusive language in our Communications and Stakeholder Programme. We developed an ‘Inclusive language’ fact sheet, discuss it in all our communications workshops and make it available on our Learning Platform. As language is fluid and reflects societal and cultural norms, we regularly update this resource to ensure it meets the cultural and contextual requirements of our region.

Our self-paced Interpersonal Communications course contains modules on inclusive language and active listening, and will be launched on our Learning Platform in the coming months.

References

[1] National Association of Colleges and Employers. https://www.naceweb.org/about-us/equity-definition/

[2] INTOSAI Capability Building Committee. (2022). Human Resource Management: A guide for SAIs.

[3] Forbes. (2021). 15 Key benefits of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion to communicate with team members https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2021/05/19/15-key-benefits-of-dei-to-communicate-with-team-members/?sh=20e038ae195c

[4] Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behaviour in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 2, p. 350-383

[5] McKinsey and Company. (2020). Diversity wins: How inclusion matters. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters

[6] Fletcher, B. (2016). Diversity and Inclusiveness is good for your well-being. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/nz/blog/do-something-different/201609/diversity-and-inclusiveness-is-good-your-well-being

[7] Fast Company. (2022). How to get better using inclusive language in the workplace. https://www.fastcompany.com/90753901/how-to-get-better-at-using-inclusive-language-in-the-workplace

[8] Ministry of Social Development [2019] Disability language – words matter. https://msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/work-programmes/accessibility/quick-reference-guides/disability-language-words-matter.html

[9] Leyla, O. (2020). Seven ways inclusive language creates belonging at work. https://diverseminds.co.uk/7-ways-inclusive-language-creates-belonging-at-work/

Establishing a Quality Assurance function at SAI Fiji

By Meresimani Vosawale-Katuba, Director (South Pacific), PASAI

The Office of the Auditor-General of Fiji (SAI Fiji) established a Quality Assurance (QA) function in 2017. This was to ensure the SAI’s audit engagements complied with the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions (ISSAIs), and that the Quality Control (QC) systems in these audit engagements were effective. More importantly, it enabled the SAI to identify areas for improvement in audit methodology and QC systems as a SAI, with relevant solutions for these issues.

Getting started

Upon its inception, the first order of business for the QA team was to develop a policy and a manual to guide its activities. The team reported directly to the Auditor-General, and maintained a database of findings from all its QA reviews. The database highlighted ‘key focus areas’ audit teams needed to work on. The QA team conducted awareness sessions of the significant or recurring findings from the QA reviews. The team held separate sessions for the preparers and the reviewers of working papers.

The QA team continues to conduct awareness sessions throughout the year so fellow staff keep ‘key focus areas’ in mind while performing audits.

The QA function was established with existing office personnel – a Senior Auditor and an Auditor. Serendipitously, four months later the INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI) conducted weeklong training for QA reviewers. This assisted the team to navigate the ‘unchartered waters’ of quality assurance at the SAI. PASAI's Quality Assurance Manual was also a main reference point.

SAI Fiji also used QA materials and guidance from AFROSAI-E and the Tasmania Audit Office (through a DFAT-funded twinning programme).

Ingredients for success

For a QA function to be effective, there needs to be an established and documented audit methodology in place that is in line with the ISSAIs. A QC system also needs to be in place and operating effectively. This enables a benchmark for the SAI’s work to be measured against during a QA review.

A QC system is intended to provide the SAI with reasonable assurance that the office and its personnel comply with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements, and that engagement reports the SAI issues are appropriate in the circumstances.

The support of the SAI Head and Executive Management is also critical for the success and effectiveness of a SAI’s QA function.

It is critical for those performing the QA function to work very well together as a team. As well as having sound technical knowledge, the individuals should have diligence, integrity and mutual respect. The team must also be independent and have sufficient and appropriate experience and authority to perform QA reviews (as required under the standards).

Positive changes

A significant impact of SAI Fiji’s QA reviews was that teams were more careful to ensure quality in their audit working papers, and to obtain sufficient and appropriate audit evidence. The SAI’s audit engagement teams also appreciate how a sufficient and rigorous risk assessment affects the planned audit approach.

Significantly, the independent QA function assisted SAI Fiji to identify and address areas for improvement in its audit methodology. This resulted in a consistent approach to quality across the organisation.

Where to from here

When audits are executed consistently, in line with the requirements and intent of ISSAIs, within a strong system of quality controls across the organisation, and in an environment of objectivity, independence, ethics and integrity, the outcome is quality audits. Enhancing audit quality is really a journey of continuous improvement and change. Delivering quality audit services and providing value-adding insights to our auditees, and ultimately, our citizens, means finding better ways to conduct audits every day.

The IDI and PASAI programme, Financial Statements of Government Audits in line with ISSAIs, includes a QA review of these audits as the final stage of the support. Of the eight participating SAIs, Fiji, Kiribati  and Tuvalu have had their reviews carried out. The remaining SAIs (Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu) are targeted to have QA reviews completed by June 2023.

Governance, external audit and accountability – why it matters

By Esther Lameko-Poutoa, Chief Executive, PASAI

The recent Forum Economic Ministers Meeting held in Vanuatu indicated a solidarity stance to advance economic recovery and resilience while supporting the ‘2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent’. The 2050 Strategy endorses thematic areas which range from leadership to climate change to connectivity through technology.

Simultaneously, there was also the consistent request for more support from development partners. Governments need more money. And where there is public money, there is accountability. The pandemic has exposed the vulnerabilities of the fragile economies of the Pacific region. Forum Economic Ministers themselves called for the acceleration of public financial management (PFM) system reforms to, “strengthen immediate economic recovery and fiscal capacities to cope with shocks.”[1] This acknowledges that better accountability by executive governments is needed.

Image adapted from: https://www.forumsec.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Annex-A-2050-Strategy-for-the-Blue-Pacific-Continent.pdf

In this context, it’s increasingly important auditors general and public auditors work together with the Legislature to hold executive governments to account and improve PFM.

We at PASAI are committed to the capacity development of supreme audit institutions (SAIs) and working with stakeholders to progress accountability.

Timely financial reporting

About 80 per cent of the financial statements of government of countries in the Pacific region were audited on time pre-COVID. Since the emergence of the pandemic, the governments of some countries have not prioritised financial reporting.[2] These reporting delays continue to be a significant setback to economic recovery. 

Governments are obligated to show how they are managing the public purse and should prioritise such reporting. It’s about building trust in government and the public sector. These financial statements of government must be externally audited. Doing so adds credibility to the financial statements. It creates opportunities to strengthen internal controls, improve financial systems, set high standards for services, and lift performance management, timely reporting and decision making. It's about building integrity in processes and embedding it in the values in the long term.

In short, creating robust financial management systems leads to a more trusted public service.  

Communication with citizens

It’s important for government audit offices to not only produce and submit audit reports to the Legislature, but also to release them to the public. This matters because the public has a right to know and understand how public money is being spent and to question it.

The public is an ally to SAIs to hold governments to account. SAIs must produce audit reports that are easy to read and understand, and preferably in multiple languages, if needed. SAIs’ reports should be timely and on projects and areas of high interest to citizens. Equitable access to information about the public sector is vital.

Audit independence and scrutiny by the Legislature

To ensure impartiality, government audit offices must have functional and organisational independence from the executive governments, which are the public entities they audit. This matters because without independence, these watchdogs won’t be able to effectively review and evaluate government spending. They must have the authority to audit and report on public spending objectively and without fear of retribution. Protection against outside influence is necessary.

The Legislature should be an ally of the SAIs, a relevant partner in the oversight of the Executive Government. It is ideal when they share a mutual interest in regularly reminding government entities of policies, regulations and timely reporting to the Legislature. The Legislature should prioritise the scrutiny of these audited financial statements of government and not obstruct SAIs from making  recommendations available to the public.

Timely financial reporting, communication with citizens, audit independence and scrutiny by the Legislature all contribute to promoting government accountability.

References

[1] 2022 Forum Economic Ministers Meeting 11–12 August 2022, Outcomes

[2] PASAI – October update of the Financial Statements of Government audits

The IntoSAINT programme is ready to kick off again

By Nicole Ayo von Thun, Senior Advisor, International Engagement, Office of the Auditor-General in New Zealand

While borders have been closed, the International Team at SAI New Zealand has been working hard to update the IntoSAINT facilitator materials. This means that now that borders are opening up we are ready to kick off this important programme again.

What is IntoSAINT?

For those of you who are new, IntoSAINT is an integrity assessment that evaluates how strong an organisation’s integrity systems are and identifies ways to reduce vulnerabilities. This process helps strengthen controls and reduce risks.

Both supreme audit institutions (SAIs) and public sector organisations can use it. The integrity assessment is called IntoSAINT when assessing a SAI and SAINT when assessing a public sector organisation. SAINT stands for Self Assessment of Integrity.

What’s the format?

A cross-section of up to 16 staff from an organisation will spend two to three days in the workshop. It is a self-assessment because the organisation’s staff do it. Administering an integrity assessment requires commitment from the organisation’s management. They must give staff who attend confidence that their views are valued, and the time to fully participate in the workshop.

There are two to three trained facilitators to guide staff through the assessment process. The staff then consider the results and develop recommendations to strengthen organisational integrity. These recommendations are powerful because they come from staff who really understand how the SAI or organisation works. The facilitators then provide recommendations to management through a presentation and a written report.

What benefits does an organisation get from the integrity assessment?

The benefits include:

• The assessment and the presentation of recommendations to management are completed within a week.

• A management team receives clear recommendations about how to strengthen the organisation’s integrity.

• Staff become strong advocates for integrity and act as integrity ambassadors after the workshop.

• Staff better appreciate how the organisation’s culture affects behaviour and trust in the public sector.

• Staff who are interested in holding managers to account for taking action.

What’s new with the IntoSAINT materials?

The pack of materials now includes a guide that leads facilitators through what an integrity assessment is, how to organise it, how to run one, and how to report the recommendations to management. It sits on top of all the documents required to do an assessment and shows facilitators how and when to use the additional materials and training documents.

We have also developed a range of new documents like the agendas, run sheets and a cover letter for the management report. We have also updated the PowerPoints so that the wording and instructions better align to the IntoSAINT Facilitator Guide. 

The goal is to make it easier for SAI staff once they have been trained as IntoSAINT facilitators to do an IntoSAINT or SAINT assessment. Previously there was a lot to remember after the training. But now all of that information is documented in the guide so facilitators can self-refresh before every workshop.

The aim is that more SAIs in the Pacific region will be able to use this tool to strengthen integrity in their own public sectors. We will share this new package with the IntoSAINT Working Group, which is chaired by SAI Mexico, to be used internationally. SAI New Zealand is currently the PASAI regional representative on the working group.

What’s next for IntoSAINT in the Pacific region?

At the beginning of 2020, SAI New Zealand had a full programme lined up to roll IntoSAINT out across the region. Unfortunately, as with many things, COVID-19 got in the way.

Next year SAI New Zealand, with the support of PASAI and other trained IntoSAINT facilitators in the region, would like to reignite the enthusiasm for this valuable tool. We will be reaching out to everyone who signed up for a 2020 assessment, as well as connecting with those in the region who would like to know more about it.

Keep an eye out for communications on this in the coming months. For any questions in the meantime on the new material or the IntoSAINT roll out in the Pacific region, please get in touch with the International Team at SAI New Zealand at international@oag.parliament.nz.

Understanding the government financial audit opinion

By Doris Flores Brooks, Director (North Pacific), PASAI

PASAI has 10 SAIs who follow the United States (US) Congressional model of governance. These SAIs are in the Federated States of Micronesia (the National Government and the four members states of Chuuk, Kosrae, Pohnpei and Yap), the Marshall Islands, Palau and the US Territories of American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam.

The standards these SAIs follow require the annual audit of the financial statements for the whole of government to be signed by a US licensed Certified Public Accountant (CPA). Very few of these SAIs have a licensed CPA on staff so for the past several decades they have contracted out the annual government financial audits to independent CPA firms.

The financial audit report of the Government of Guam for the fiscal year ended 30 September 2021 [1] is 201 pages long. It begins with an Independent Auditors’ Report prepared by Deloitte and Touche LLP addressed to the Governor of Guam. We’ll use this as an example of terminology common among financial auditors that likely requires ‘translation’ when presented in other formats for laypeople [2].

Report on the Financial Statements

The report opens by listing the financial statements audited, namely, those of:

• the governmental activities,

• the aggregate discretely presented component units,

• each major fund,

• the aggregate remaining fund information, and

• the related notes to the financial statements.

It should be clear from the beginning which statements of information the audit opinion is expressed on.

Governmental activities include education, general government, public safety, public welfare, economic development, transportation, interest on debt and other activities governments customarily perform.

In this part of the audit opinion, it highlights the main activities of government which were covered in the audit.

Component units are state owned enterprises that have been established by law and separated from the general treasury. These component units have their own financial records that document revenues and expenses.

This information is particular to a government being audited. In this case, the Government of Guam has more than 20 component units. They include the hospital, the community college, the university and the authorities for the airport, the waterworks and the port.

Major funds in Guam include those for Federal Grants Assistance, American Rescue Plan Act Assistance, COVID-19 and Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act Unemployment Assistance.

This part of the audit opinion highlights the main funds and revenue sources of the government.

Management’s Responsibility to the Financial Statements

“Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free of material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.”

This part of the audit opinion highlights the responsibility of government in the preparation of financial statements. Management, in this case, the Department of Administration, prepared the financial statements following the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). It is the responsibility of government to have proper financial management systems and adequate systems of internal controls in the preparation of these financial statements.

Auditor’s Responsibility

“Our responsibility is to express opinions on the financial statements based on our audit.”

This part is the responsibility of the independent external auditor, to express an audit opinion based on sufficient and appropriate evidence collected and documented from the audit. The audit must be conducted in line with international audit standards, in the case of Guam, the Generally Accepted Government Audit Standards, known as GAGAS or the Yellow Book.

Opinions

“In our opinion, based on our audit and the reports of other auditors, the financial statements … present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the government…”

This is the actual audit opinion expressed on the financial statements. In this case, the auditor issued an unqualified audit opinion and that the government’s financial statements are fairly stated. In other cases, audit opinions can be modified if there are significant issues with the financial statements.

Emphasis of Matters

An emphasis of matter paragraph is to highlight a matter to the readers of the financial statements which does not affect the audit opinion expressed. Emphasis is made if auditors want to highlight certain topics even though they have been appropriately presented in the financial information.

In this case, the auditor emphasised a change in an accounting principle and that the government thought COVID-19 may have a negative effect on its finances.

Other Matters

This is where auditors raise matters relevant to understanding the financial information.

Required Supplementary Information

The Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requires certain information to be presented so there is context to the basic financial statements. The auditor pointed out that management didn’t present certain information (the Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Deficit – Budget and Actual – General Fund and notes).

Other Information

Management provided extra information on pages 143 to 197 for additional analysis to support the financial information presented.

Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards

In this paragraph the auditor states it has issued a report on the government’s internal control over financial reporting and its own tests of its compliance with certain laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements.

The Challenge

It’s one thing to understand financial audit opinions and another thing to explain them to a SAI’s stakeholders. SAI Guam has done a commendable job in creating a short 2021 Financial Highlights document [3] that incorporates some effective visuals and summarises important points from the Independent Auditors’ Report and the government’s financial statements as a whole.

References

[1] https://www.opaguam.org/sites/default/files/2_-_govguam_fs21_final_jul_18_2022_0.pdf

[2] Much of this information was obtained from Jeanne Yamamura CPA, at the 2022 APIPA virtual conference.

[3] https://www.opaguam.org/sites/default/files/1_-_ggw_fy_2021_hl_final.pdf

Reflections on seven years at PASAI

By Tiofilusi Tiueti, Director – Technical Support, PASAI

When you walk into an organisation on your first day and are greeted happily you know your tenure will be a pleasant one. About seven years ago, I was warmly welcomed at the PASAI Secretariat office in Auckland and immediately felt at home with my co-staff and as a member of the PASAI community.

This is not your usual blog post on a technical audit topic to garner interest from members and the public audit community. Rather, it is a sharing of fond memories to express how much I have enjoyed the opportunities and challenges of working in PASAI, the partnerships we have forged among our member SAIs, and, most of all, the camaraderie of our dedicated, hard-working team in the PASAI Secretariat. All this could be perceived as trite, but the feelings are absolutely genuine – as I am now finding.

After prudent consideration, I concluded that although it would still be delightful to work in PASAI, the value I take from the worlds of public finance and global development would also make a humble contribution to Tonga and the region. So, I have resigned.

Memories of the work I have engaged in and the opportunities afforded to me over the last seven years at PASAI will remain with me forever. 

Since I became a PASAI staff member, I have enjoyed working for an organisation that is continuously empowering SAI staff and endeavouring to make a difference in the lives of people in the Pacific.

I remember Eli Lopati and Matereta Raiman, the former heads of SAI Tuvalu and SAI Kiribati, who were persistent in reforming their respective audit legislation to strengthen their SAIs’ independence. It is encouraging to see other SAIs also pursuing their SAI independence ‘journey’. Having a will at the top, a clear independence strategy and an effective advocacy program with key stakeholders is vital to bolstering SAI independence.

I remember parliamentarians in Fiji, FSM Pohnpei, Kiribati, Samoa, Solomon Islands and Tonga appreciating the integral external oversight roles of SAIs and Public Accounts Committees (PACs). They are vital in the effective follow-up of the implementation of audit recommendations by the Executive and in holding the government accountable in its use of public resources. This is why we persistently promote SAIs as a critical component of a robust public finance management (PFM) system and advocate they have effective communication with parliament. 

I remember the thrill of seeing SAI Nauru addressing its 15-year backlog of Financial Statements of Government (FSG) audits and continuing with the determination to get the subsequent years’ FSG audits up to date. Seeing the staff support from SAIs Fiji, Samoa, and Tonga of SAI Nauru on the Financial Audit Secondment Technical Support (FASTS) initiative bear success was most pleasing. This is a good approach to help reducing audit backlogs and ensure the timeliness and quality of FSG audits.

I remember working with SAI staff on various INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI) cooperative audits and other programmes. The SAI-level support to eight SAIs on their FSG audits to be ISSAI compliant presents a useful model for audit quality and building the capacity of SAIs.

I remember working with a fine bunch of PASAI audit professionals over the years in conducting the SAI Performance Measurement Framework assessments of member SAIs. The results of these assessments have provided PASAI with a wealth of evidence-based information on the status of SAI operations and performance but more importantly, have identified areas where SAIs need support to become more professional and independent. 

I remember sharing knowledge, revealing experiences and absorbing discussions with SAI staff in various training, workshops and SAI-level support programmes.

I remember working with Sarah Markley (aka the Deputy Secretary-General) to secure funding to implement the second half (last five years) of the PASAI Strategic Plan 2014–2024. The wise guidance of the Secretary-General and the great support of the Governing Board was vital to obtaining agreement with our development partners on building SAIs’ capacity through our programmes.

I remember the ongoing delivery of PASAI programmes with SAIs adapting to the changing global context despite the unfavourable impact of COVID-19. We still supported SAIs to respond to emerging issues and remain relevant. It also revealed that in times of adversity we have the resilience to adapt and achieve our purpose.

I remember the wise ideas and creative approaches shared and discussed by heads of SAIs, staff and colleagues, in numerous congresses, governing board meetings, and other regional and international forums. These vital interventions contributed to improving SAI systems and enhancing audit processes to ensure audit quality towards making an impact on the lives of people.

I remember uniting with development partners and engaging with regional partners who have been a great support to PASAI in funding and technical assistance. They have worked with us at the Secretariat and the member SAIs to create an environment for more inclusive dialogues on regional and global issues. Engaging constructively in regional public audit and PFM strengthening processes is of continuing significance.

I remember the countless cups of coffee in the Secretariat office to plan, set up, strategise, discuss, agree and celebrate with fellow staff and good friends.

And so, so much more.

I want to acknowledge and thank our member SAIs and officials for what we have achieved together. I have been very inspired by the incredible work of our SAIs across the Pacific – a work that I will continue to follow as I move on to my new role. I am very proud of the work that PASAI does and glad I could be part of it.

As I conclude my term, I have never felt more strongly about the need for the PASAI Secretariat. It remains the only regional organisation for government (public) auditors that provide us with the space to determine our own strategic direction, free from external influence.

Much has been achieved, but there is still much to do.

All Pacific countries and their people must feel valued and derive value from SAIs. At the same time, and particularly at these uncertain times, I sincerely hope that all 27 members continue to recall why PASAI is a necessary institution.

It has been a great privilege to serve the region as part of the Secretariat. Over the past seven years, I have had the pleasure to work with a Secretariat team of passionate, dedicated and highly competent colleagues who manage important PASAI projects and learn from their diverse experiences. I am very proud of the staff who ensure we deliver on our priorities. I know you are well placed to meet the challenges ahead under the leadership of the Chief Executive, Esther Lameko-Poutoa. I cannot wait to see what PASAI will achieve in the years to come!

I am awed by the prospect of starting my new role but I have worked at the Tonga Ministry of Finance for eight years before I joined PASAI. The new role will be rich, exciting and immensely challenging – working with local, regional and global partners in exceptional public finance landscapes, and helping to build capacity, economic resilience and global development.

When I walk out of the Secretariat’s office at the end of today and hand in my key card and other resources belonging to the Secretariat, part of me will be deeply sad. I started as a colleague of a PASAI community, I will leave as a member of the PASAI family. I still feel the warmth and welcome since my first day at the office. I’ve had a pleasant time indeed.

But … I am hoping to continue connecting in my new role. And to keep on advocating for SAI independence, strong PFM systems and accountable governments in the region.

So, farewell until we cross paths again, hopefully in the field where our best work is done.

Mālō ‘aupito mo e ‘ofa atu!

The importance of strategic planning and alliances in creating audit impact

By Sinaroseta Palamo-Iosefo, Director – Practice Development, PASAI

A mandate that provides supreme audit institutions (SAIs) the discretion to select areas of audit focus is a tremendous responsibility. It deserves proper strategic planning, external consultation and due consideration to the intended benefits to citizens the audits will achieve through their impacts.

Coherent audit planning

A well-structured strategic plan ensures the SAI will produce work that contributes to improving performance in the public sector and solving societal problems. A SAI should have an established planning system and process to ensure it covers issues of broad public and political interest.

Where SAIs have flexibility to choose the objective and scope of their performance or compliance audits, they should consider emerging issues like inclusiveness in the audit planning process. They should also consider the resources required to perform these audits.

The COVID-19 pandemic has, in many cases, increased the disparities of opportunity, wealth and power among people. These inequalities reveal themselves when looking at demographics such as gender, ethnicity, age, class, disability, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, indigeneity, migratory status, socio-economic status, and geographical remoteness.

SAIs should consider the range of issues and risks heightened by the pandemic when selecting audit focus areas to remain relevant, increase their impact and make valuable contributions to their citizens.

SAI value creation

While SAIs have control over the quality and timeliness of their audits, there are other factors that affect the SAI’s contribution to greater impact on citizen’s lives, especially the most vulnerable and marginalised sectors. The diagram below depicts the value chain of what the SAI can achieve through audits.

Source: Adapted from IDI’s Performance Audit ISSAI Implementation Handbook, August 2021

It’s more than completing quality audits and submitting timely reports (SAI outputs), which are within the control of the SAI. The impact of the SAI’s work can only materialise when auditees action recommendations. However, if the overall accountability framework is insufficient, some auditees may lack the incentive to action any recommendations.

For citizens to reap the benefits of improvements in public service delivery, it usually requires legislative scrutiny of audit reports and interest from CSOs and the media, among other key stakeholders.

Auditees usually care about the risk of reputational loss. Knowing the implementation of audit recommendations will be followed up can motivate action.

Strategic alliance

Each SAI is part of an ecosystem with its own unique social, economic, and political context. Multiple stakeholders such as legislative bodies, auditees, civil society organisations, professional bodies, academia, and media all play a role in achieving audit impact. SAIs need to take an active role in engaging with these stakeholders throughout the audit process to ensure government policies, programmes and institutions are inclusive and responsive to the needs of citizens, especially the marginalised sectors.

Throughout the audit process—from planning, conducting, reporting and follow-up—SAIs need to maintain an active dialogue with relevant stakeholders to understand significant societal issues, the main risks, and how the SAI can add the most value through the intended audit.

PASAI support

PASAI continues to build SAI capabilities to develop their own strategic and operational plans, human resource strategies and communication strategies.

An upcoming course on Strategic Audit Planning will cover in depth how SAIs should select potential audit topics by intentionally reviewing government priorities, policies and programmes. It will also give participants a deeper understanding of emerging societal issues. SAIs should have a rationale for any audit, especially performance or compliance audit.

Collectively these initiatives aim to strengthen the SAIs to deliver meaningful and impactful audits.

Impacts guide the audit process

In summary, SAIs should focus on the outcomes and the long-term effects of audits. The overall objective of the SAI is to deliver value and benefits and make a difference in the lives of citizens. SAIs should actively consider impact throughout the audit process when:

• planning – create a coalition with stakeholders when selecting audit topics to ensure audits focus on relevant and significant issues affecting government and citizens,

• conducting – perform audits in accordance with relevant standards or ISSAIs to ensure audit quality,

• reporting – communicate the value of audit results through timely reporting to all stakeholders, and

• following up – check with the Legislature and auditees to ensure recommendations have been fully implemented for citizens to benefit from improvements.

---

The Pacific Association of Supreme Audit Institutions (PASAI) is the official association of supreme audit institutions (SAIs) in the Pacific region, promoting transparent, accountable, effective and efficient use of public sector resources in the Pacific. It contributes to that goal by helping its member SAIs improve the quality of public sector auditing in the Pacific to recognised high standards. Our blog includes topics that may help auditors think about some implications to service delivery because of the global coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19).