Issue - meetings
Proposed Internal Audit and Counter Fraud Strategy
Meeting: 11/04/2019 - Audit Committee (Item 5)
5 Proposed Internal Audit and Counter Fraud and Corruption Strategy / Plan 2019-20 PDF 588 KB
Additional documents:
- Enc. 1 for Proposed Internal Audit and Counter Fraud Strategy_Final, item 5 PDF 496 KB
- Enc. 2 for Proposed Internal Audit and Counter Fraud Strategy_Final, item 5 PDF 299 KB
Minutes:
Mr Steven Tinkler, Interim Head of Audit and Risk Management introduced this report stating that the report outlines the combined Internal Audit and Counter Fraud Plan for 2019-10. Mr Tinkler said the plan had been developed in consultation with the Corporate Leadership Team and his knowledge of the organisation. The Plan highlighted five to six areas and had a more strategic outlook. Mr Tinkler said there was a mix of strategic reviews, transformation activities and projects.
One of the key values the strategy wants to embed is Internal Audit’s involvement in the design of a project. He said the Audit Team could provide assistance with the board scope of a project and provide risk opinion on projects.
In response to questions from Members the following was noted:
· The counter-fraud strategy follows the ‘Enfield’ model whereby the London Borough of Enfield were given £30M over two years by government to develop a single investigation service, as some of the functions and monies had moved to the DWP. The Enfield model introduced new innovative ways to counter-fraud measures and is the standard promoted by CiPFA. All fraud risks are scored with and without controls and the work has been standardised.
· In response to how Internal Audit is perceived within the organisation, Mr Tinkler said the peer review by Kent County Council made several recommendations regarding how the Council’s Audit process could be improved and the strategy incorporated these recommendations.
· Mr Tinkler gave an example of how Internal Audit had highlighted concerns in relation to Children’s Services however the recommendations were ignored until the Ofsted inspection verdict. Since then the profile of the Audit function within the Council had vastly improved. Mr Tinkler stated he had weekly meetings with the Portfolio Lead for Resources and the Corporate Leadership Team and was working with colleagues across the organisation to embed the strategic values of internal audit.
o ACTION: The Kent County Council peer review recommended the appointment of an Independent expert on to the Committee and this should be pursued.
· In reference to page 101, paragraph 7.2.4 Members recommended the referral of counter-fraud to the police should be strengthened to avoid delays in prosecuting.
· In reference to the Internal Audit Plan – pages 107 to 126, Mr Tinkler confirmed the number of days to be spent on each Audit had not been stated, primarily because the scope of the work is more important rather than the number of days it will take,
The Committee RESOVLED to
AGREE the proposed combined Internal Audit and Counter Fraud Plan for 2019-20 and the Internal Audit Charter.