This is the accessible text file for the International Journal of 
Government Auditing, October 2006 edition. Special Section: Audits of 
Disaster-Related Aid. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

INTOSAI International Journal Of Government Auditing: 

October 2006: 
Volume 33, No. 4: 

Board of Editors: 
Josef Moser, President, Rechnungshof, Austria: 
Sheila Fraser, Auditor General, Canada: 
Faiza Kefi, First President, Cour des Comptes, Tunisia: 
David M. Walker, Comptroller General, United States of America: 
Clodosbaldo Russian Uzcategui, Comptroller General, Venezuela: 

President: Helen H. Hsing (U.S.A.): 

Editor: Donald R. Drach (U.S.A.): 

Assistant Editors: 
Linda J. Sellevaag (U.S.A.): 
Christopher Lyons (U.S.A.): 

Associate Editors: 
Office of the Auditor General (Canada): 
Sudha Krishnan (ASOSAI-India): 
Luseane Sikalu (PASAI-Tonga): 
CAROSAI Secretariat (St. Lucia): 
EUROSAI General Secretariat (Spain): 
Khemais Hosni (Tunisia): 
Yadira Espinoza Moreno (Venezuela): 
INTOSAI General Secretariat (Austria): 
U.S. Government Accountability Office (U.S.A.): 

Administration: 
Sebrina Chase (U.S.A.): 
Paul Miller (U.S.A.): 

Members of the Governing Board of INTOSAI: 
Arpád Kovács, President, Allami Számvevöszék, Hungary, Chairman: 
Arturo González de Aragón, Auditor General, Auditoría Superior de la 
Federación, Mexico, First Vice-Chairman: 
Osama Jaffer Faquih, President, General Auditing Bureau, Saudi Arabia, 
Second Vice-Chairman: 
Josef Moser, President, Rechnungshof, Austria, Secretary General: 
Henri Bruno Bessin, Inspector General, Inspecteur Général d’Etat, 
Burkina Faso: 
Paul R.S. Allsworth, Director of Audit, Cook Islands Audit Office: 
Vijayendra Nath Kaul, Comptroller and Auditor General, India: 
Muneharu Otsuka, President, Board of Audit, Japan: 
Yun-Churl Jeon, Chairman, Board of Audit and Inspection, Korea: 
Guillermo Argüello Poessy, President, Consejo Superior de la 
Contraloría General, Nicaragua: 
Juergen Kosmo, Auditor General, Riksrevisjonen, Norway: 
Guilherme D’Oliveira Martins, President, Tribunal de Contas, Portugal: 
Albert Edwards, Director of Audit, National Audit Office, St. Kitts 
and Nevis: 
Faiza Kefi, First President, Cour des Comptes, Tunisia: 
Sir John Bourn, Comptroller and Auditor General, National Audit 
Office, United Kingdom: 
David M. Walker, Comptroller General, Government Accountability 
Office, United States of America: 
Guillermo Ramírez, President, Tribunal de Cuentas de la República, 
Uruguay: 
Clodosbaldo Russián Uzcátegui, Comptroller General, Venezuela: 

The International Journal of Government Auditing is published 
quarterly (January, April, July, October) in Arabic, English, French, 
German, and Spanish on behalf of INTOSAI (International Organization 
of Supreme Audit Institutions). The Journal, which is the official 
organ of INTOSAI, is dedicated to the advancement of government 
auditing procedures and techniques. Opinions and beliefs expressed are 
those of editors or individual contributors and do not necessarily 
reflect the views or policies of the organization. 

The editors invite submissions of articles, special reports, and news 
items, which should be sent to the editorial offices at: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office: Room 7814, 441 G Street, NW: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 
U.S.A. 
(phone: 202-512-4707; 
fax: 202-512-4021; 
e-mail: intosaijournal@gao.gov) 

Given the Journal's use as a teaching tool, articles most likely to be 
accepted are those that deal with pragmatic aspects of public sector 
auditing. These include case studies, ideas on new audit 
methodologies, or details on audit training programs. Articles that 
deal primarily with theory would not be appropriate. 

The Journal is distributed to INTOSAI members and other interested 
parties at no cost. It is also available electronically at 
http://www.intosaijournal.org or http://wwwintosa.org and by 
contacting the Journal at spel@gao.gov. 

Articles in the Journal are indexed in the Accountants' Index 
published by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants 
and included in Management Contents. Selected articles are included in 
abstracts published by Anbar Management Services, Wembley, England, 
and University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. 

Contents: 

New Journal Web Site: 

Editorial: 

Spotlight on the Strategic Plan: 

News in Brief: 

Disaster-Related Aid: International Symposium on Auditing Tsunami 
Relief Funds: 

Using Geographic Information in Audits: 

Achieving Public Sector Outcomes 

Audit Profile: Nepal: 

Reports in Print: 

Inside INTOSAI: 

IDI Update: 

INTOSAI Calendar: 

[End of section] 

Editorial: Going from Strength to Strength: 

Dr. Josef Moser: 

President of the Austrian Court of Audit and Secretary General of 
INTOSAI: 

[Photograph of Dr. Josef Moser] 

On July 1, 2004, I was appointed President of the Austrian Court of 
Audit and Secretary General of INTOSAI. Since just over 2 years of my 
12-year term have elapsed, this is a good moment to think back on what 
has been accomplished during this time and to take stock of the new 
INTOSAI, which is going from strength to strength. 

Taking Stock: 

As a newcomer to the INTOSAI family, I was immediately taken by the 
warm welcome I received, INTOSAI's record of accomplishments during 
its first 50 years, and its immense potential and resources. 

I assumed office just as INTOSAI entered a time of renewal, 
reorganization, and new vision for the future. At the beginning of the 
new millennium, INTOSAI recognized the need to add tools and 
instruments to its existing repertoire and pair them with innovative 
forms of interaction, communication, and leadership to meet the 
challenges of an ever-changing world of accelerating globalization, 
dynamic global transformations, and growing demands for accountability 
and transparency. One of the goals I set for myself as I began my term 
was to reconcile past achievements with bolder visions for the future. 
To deliver on my promise of reaching out to the INTOSAI family and 
enhancing INTOSAI's presence, I have traveled extensively to events 
and meetings, where I have gotten to know colleagues and forged ties 
with counterparts around the globe. Today, I am proud to say, INTOSAI 
has managed to adjust to its new environment while building carefully 
on past achievements and has achieved a stronger profile and greater 
influence in the global arena. 

Progress on All Fronts: 

My appointment to office also coincided with the adoption of INTOSAI's 
strategic plan for 2005 to 2010 by the 18th INCOSAI in Budapest. This 
milestone document, a historic endeavor, is being implemented 
throughout INTOSAI. The strategic plan, which is designed to guide 
INTOSAI's operations in the years ahead, proposes three primary 
mission-related goals. 

Goal 1 promotes strong, independent, and multidisciplinary SAIs and 
the development and adoption of effective professional standards. The 
SAI of Denmark—which chairs this goal and the Professional Standards 
Committee (PSC) that was established under the goal—set the ambitious 
objective of merging existing and new INTOSAI standards and guidelines 
into a common framework. This will give INTOSAI members and other 
interested parties an overview and common understanding of INTO-SAI's 
auditing standards and guidelines, eliminate existing duplication, 
focus greater attention on professional standards, and raise the 
profile and status of INTOSAI's standard-setting process within the 
broader accountability community. 

Goal 2 focuses on building the professional capabilities and 
capacities of SAIs through training, technical assistance, and other 
development activities. Under the leadership of the SAI of Morocco, 
the Capacity Building Committee (CBC) officially presented its terms 
of reference and instituted three subcommittees at its inaugural 
conference in London in March 2006. These subcommittees will promote 
capacity-building activities among SAIs, develop advisory and 
consultant services, and promote best practices and quality assurance 
through voluntary peer reviews. This broad-based effort—which involves 
many SAIs, INTOSAI's regional organizations, and the INTOSAI 
Development Initiative—will help INTOSAI brace itself for the 
challenges of the new millennium. 

Goal 3 promotes cooperation and collaboration between SAIs and their 
continuous improvement through knowledge sharing, including 
benchmarking, best practice studies, and research. In cooperation with 
the SAI of India, an INTOSAI communications policy and online 
collaboration tool is being elaborated to further INTOSAI's 
modernization. 

Goal 4 calls for INTOSAI to become a model international organization. 
Through ongoing interaction and consultation, the Finance and 
Administration Committee, chaired by the SAI of Saudi Arabia, 
spearheaded a reform of INTOSAI's finances. With a view to long-term 
sustainability of INTOSAI's finances, the General Secretariat followed 
up on and immediately implemented a number of valuable recommendations 
the committee made on areas such as debt management, the conversion of 
its accounting system to the euro, and the streamlining of its 
accounting procedures. As befits a model international organization, 
INTOSAI can take pride in the sound management of its own business 
matters. To respond to its need for modern communications, INTOSAI is 
giving a thorough facelift to its Web site, which will be relaunched 
shortly. 

The Human Factor: 

A director of strategic planning was appointed to implement INTOSAI's 
strategic plan. Mr. Klaus Henning Busse, from the SAI of Germany, 
started to work at the General Secretariat in Vienna in January 2006. 
Our working relations have been excellent on both the professional and 
personal levels and have been carried out in a spirit of constructive 
cooperation. His mandate is to translate the strategic plan's 
ambitious goals into reality while trying to adopt a streamlined and 
target-driven approach to INTOSAI's divergent systems, multilayered 
structures, and varied settings. Mr. Busse reports directly to me and 
consults with me on a regular basis. He has been interacting closely 
with the committees, working groups, task forces, and regional working 
groups on an ongoing basis. Recently, he sent to the regional working 
groups a questionnaire on their progress in implementing the strategic 
plan in the different INTOSAI regions and on measures and programs 
they have already adopted. 

Recent Highlights and a Vision for the Future: 

The INTOSAI Tsunami Initiative is a shining example of INTOSAI's new 
spirit. In the wake of the tsunami disaster in December 2004, the 
General Secretariat and the SAI of the Netherlands undertook this 
initiative, which was favorably received by the SAIs of major donor 
and recipient countries and international stakeholders. The
initiative led to the establishment of the INTOSAI Task Force on 
Accountability and Audit of Disaster-Related Aid and to the 
organization of the International Symposium on Strengthening Global 
Government Audit: The Contribution of the International Organization 
of Supreme Audit Institutions, as illustrated by the Audit of Tsunami 
Relief Funds. The symposium promoted government audit and, in 
particular, the global activity of INTOSAI, using the audit of tsunami 
relief funds as an example. This 1-day event, hosted in the 
prestigious Austrian Parliament building, drew a large and high-
ranking international audience to Vienna. The symposium participants 
adopted the Vienna Declaration, which contains recommendations to 
ensure that public funds the state manages in trust for its citizens 
are used for designated aid projects in a transparent, efficient, and 
effective manner. The symposium was a groundbreaking event that 
enhanced the accountability for and audit of disaster-related aid. 
Major stakeholders—such as the European Commission, the United 
Nations, and the World Bank—pledged their continued support to the 
initiative and signaled a readiness to fund external INTOSAI projects. 
A brochure published after the symposium compiles national and 
international experiences in auditing disaster-related aid and 
reflects the excellent international cooperation between government 
audit institutions. The SAI of Austria and the General Secretariat 
took pride in hosting such an outstanding event, which set an example 
for future INTOSAI activities. 

INTOSAI has also undertaken a visionary project focused on auditor 
training and continued education that relates to its goals of 
knowledge sharing and capacity building. In a joint venture with the 
Executive Academy of the Vienna University of Economics and Business 
Administration, the Austrian SAI has developed a postgraduate program 
in public auditing that started in March 2006. This master of business 
administration (MBA) program will provide a forum for a fruitful 
interchange on key issues of auditing, sound financial management, and 
government accountability. The curriculum will cover comparative 
analyses of auditing and accounting standards and guidelines from 
different international bodies, including the European Union, the 
International Federation of Accountants, the Institute of Internal 
Auditors, as well as INTOSAI. In this way, INTOSAI standards will 
enter the academic world. In a further step, the Vienna University of 
Economics is planning to follow up on my suggestion and extend the MBA 
program to a university-level International Centre of Excellence for 
public auditing based in Vienna. 

Looking Ahead: 

Never before has the pace of activities between INTOSAI's triennial 
congresses been more dynamic than it is at present, and I am grateful 
to have had the opportunity to actively shape our organization's 
development. INTOSAI is already gearing up for its next congress, to 
be hosted in late 2007 by the SAI of Mexico. Preparations for this 
event are in full swing, and the General Secretariat is actively 
coordinating with the incoming host. With the combination of relevant 
congress themes, excellent cooperation between the SAI of Mexico and 
the General Secretariat, and a highly committed team, the 19th INCOSAI 
promises to be a showcase event that will testify to the new strength 
of this organization. By combining our efforts and translating vision 
and values into concrete action, we can—in a spirit of renewal, 
inclusiveness, and sharing—make a real difference and realize 
INTOSAI's motto: Experientia Mutua Omnibus Prodest. 

[End of section] 

INTOSAI Strategic Plan: Building On The Past, Creating The Future: 

Professional Standards Committee Advances Goal 1: 

The Steering Committee of INTOSAI's Professional Standards Committee 
(PSC) met in Cameroon on September 5-6,2006, to prepare a survey on 
the application of international professional auditing standards and 
guidelines among SAIs. The survey is part of the PSC's own strategic 
plan and will provide the basis for formulating the PSC's new mandate 
for 2007-2010. The survey will focus on identifying areas where 
existing standards and guidelines do not meet the needs of SAIs, and 
areas relevant to SAIs where no guidance yet exists. In this effort, 
the PSC's aim is to build on the work of other standard-setting 
organizations around the world. The survey will be sent to all SAIs 
through electronic and ordinary mail in November and December 2006. 

The steering committee previewed the draft Framework of INTOSAI 
Professional Standards that will be presented to the Governing Board 
in November 2006 and then circulated as an exposure draft with the 
survey. The framework is intended to provide a better overview of 
existing INTOSAI guidance material. A draft electronic version is now 
available at www.issa.org. 

Other committee news discussed at the meeting includes the following: 

* The Subcommittee on SAI Independence developed a draft Charter on 
SAI Independence that will be presented to the Governing Board in 
November and then circulated to INTOSAI members as an exposure draft. 

* The Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee (FAS), in collaboration 
with some of the world's leading experts, is preparing practice notes 
to International Standards on Auditing (ISA) under the leadership of 
the Swedish SAI. For additional FAS information, see "Inside INTOSAL" 

* A Compliance Audit Reference Group has been established to 
coordinate the work of FAS and the Compliance Audit Subcommittee. 

* In the first meeting of the Subcommittee on Performance Audit 
Guidelines, held in Brasilia on August 8-9, terms of reference and a 
work plan to meet the requirements of its mandate were agreed upon. 
See "Inside INTOSAI" for additional information on the subcommittee. 

* The PSC is launching a project, chaired by the SAI of France, to 
collect examples of best practices in transparency and accountability. 
All SAIs are invited to contribute examples. 

The Yaounde meeting was generously hosted by the SAI of Cameroon, 
under the leadership of the auditor general, Siegfried David Etame 
Massoma. The next meeting will take place on April 23-24,2007, in 
Bahrain. For further information about the PSC and its work, please 
visit its Web site: http://psc.rigsrevisionen.dkl. 

November Governing Board to Focus on Strategic Plan Implementation: 

The results of the Governing Board's deliberations on a wide variety 
of strategic plan implementation issues—including financial, 
membership, and communications issues—will be presented in "Spotlight 
on the Strategic Plan" in the January 2007 issue of the Journal. 

End of section] 

News in Brief: 

Afghanistan: 

Audit Journal Published: 

The Control and Audit Office of Afghanistan (CAO) has published its 
Audit Journal. The new journal focuses on corruption in government and 
methods to prevent it. 

For additional information or to obtain a copy, contact the Control 
and Audit Office: 

Fax: ++93 0 20 210 2285. 
E-mail: auditoffice_afghanistan@yahoo.com. 

Australia: 
ANAO Newsletter: 

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) recently began to publish 
a newsletter entitled AuditFOCUS that disseminates lessons learned and
issues arising from its audit work. The newsletter is widely 
circulated among senior managers in the Australian public sector and 
the chairs of audit committees of all Australian government 
organizations. The newsletter is to be issued three times a year and 
is available on the ANAO Web site. 

A recent article identifies the following key factors for successful 
project management: preparing a comprehensive business case, 
undertaking a formal risk assessment, identifying and committing 
internal and external resource requirements, and establishing and 
communicating governance arrangements. The article also discusses 
contract management, underlining the importance of establishing 
performance measures, using standard templates or clauses for 
contracts, and providing contract assistance and guidance for 
managers. Other topics the newsletter has covered include compliance 
with the public sector financial framework, maintenance of proper 
records, information technology issues, and management of conflicts of 
interest. 

For additional information, contact the ANAO: 

Fax: ++61 (2) 62 03 77 77, 62 73 53 55/ 
E-mail: ag1@anao.gov.au. 
Web site: www.anao.gov.au. 

Canada: 

Audit of Environmental and Sustainable Development Issues: 

The Office of the Auditor General (OAG) of Canada recently developed 
and launched a practice guide on auditing environmental and 
sustainable development issues. The OAG has a strong mandate to 
conduct audits in this area. In 1995, amendments to the OAG 
legislation created the position of commissioner of the environment 
and sustainable development and added the "4th E"--the environment--to 
the OAG's mandate for auditing economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. 
The OAG is now required to report significant instances of money spent 
for federal government operations without due regard to environmental 
effects and sustainable development. The guide is one of the OAG's 
initiatives to provide its auditors with the support and tools they 
need to address these important yet challenging issues. 

"In the past few years, we have come to recognize that we needed some 
further steps to ensure that the environmental consequences of the 
federal government's activities are considered systematically as we 
plan and conduct our audits," said Assistant Auditor General Richard 
Smith. "In particular, we recognized the need to more actively engage 
and support audit teams across the office, above and beyond the 
commissioner's environmental team." 

The new guide, entitled the 4th E Practice Guide, was launched in 
spring 2006. It is designed to help auditors who lack environmental 
expertise to identify and assess the risks of environmental 
consequences through the systematic use of screening tools, 
checklists, and other resources. The guide is used during long-range 
audit planning and also when teams are involved in the detailed 
scoping of issues as part of the planning phase of their performance 
audits. 

In 2004, the OAG created a full-time position dedicated to helping 
auditors apply the new guidance, and more attention is being paid to 
increasing auditors' awareness of environmental and sustainable 
development issues and providing related training. Existing courses in 
this field were revamped in 2005, and a course to provide hands-on 
training in the new guide's methodology was piloted in September 2006. 

Annual Report on the Environment and Sustainable Development: 

The 2006 Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable 
Development was tabled in Parliament on September 28. The report deals 
with climate change, the reduction of greenhouse gases emitted during 
energy production and consumption, environmental petitions, and the 
progress 21 departments and agencies have made toward meeting the 
commitments in their sustainable development strategies. 

A summary of the report is available on the OAG Web site. 

For additional information contact the OAG: 

Fax: ++1 (613) 941-8286. 
E-mail: communications@oag-bvg.gc.ca. 
Web site: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca. 

Fiji: 

Audit Legislation Amended: 

In February 2006, the Fiji Parliament enacted the Audit (Amendment) 
Act, which amends and adds new provisions to the Audit Act of 1969. 
The new legislation widens the scope of entities to be audited and 
specifies the procedures to be used in the auditor general's work. It 
also deletes certain provisions of the Audit Act to reflect changes in 
the government's financial management. In 2004, provisions of the 
Financial Management Act (FMA)--which provides the legislative 
framework to support financial management reform—enhanced the powers 
of the auditor general by requiring him to include all government 
financial statements and the reports of all government entities in his 
audit report to the speaker of the House of Representatives. 

The Audit (Amendment) Act extends the scope of the auditor general's 
audits to those government entities specified under the Public 
Enterprise Act, which include government commercial companies (such as 
Airports Fiji Limited), commercial statutory authorities (such as the 
Fiji Meat Industry Board), and agencies the FMA specified as off-
budget state entities (such as the Fiji Development Bank). The act 
also empowers the auditor general to conduct performance audits of 
government entities. Performance audits may also be conducted on 
operations or activities of a state entity or across entities. 

Under the Audit (Amendment) Act, the auditor general may obtain legal 
advice from sources other than state solicitors. This is necessary 
because some public officers implicated in financial mismanagement in 
audit reports refer their cases to the same state solicitors. 
Previously, the auditor general had sought legal assistance from the 
private sector. 

The act also allows information obtained from audits to be shared with 
the Fiji police force. While this was a common practice when audit 
findings revealed fraudulent activities, this provision formalizes the 
process, thus helping to reduce corruption in public service. Cases 
referred to the police have been endorsed by state solicitors. 

When a serious irregularity is identified, the Audit (Amendment) Act 
requires the auditor general to (1) notify the minister for finance, 
the responsible authority/entity, and the minister responsible for the 
entity and (2) encourage the two ministers to take corrective 
measures. Previously, the chief executive officer or head of 
department was informed; it was his/ her responsibility to inform the 
relevant minister, and the minister of finance was not informed. 

The Audit (Amendment) Act specifies the time frames within which the 
auditor general should report to Parliament: audit reports should be 
submitted within 9 months of the end of the financial year and special 
investigations, within 6 months of their completion. However, neither 
the act nor the FMA requires the Ministry of Finance and ministries 
and departments to submit accounts within a reasonable time to the 
auditor general. This may affect the auditor general's ability to 
comply with these time frames. 

Several provisions of the act formalize existing processes and 
procedures of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG), including the 
outsourcing of audits, the appointment of an auditor by the speaker of 
the House of Representatives to audit the OAG's accounts; the setting 
of fees; the review of audits exempted from the auditor general's 
mandate; and the application of the Audit Act to financial 
transactions, balances, acts, and omissions outside of Fiji. 

The amendments and new provisions in the Audit (Amendment) Act have 
enormous implications for the OAG. Currently, the OAG lacks the 
capacity to undertake the additional work required. The audits of 
government commercial companies, commercial statutory authorities, and 
off-budget entities are being contracted out for 3 to 5 years while 
the OAG staff are exposed to and trained in the audits. When OAG staff 
develop proficiency in these audits, the OAG may perform the audits on 
its own. However, even if the OAG had the required expertise, some of 
the audits would still have to be contracted out since they need
to be completed at the same time as the audits of state entities. All 
but one of the government entities have a December 31 financial year-
end; therefore, audit services must be provided at the same time each 
year to meet the requirements of the entity boards and Parliament. 

Furthermore, the FMA requires all state entities, including ministries 
and departments, to adopt accrual accounting and consolidate the 
accounts of all government entities in 2008, and the Environment 
Management Act 2005 requires the auditor general to conduct 
environmental audits. All these responsibilities will require
considerable additional resources for the OAG. 

For additional information, contact the OAG: 

Fax: ++679 330 44 34. 
E-mail: evatuloka@connect.corn.fj. 
Web site: www.oag.gov.fj. 

Iraq: 

Training in Audit of Privatization: 

Two teams of staff from the Supreme Board of Audit of Iraq attended
training seminars in Amman, Jordan, on the audit of privatization. 
Twenty participants attended the first seminar, which was held April 
23-May 4, 2006; 10 participants attended the second seminar (a train-
the-trainers workshop), which was held May 7-June 1, 2006. The 
seminars were held in coordination with the Jordanian SAI and were 
part of a US$4.8 million grant from the United Nations Development 
Programme. Additional audit and oversight training programs are being 
planned under the grant. 

For additional information, contact the Supreme Board of Audit: 

Fax: ++9 647 901 312 492. 
E-mail: bsairaq2@yahoo.com. 

Malawi: 

Audit Office Web Site Launched: 

In August 2006, the National Audit Office of Malawi (NAO) launched its 
Web site at www.nao.mw. The Web site was developed as part of an 
institutional cooperation project with the Swedish National Audit 
Office. The project was co-financed by Norway and Sweden. 

The aim of the Web site is to increase awareness and knowledge about
the important role the NAO plays in promoting good governance, 
transparency, accountability, and sound financial management in the 
Malawi public sector. 

The NAO Web site includes information on the role and responsibilities 
of the NAO, legislation, audit guidance, NAO strategies and plans, NAO 
reports, information on the institutional cooperation project, as well 
as links to cooperating partners. 

For additional information, contact the NAO: 

Timothy Mponela, project manager, 
e-mail: tmponela@gmail.com. 
Einar Gorrissen, long-term advisor, 
e-mail: einargorrissen@gmail.com. 

Malaysia: 

Death of Former Auditor-General: 

Tan Sri Ahmad Noordin Zakaria, the former auditor-general of Malaysia 
(1976-1986) passed away in June 2006. 

[Photograph: Tan Sri Ahmad Noordin] 

During his service as the auditor-general, Tan Sri Ahmad Noordin was 
actively involved in ASOSAI, serving as its secretary general for 6 
years, from 1981 until 1986. Malaysians considered him a towering 
figure in public service for his contributions to public 
accountability. His comprehensive reports as auditor-general had a 
great impact on society. His work included the tightening of the 
Official Secrets Act, the Bumiputra Malaysia Finance (BMF) scandal, 
and Election Watch in Malaysia. His name was synonymous with 
transparency, integrity, and accountability. 

For promoting public accountability and integrity, Tan Sri Ahmad 
Noordin received several awards, including the Ramon Magsaysay Award 
(1985), the Tun Razak Award (1986), and the National Integrity Gold 
Award (2000) from Transparency International, Malaysia. 

National Audit Department Receives MS ISO 9001: 2000 Certificate: 

In June 2006, the National Audit Department (NAD) of Malaysia
was awarded the MS ISO 9001: 2000 Certification for the Financial 
Audit of the Federal Government and Federal Statutory Bodies. The 
Director General of the Malaysian Administrative Modernization and
Management Planning Unit (MAMPU) presented the certificate to the 
Auditor-General of Malaysia, Tan Sri Dato' Setia Ambrin bin Buang. 
This internationally recognized certification assures auditees and 
stakeholders of the quality of the financial audits the NAD carries 
out. The NAD is now in the final stages of obtaining the same 
certification for the financial statements of state governments, state 
statutory bodies, state local authorities, and the Islamic Religious 
Council. 

For additional information, contact the NAD: 

Fax: ++60 (3) 88 88 97 03. 
E-mail: jbaudit@auditgov.my. 
Web site: www.auditgov.my. 

Malta: 

Midyear Report on 2005 Public Accounts: 

The National Audit Office of Malta issued its midyear report on public 
accounts for 2005. This report complements its annual report and 
includes audit findings for the financial and compliance audits of 
central government ministries and departments and noncentral public 
entities for the financial year ending December 31, 2005, that were 
completed by June 2006. 

The report identifies areas of concern that include outstanding 
amounts due to the government for Social Security contributions, a 
lack of documentation and an audit trail in public debt budgeting, 
insufficient controls over attendance and overtime records in a number 
of government departments, weakness in stock control procedures, the 
unauthorized use of government-owned vehicles, and a lack of
full compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards by a 
number of public entities. The report also identifies issues related 
to the management of European Union funds. 

Performance Audit of Job-Matching Services: 

The NAO issued a report on the effectiveness of the job-matching 
services the Employment and Training Corporation (ETC) provides to job 
seekers and employers. It presents the results of a survey that 
targeted private and public sector employers who used these services 
from September 2004 to August 2005. While over 70 percent of 
respondents stated that the ETC provided improved job-matching 
services, the majority also stated that the ETC needs to screen job 
seekers more effectively. The report also notes problems with ETC 
courses aimed at providing training for registrants who are most at 
risk of remaining unemployed. 

The report described initiatives designed to implement a new 
information system and improve the way employers are informed of
job-matching results. It recommends ways to address the issues raised 
and encouraged further improvements to the management and delivery of 
ETC's processes and services. 

Performance Audit of the Tax Compliance Unit: 

The NAO issued a report on its performance audit of the Tax Compliance 
Unit (TCU), which was established to further the government's overall 
fiscal policy by increasing tax revenues through better enforcement. 
The TCU employs professional staff and has a comprehensive data 
warehouse to support its investigative work. However, the NAO's report 
notes that the TCU has fewer staff than was originally envisaged and 
that tax revenue departments were not fully utilizing the data 
warehouse to examine those taxpayers who posed the highest risk to tax 
collection. In addition, lack of general direction from the TCU's 
strategy and policy management board has weakened communication and 
coordination between the various tax collecting authorities. 

Given adequate support from its board and more cooperation from the 
tax collecting departments, the TCU will be better able to promote the 
government's fiscal objectives and help to instill a culture of tax 
compliance. 

For additional information on these three reports, contact the NAO: 

Fax: ++356 21 22 07 08. 
E-mail: joseph.g.galea@gov.mt. 
Web site: www.nao.gov.mt. 

Nepal: 

Report of Auditor General: 

The report of the auditor general of Nepal for 2002, 2003, 2004, and 
2005 was tabled in the Parliament after the Nepali House of 
Representatives, which was dissolved in 2002, was reinstated through 
the people's movement in May 2006 and Parliament reconstituted the 
Public Account Committee. The activation of the committee and its 
discussions on the observations of the auditor general's report will 
help to enhance financial accountability in Nepal. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Auditor General: 

Fax: ++977-1-4662798. 
E-mail: oagnep@ntc.net.np, infoag@most.gov.np. 
Web site: www.oagnep.gov.np. 

Senegal: 

New Auditor General: 

Nafi Ngom Keita has been appointed as the new head of the SAI of 
Senegal. Mrs. Keita is a recent graduate of the Canadian International 
Fellowship Program (International Assistance Program for Improved 
Governance and Accountability). During her fellowship in Canada, Mrs. 
Keita participated on a team that worked on value-for-money auditing 
in health and social services areas. Her special project focused on 
the primary health services sector. 

For additional information, contact the Court of Audit of Senegal: 

Fax: ++221 849 43 62. 
E-mail: ccomptes@courdescomptes.sn. 
Web site: www.courdescomptes.sn. 

Sweden: 

New Auditor General: 

[Photograph: Karin Lindell] 

Karin Lindell took office as auditor general on August 1, 2006, 
replacing the departing auditor general, Kjell Larsson. Ms. Lindell is 
a lawyer who has served as a judge. Before her appointment as auditor 
general, she was consumer ombudsman and director-general of the Swedish
Consumer Agency. She also served as the president of the Swedish 
National Board for Consumer Complaints. Between 1982 and 1996, she 
worked at the Riksdag (Swedish Parliament) as secretary to the 
Standing Committee on Social Insurance and the Standing Committee on 
Civil Law. Ms. Lindell also led several government inquiries, served 
as a member of the board of directors of the Swedish Financial 
Supervisory Authority and the Swedish National Food Administration, 
and chaired the board of Gotland University. 

For additional information, contact the Swedish National Audit Office: 

Fax: ++46 (8) 51 71 41 11. 
E-mail: int@nksrevisionen.se. 
Web site: www.nksrevisionen.se. 

Trinidad and Tobago: 

New Auditor General Appointed: 

[Photograph: Sharman Ottley] 

Sharman Ottley has been selected as the new auditor general of 
Trinidad and Tobago, succeeding Joycelyn Thompson after her retirement.
Between 1983 and 2005, Mrs. Ottley served as the assistant auditor 
general. In this capacity, she performed various functions, at times 
acting as the head of different divisions responsible for the auditing 
of accounts. Mrs. Ottley has been active in CAROSAI, serving as its 
administrative officer and presenting financial reports and projected 
budgets for CAROSAI. 

For additional information contact the Auditor General's Department: 

Fax: ++1 (868) 625 53 54. 
E-mail: csai@opus.co.tt. 
Web site: www.auditorgeneral.gov.it. 

Tuvalu: 

New Auditor General: 

Isaako K. Kine was appointed to be the new auditor general in May 
2005. The office is currently recruiting an adviser to the auditor 
general through AUSAid, the Australian government's overseas aid 
program. The adviser is to begin work no later than November 2006. 
This position will be funded under a multilateral program with 
Australia. 

The former auditor general, Lotoala Metia, left office in September 
2004 to run for public office, but was not elected. In the 2006 
general election, he won a seat and was named minister for finance in 
August 2006. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Auditor General 
of Tuvalu: 

Fax: ++688 201 33. 
E-mail: auditorgeneral@tuvalu.tv. 

Vietnam: 

New Auditor General of Vietnam: 

In June 2006, the Vietnam National Assembly elected Vuong Dinh Hue as 
the new auditor general of Vietnam, succeeding Do Binh Duong, who 
retired from the position. Dr. Vuong was the deputy auditor general of 
Vietnam from 2001 to 2006. From 1999 to 2001, he was the vice 
headmaster of Vietnam's University of Finance and Accounting. He also 
served as vice chairman of the Vietnam Association of Auditing and 
Accounting. Dr. Vuong holds a bachelor's degree in finance and 
accounting and a doctorate in economics from Bratislava University of 
Economics. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the State Audit: 

Fax: ++84 (4) 556 45 17. 
E-mail: vietnamsai@hn.vnn.vn. 
Web site: www.kiemtoannn.gov.vn. 

[End of section] 

Disaster-Related Aid: International Symposium on Auditing Tsunami 
Relief Funds: 

By Helen H. Hsing, U.S. Government Accountability Office: 

[Photo collage] 
Source: NOAA Photo Library, California Seismic Safety Commission, U.S. 
Geological Survey, FEMA,PhotoAlto, Photodisc. 

[Editor's note: Following the tsunami disaster of December 2004, 
INTOSAI established the Task Force on Accountability and Audit of 
Disaster-Related Aid. The aim of the task force is to enhance 
accountability for and transparency of disaster-related assistance by 
establishing an audit trail for tsunami-related aid and formulating 
best practices for SAIs and other stakeholders to establish an audit 
strategy prior to a disaster. This article summarizes a recent 
international symposium on INTOSAI's contributions to the audit of 
tsunami relief funds. The second article describes the use of 
geographical information for planning, monitoring, and auditing 
disaster-related aid flows.] 

On June 20, 2006, the Austrian Court of Audit and INTOSAI Secretariat 
hosted the International Symposium on Strengthening Global Government 
Audit: The Contribution of the International Organization of Supreme 
Audit Institutions as Illustrated by the Audit of Tsunami Relief 
Funds. The conference, which was held in the Austrian Parliament 
building in Vienna, drew delegates from 24 countries as well as 
participants and observers from SAIs, the United Nations, the World 
Bank, the European Parliament, the European Commission, the European 
Court of Audit, the Austrian government, and academia. 

Opening Ceremony: 

Various dignitaries welcomed the delegates to the symposium. The 
President of the Republic of Austria, Heinz Fischer, and the Vice 
Mayor of Vienna, Grete Laska, sponsored two receptions, and Dr. 
Andreas Kohl, the Speaker of the Austrian Parliament, opened the 
symposium. In his opening address, Dr. Josef Moser, President of the 
Austrian Court of Audit and Secretary General of the INTOSAI, thanked 
Dr. Kohl for his support and thanked the participants, including the 
INTOSAI colleagues, for their dedicated commitment. 

Dr. Moser described the background that led to the symposium—the 
earthquake and tsunami of 2004 and the unprecedented response to the 
disaster; INTOSAI's tsunami initiative, launched in January 2005, to 
provide assurance to the victims and major donor countries that aid 
funds were being properly managed and used for intended purposes; and 
the establishment of the INTOSAI Task Force on Accountability and 
Audit of Disaster-related Aid (tsunami task force) in November 2005. 
Dr. Moser described the purpose of the symposium as sharing and 
disseminating information on the new challenges facing government 
audit institutions and the milestones that INTOSAI has set for the 
accountability and audit of disaster-related aid. 

The symposium's central theme was addressed in five broad categories: 
the importance of global cooperation, challenges to monitoring and 
evaluating relief and reconstruction initiatives, the INTOSAI tsunami 
initiative, lessons learned, and best practices. 

Importance of Global Cooperation: 

A number of symposium participants described how the accelerating pace 
of globalization in the 21st century is transforming the traditional 
role of the SAIs in government audit. Specifically, they noted that 
SAIs are facing reforms in public administration resulting from a 
changed perception of the role of the state and the increasingly 
international implications of government audit issues. The 
participants generally agreed that SAIs and supranational audit 
institutions must cooperate as they become subject to projects that 
require joint, multinational audit arrangements. 

Gerard McGovern from the European Commission reported that with 
pledges from 25 member states, the commission had offered more than 2 
billion euros in grant assistance and was managing 473 million euros 
of this assistance. In December 2005, representatives of several 
countries affected by the tsunami as well as representatives of the 
European Commission and the Council of the European Union, the United 
Nations, the World Bank, and European nongovernmental organizations 
(NGO) met for a high-level review of the European Union's humanitarian 
and reconstruction aid efforts. They found that additional efforts 
were needed to ensure stronger coordination between multilateral and 
bilateral organizations that respond to disasters; the quality of 
leadership at all authority levels of the affected countries made a 
major difference in aid response; donors should minimize burdens on 
local actors without undermining accountability; and a clear donor 
communication strategy is needed to manage expectations. 

Dr. Shabir Cheema from the United Nations noted that INTOSAI has grown 
into an essential instrument of public governance on a global level. 
He also described the UN's disaster-related auditing activities as 
follows: 

* The UN's Panel of Auditors plans to issue a report by December 2006 
on the audit of tsunami relief funds. This report will compile 
individual audit reports by agency and will include lessons learned 
and recommendations for improvement. 

* The UN Board of Auditors is coordinating a comprehensive review of 
UN systemwide disaster-related aid activities. 

* A Tsunami Evaluation Coalition has been formed. It consists of 50 
members, including UN agencies, NGOs, and the Red Cross/Red Crescent 
International Committee. This coalition, which is funded by donors, 
conducts agency-specific evaluations and joint thematic evaluations. 

* The UN Office of Internal Oversight Services has been closely 
involved in the oversight of humanitarian efforts in the aftermath of 
the tsunami disaster and coordinates its activities with the Board of 
Auditors. 

Monitoring and Evaluation of Relief and Reconstruction Initiatives: 

Magistrate Anton Mair of Austria's Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
discussed his government's experience in monitoring and evaluating 
relief and reconstruction initiatives financed by the Austrian 
Development Cooperation. Following his presentation, Dr. Alfred Finz, 
Secretary of State in Austria's Ministry of Finance, discussed the 
funding of Austrian disaster-related aid and audit mechanisms. 

Dr. Josef Isensee, a professor of public law from Germany, discussed 
the challenges facing government audits where cross-border funding is 
involved. He noted that donor countries' SAIs face a barrier in 
international law—territorial sovereignty—because the funds are being 
expended outside the sovereign limits of those countries. In such 
situations, an audit institution cannot impose its own national law 
and standards; rather, it must respect the unique characteristics of 
the organization being audited. He stated that this area is so new 
that no legal framework or established practice exists to guide 
auditors. He stressed that the more difficult the control problems are 
in a target location, the greater the need for the donor country to 
establish preventive measures. According to Dr. Isensee, national law 
expects auditors to apply their intuition, imagination, wisdom, gut 
instinct, and—above all—alertness and vigilance to recognize deception 
and ensure regularity and rationality in the use of funds. 

INTOSAI Tsunami Initiative: 

Dr. Arpad Kovacs, the auditor general of Hungary and chair of the 
INTOSAI Governing Board, cited the tsunami initiative as an example of 
how INTOSAI's strategic plan for 2005 to 2010 is being translated into 
concrete action. Specifically, he reported approaching the SAIs of the 
countries most severely affected by the disaster, as well as the major 
donor countries, to set up a joint international platform to pool 
capacities and technical expertise in international government audit. 
Subsequently, delegates participating in the International Conference 
on Promoting Financial Accountability in Managing Funds, cohosted by 
the SAI of Indonesia and the Asian Development Bank, endorsed the 
INTOSAI initiative in April 2005. This led to the establishment of the 
INTOSAI tsunami task force. 

Dr. Hubert Weber, president of the European Court of Auditors, 
expressed his support for INTOSAI and discussed the court's role in 
auditing disaster-related aid, including its participation in the 
INTOSAI tsunami task force. He identified a study that the court had 
just completed on the European Commission's humanitarian aid response 
to the tsunami,[Footnote 1] which is available on the court's Web site 
(www.eca.eu.int). 

Saskia Stuiveling, chair of the INTOSAI tsunami task force, reported 
on the task force's activities. It currently comprises representatives 
of 17 SAIs (Austria, Australia, Denmark, France, Indonesia, Japan, 
Kenya, Korea, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, the Philippines, South 
Africa, Sri Lanka, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States) 
and the European Court of Auditors. Its aim is to establish an audit 
trail for tsunami aid and then, based on lessons learned, to establish 
a potential audit trail for future disaster-related aid and formulate 
guidelines for SAIs. 

The chair is assisted by two vice-chairs: the SAI of Indonesia, which 
is responsible for identifying lessons learned and shared, and the SAI 
of Korea, which is responsible for transforming these lessons into 
guidelines and best practices. The exchange of information will be 
facilitated through meetings and the Web site the task force established
(www.intosai-tsunami.org). The task force plans to present its interim 
report at the INTOSAI Governing Board meeting in November 2006 and at 
the 19th INCOSAI in 2007. 

Dr. Anwar Nasution, chairman of the Audit Board of Indonesia and vice-
chair of the INTOSAI tsunami task force, reported on the activities of 
the BPK, the SAI of Indonesia. He estimated that donor aid for the 
rehabilitation and construction of the tsunami-affected regions was 
US$6 billion, of which 96 percent came from the international 
community. The BPK established two teams in 2005 to conduct a 
financial audit of the relief phase. The audit, completed in April 
2006, found many deficiencies, including ineffective coordination and 
weaknesses in organizational structures, implementation, monitoring, 
evaluation, and accountability reporting. The BPK also identified a 
lack of proper accounting systems to record and report the money and 
logistics coming from local and international donors. Dr. Nasution 
highlighted the BPK's critical role in the effectiveness of 
rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts and advocated closer 
cooperation between various SAIs to exchange experiences, methodology, 
approaches, and strategy. 

Lessons Learned: 

Recent disasters have prompted SAIs in donor and recipient countries, 
along with national and multinational institutions, to undertake 
studies or audits. David Walker, comptroller general of the United 
States, reported on (1) the findings in recent U.S. Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) reports on tsunami relief to South Asia 
and hurricane relief to the U.S. Gulf Coast, (2) the need for 
governments and SAIs to join together, share their expertise, and 
develop new approaches and solutions to complex issues, and (3) 
additional steps that can be taken to ensure that donations are being 
well spent. He emphasized that from rebuilding Banda Aceh to 
rebuilding New Orleans, success depends on a strong set of incentives, 
transparency, and accountability mechanisms. GAO's work, along with 
studies by other SAIs, has identified the need for detailed national 
disaster plans as well as measures for rapid government action in case 
of emergencies. From its preliminary findings and observations, the 
INTOSAI tsunami task force has identified examples of overall problems 
with harmonization (e.g., a wide range of definitions, accountability, 
and audit arrangements), coordination (e.g., international 
intervention without coordination), and cooperation (e.g., fierce 
competition among the donor community for funds). 

Best Practices: 

To summarize the symposium's findings, the Austrian Court of Audit and 
the INTOSAI General Secretariat prepared the Vienna Declaration. The 
document proposed best practices in three sectors: international 
coordination; internal controls and governance; and awards of 
contracts and management and monitoring of aid projects. 

For additional information on the symposium, including the papers 
presented, see the INTOSAI Web site: www.intosai,org, under 
International Symposium-2006. 

Footnote: 

[1] Special Report No 3/2006 Concerning the European Commission 
Humanitarian Aid Response to the Tsunami Together with the 
Commission's Replies (European Court of Auditors: 2006/C 170/01). 

[End of section] 

Disaster-Related Aid: Using Geographic Information in Audits: 

By Karola Rentenaar, Netherlands Court of Audit, and Jacquelyn 
Williams-Bridgers, U.S. Government Accountability Office: 

[Editor's note: INTOSAI's Task Force on Accountability for and Audit 
of Disaster-Related Aid is searching for a global audit trail for 
tsunami-related aid by developing strategies for the use of data 
captured through geographical information systems for planning, 
monitoring ,and auditing diasater-related aid flows. In this article,
the authors, both members of the task force, describe the valuable 
contributions of geographical information systems to this task.] 

To audit disaster-related aid efficiently and effectively, an audit 
trail must be established to track the complex flow of humanitarian 
aid. Many factors—multiple national and international donors and 
recipients; the blending and division of aid flows; and
a lack of coordination, cooperation, and harmonization—can hinder 
accountability and lead to waste, competition, fraud, and corruption. 
In this situation, audits help to ensure that the following questions 
are answered: 

* Trust: Has the aid pledged been provided? Has the aid pledged led to 
appropriate expenditures? 

* Regularity: Has the aid been spent on the intended purposes? 

* Efficiency: Has the aid been spent as efficiently as possible? 

* Effectiveness: Has the aid been spent as effectively as possible? 

This article outlines how a geographical information system (GIS)—
which combines computer hardware, software, and geographic data to 
capture, manage, analyze, and display geographically referenced 
information—can provide the information needed to answer these 
questions. Such systems are already being used successfully for 
auditing purposes. Combining geographical information with other 
information on disaster aid makes it possible to better monitor and 
track the aid flows and visualize high-risk areas for waste, 
competition, fraud, and corruption. Visualizing these risks makes it 
possible to direct the scarce audit capacities of donor and recipient 
SAIs more efficiently and effectively. 

Using Geographic Information for Audit: 

As shown in figure 1, a GIS combines information from a variety of 
sources (e.g., pictures, maps, and data), links the information to a 
geographic location, and displays it visually. In a GIS, data are 
linked to a "geocode"—a geographical code to identify a point or area 
on the earth's surface. Most GIS applications work with a digital map. 
A GIS can also be used in combination with satellite pictures, 
although this use is not yet common. A GIS portrays important 
information graphically—the way the human brain works—making 
connections more obvious than columns of numbers or, at best, colored 
charts. In this way, a GIS allows a user to see regions, counties, 
neighborhoods, and the people who live in them with unprecedented 
clarity. It shows layer upon layer of information—for example, 
demographic trends, income levels, voting tendencies, poverty rates, 
pollution levels, epidemics, and Internet accessibility—and how all 
the layers work together. The user chooses the information to layer 
based on the questions that must be answered. Thus, the types of 
information that a GIS can provide are limited only by the imagination. 

Figure 1: Components of Geographical Information Systems: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

Pictures and maps together with other data result in geographically 
referenced information. 

[End of figure] 

GIS applications have been used frequently for audit purposes. The 
task force found several examples that show how valuable their use can 
be. 

Auditing Housing Subsidies: 

The City of Portland, Oregon, in the United States, used a GIS to help 
low-income residents find affordable housing and ensure the 
availability of housing for a growing population at all income levels. 
The Office of the City Auditor audited the city's housing programs, 
[Footnote 1] collecting data on expenditures and accomplishments from 
17 data sets and merging these data with more than 3,500 addresses 
representing 11,700 housing units receiving city funding. The auditor 
identified units receiving subsidies from multiple city programs and 
mapped their geographic distribution, drawing together information 
that had not been available previously because city subsidy programs 
had never been combined in a single audit. 

Auditing Eligibility Determinations: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) auditors used GIS 
techniques to determine that 1,300 communities were not receiving 
rural housing assistance even though they were located within eligible 
geographic boundaries and met other criteria. GAO concluded that the 
U.S. government should change the definition of "rural areas" to 
better capture communities that are rural in character and to improve 
determinations of eligibility. 

Using a GIS for Disaster Response and Management: 

A GIS is commonly used for disaster response and management. Plotting 
the accurate physical geography of a disaster event on a computer and 
aligning that geography with other relevant features, events, 
conditions, or threats can speed and facilitate decision making. In 
the United States, auditors effectively used a GIS to display the 
paths of destruction caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and their 
effect on natural gas production, processing, and pipeline 
infrastructure in several states bordering the Gulf of Mexico. The use 
of a GIS enabled the auditors to present, in a compellingly visual 
way, the extensive network of pipelines layered with thousands of gas 
platforms and layered again with the paths of the hurricanes over 
time. [Footnote 2] 

Monitoring Systems for Tsunami-Related Aid: 

If government-led tools that track aid are accurately populated by 
governments and implementing partners, they can be essential sources 
of information on funding, costs, location, and sector impacts. 
Various monitoring and tracking systems for tsunami-related aid are in 
place, including the Financial Tracking Service (FTS) of the United 
Nations Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN OCHA) and 
the Development Assistance Database (DAD) developed by the United 
Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and a private company. 

FTS is a global, real-time database that records all reported 
international humanitarian aid. FTS is intended to display the 
totality, sources, and uses of humanitarian aid globally and for each 
crisis. It includes a special focus on consolidated and flash appeals 
[Footnote 3] because they cover major humanitarian crises and because 
their funding requirements are well defined. As a result, FTS can show 
the extent to which populations in crisis receive humanitarian aid in 
proportion to needs. UN OCHA manages FTS, using data provided by 
donors or recipient organizations.[Footnote 4] 

DAD is an online database system that provides access to real-time 
information on project financing, implementation, and outputs. For 
governments and donors, DAD provides a customized strategic tool to 
support coordination, planning, operational management, and reporting 
of results. Its ability to track resources from programming to output 
allows for an enhanced monitoring capability and for wider 
accountability and transparency. 

With UNDP support, the governments of Sri Lanka, Maldives, Thailand, 
and Indonesia have established nationally owned DADs. At the regional 
level, an information portal and a DAD system have been developed to 
bring together results and resource allocation data from each country 
and make it available within a single window.[Footnote 5] The strength 
of the DAD system is that it can be adapted to support national 
planning and budgeting processes, which increases the likelihood that 
data will be accurate and the system will be sustained in the future. 

When the tsunami struck, these governments had incomplete aid records—
often merely memorandums of understanding regarding aid projects. 
Information systems consisted primarily of paper- or Excel-based data 
that tracked resources, not results. The government-owned DAD systems 
are helping to open up the "black box" of aid. DADs help not only to 
monitor and track aid but also to provide information on the results 
of projects financed with tsunami aid. By showing where the aid 
efforts or projects are concentrated, DADs also (1) show areas with a 
high risk of waste, competition, fraud, and corruption and (2) help 
identify areas where the needs of affected populations are not fully 
addressed. 

Although FTS and DADs help establish an efficient and effective audit 
trail of tsunami-related aid, they are not audit tools, and they 
remain works in progress. While they provide great coverage and 
reliability than were provided in the past, related verification 
mechanisms are in their infancy. 

Challenges Ahead: 

The implementation of an international, geographical approach to 
planning, monitoring, and auditing disaster-related aid poses many 
challenges. Important questions, such as the following, will need to 
be addressed: 

* Should a single, integrated system be developed or should all 
stakeholders (donors, channels, and implementers) use their own 
systems? 

* If a single system is developed, who should own it? 

* If the systems of multiple stakeholders are used, would it be 
possible to link the information from these systems? 

* How can we make sure that the data entered in the system are 
complete and accurate? 

* Should one international, agreed-upon geocode be used, or should 
every country or region use its own local zip code? 

* Can we reach international agreement on standards and definitions? 

Conclusions: 

Using geographical information to audit disaster-related aid holds 
promise and has already been implemented successfully, as the examples 
in this article show. Ideally, an international GIS should be 
developed to help coordinate, plan, and monitor the flow of aid from 
source to destination in any future disaster. Such a system could 
facilitate the auditing of aid if all international stakeholders agree 
on the system's use, consistent standards, and common definitions. Any 
such agreement should lead to the designation of an international 
audit label certifying that the holder has spent the aid money in a 
transparent and traceable way in accordance with specifications of the 
international agreement. The July 2006 report of the Tsunami 
Evaluation Coalition[Footnote 6] reached similar conclusions. 

The INTOSAI task force would like to invite colleagues from other SAIs 
to provide us with examples of their use of geographic information in 
auditing disaster-related aid and to help us in developing a 
methodology for these audits. 

For additional information, contact Karola Rentenaar, Netherlands 
Court of Audit at k.rentenaar@rekenkamern1 or visit the task force Web 
site: www.intosai-tsunami.org. 

Footnotes: 

[1] For more information, see 
www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.rn?a=fhee&c=chbad. 

[2] Natural Gas: Factors Affecting Prices and Potential Impacts on 
Consumers (GAO-06-420T, February 13, 2006). 

[3] A flash appeal is the way that the many agencies responding to a 
sudden humanitarian crisis coordinate their responses and present a 
unified set of needs to donors. A flash appeal may be developed into a 
consolidated appeal if the emergency continues beyond 6 months. 

[4] For more information, see www.reliefweb.int/fts. 

[5] See www.TsunamiTracking.org. 

[6] Joint Evaluation of the International Response to the Indian Ocean 
Tsunami: Synthesis Report (London: July 2006) and Funding the Tsunami 
Response (London: July 2006). Both reports are available at
www.tsunami-evaluation.org. 

[End of section] 

Achieving Public Sector Outcomes with Private Sector Partners — a New 
Zealand Perspective: 

By Liz Buttimer, Senior Performance Auditor, Office of the Controller 
and Auditor-General, New Zealand: 

[Editor's note: The author is currently on secondment to the New 
Zealand SAI from the Audit Commission, U.K.] 

In New Zealand, the use of partnering contracts to build new public 
sector infrastructure and deliver public services is a fairly recent 
phenomenon.[Footnote 1] There are, however, signs of increasing 
interest in this approach, especially in the local government and 
transport sectors. 

Because partnering contracts carry special risks, the Auditor-General 
of New Zealand decided to act—while this form of contracting was still 
at an early stage of development—by publishing guidance for public 
sector leaders and decisionmakers. The guidance does not promote or 
oppose the use of partnering. Its principal aim is to set out the main 
issues that government as a whole and individual public organizations 
need to consider.[Footnote 2] 

In developing its guidance, the Office of the Controller and Auditor-
General (OAG) looked at projects in New Zealand and the experience of 
countries such as the United Kingdom and Australia, where the 
partnering approach to public sector contracts is well established. 

The OAG initially planned to focus on public-private partnerships 
(PPP)—that is, arrangements involving private financing from a private-
sector party (usually a consortium) to build and own facilities that 
deliver services, often for more than 30 years. However, in New 
Zealand it found different types of arrangements, from franchises and 
joint ventures to PPPs, that require public sector organizations to 
consider similar issues. Therefore, the OAG widened the scope of its 
guidance to include all these arrangements. 

The first part of the OAG guidance looks at the issues to be 
considered from a governmentwide perspective. In countries where the 
use of partnering under long-term contracts and private financing is 
well established, there is evidence of firm commitment from 
governments, with cross-party political support, to providing direction
and guidance. Three important issues relevant to national governments 
are leadership, expertise, and market development. 

Partnering arrangements require significant investment (in monetary 
and nonmonetary terms) by both public and private sector parties. The 
private sector is unlikely to be attracted to investing in major, long-
term public sector projects when it sees significant risks from 
political uncertainty. In the United Kingdom, there is evidence that 
more private finance initiative[Footnote 3] (PFI) contracts have been 
entered into when the Treasury has had responsibility for providing 
direction. In Australia, the State of Victoria set up Partnerships 
Victoria[Footnote 4] to manage the government's approach to PPPs. 
Partnerships Victoria has produced a clear written policy defining the 
circumstances in which it supports the use of PPPs. 

Public organizations need expertise to implement partnering 
arrangements successfully. Without expertise, the public organization 
faces significant risks. The United Kingdom's central government and 
Australian state governments have set up central resources to help 
public organizations entering into partnering contracts that involve 
private financing. Partnerships Victoria has produced extensive 
guidance on all aspects of the process, from preparing an initial 
business case to managing the PPP contract after it is awarded. 
Partnerships UK, a central resource of PPP and PFI experts drawn from 
the public and private sectors, works with the public sector to 
provide knowledge and skills. 

To ensure a competitive process, enough private sector companies need 
to take part. If private sector capital investment is required, an 
assessment of the interest from major national and international 
financial institutions is also important. Australia created
a National PPP Forum to produce a project pipeline—a national database 
of future projects that private sector companies can use to assess the 
range of opportunities and plan to submit bids if they are interested. 

The second part of the OAG guidance covers the issues individual 
public organizations need to consider before deciding whether to enter 
into partnering arrangements. 

Public organizations are ultimately accountable for delivering public 
services and cannot transfer this responsibility to the private 
sector. It is imperative that a public organization have a sound basis 
for choosing a partnering approach, managing its implementation and 
long-term operation, and carrying out its accountability obligations 
to the public. 

Public organizations must prepare a detailed business case to support 
their decisions. The OAG guidance provides an extensive list of the 
issues that need to be considered as part of the business case. These 
include how the partnering arrangement will contribute to the public 
organization's vision and policy objectives, evidence of senior-level 
commitment, and sound arrangements for governance and accountability. 

It is important to consider whether a partnering arrangement is in the 
public interest. Public sector policy may dictate that the public 
sector should directly deliver certain services. Australian state and 
United Kingdom central governments have identified services that are 
not suitable for PPPs or PFI and should remain with the state. These 
include core public services, such as clinical services in hospitals 
and teaching in state schools. 

Other public interest issues that need to be considered are 
requirements for accountability and transparency balanced against the 
need for commercial confidentiality and the ability to ensure that 
essential services are continuously provided despite any breaches by 
the private sector party. 

In the early days of PPPs in Australia and PFI in the United Kingdom, 
the main reason for adopting the approach was to promote the 
construction of new public infrastructure and achieve "off-balance-
sheet" financing. However, the governments of both these countries now 
stress that the main reason is to achieve better value compared
to other contracting choices. A value-for-money assessment considers 
the benefits of adopting a partnering arrangement against the costs. 
Value for money does not necessarily mean lowest cost, since several 
benefits may justify higher costs. 

As part of the value-for-money assessment, it is important to consider 
risk sharing between the parties. Adopting a partnering approach 
forces the parties to explicitly identify risks and their costs. Risks 
are likely to be associated with design and construction, operation 
and maintenance, user demand and income generation, technology and 
obsolescence, and legislative and political change. 

The Australian and United Kingdom governments agree that the party 
best able to manage risks should bear them. Seeking to transfer 
inappropriate risks to the private sector party will likely add to the 
cost of the arrangement. 

A value-for-money assessment should also address the scale of the 
project relative to transaction costs. Many partnering arrangements 
are complex, and the need for lengthy tendering processes and complex 
contract documentation can significantly affect costs. These costs 
need to be assessed against the total value of the project and the 
benefits that will be derived from a partnering approach. The 
Australian and United Kingdom governments have provided advice on the 
monetary value of projects suitable for this contracting approach. 

Public organizations also need to consider whole-of-life costs, the 
potential to release public sector staff to concentrate on key service 
delivery, greater asset utilization, and the scope for innovation 
(such as business practice and technology application). 

Assessing value for money can be difficult, especially for long-term 
projects where assumptions must be made. Partnering arrangements in 
other jurisdictions have been criticized for a tendency to 
overestimate benefits and underestimate costs. 

The public organization needs to be aware that its responsibilities do 
not end once the contract is awarded. Rather, the public and private 
sector parties must set up and maintain effective contract management 
throughout the term of a partnering arrangement. The public 
organization will have to consider the need for experienced personnel 
to manage relationships with the private sector party, service users, 
and other stakeholders and arrangements for managing performance, 
risks, assets, payments, and changes to the contract. 

Inadequate contract management can increase costs for the public 
sector party, affecting the financial viability of the project and the 
value-for-money outcome. 

Finally, the public organization will likely need to make a conscious 
effort to change its culture if it has favored an arm's-length and 
possibly adversarial approach to contracting. Working in partnership 
requires the parties to build a long-term relationship of mutual 
benefit. They need to understand each other's aims and objectives and 
how to achieve them. They must share problems and work through them 
together rather than resorting to legal remedies. 

For additional information, contact the author at: 
liz.buttimer@oag.govt.nz. 

Footnotes: 

[1] Partnering contracts include any mutually beneficial contractual 
relationships between public and private sector parties that involve a 
collaborative approach to achieving public sector outcomes. 

[2] The guidance, Achieving Public Sector Outcomes with Private Sector 
Partners, is available on our Web site, www.oag.govt.nz. 

[3] PFI contracts are defined by HM Treasury as arrangements where 
"the public sector contracts to purchase quality services, with 
defined outputs, on a long-term basis from the private 
sector...including maintaining or constructing the necessary 
infrastructure." Public Private Partnerships: The Government's 
Approach, HM Treasury, 2000. 

[4] Partnerships Victoria is part of the Department of Treasury and 
Finance. 

[End of section] 

Audit Profile: Office of the Auditor General of Nepal: 

Ramesh R. Satyal, Deputy Auditor General: 

The vision of the Office of the Auditor General of Nepal is to enhance 
good governance through accountability and transparency in the public 
sector. Its mission is to provide trustworthy, effective, and 
independent audit for the efficient management and utilization of 
public resources. 

The Auditor General: 

Under the provisions of Nepal's 1990 constitution, His Majesty the 
King appoints the auditor general (AG) based on the recommendation of 
the constitutional committee, which consists of the prime minister, 
the chairman of the House of Representatives and the Upper House, the 
chief justice of the Supreme Court, and the leader of the 
parliamentary opposition. At present, however, a new interim 
constitution is being drafted. In May 2006, the Nepalese Parliament 
issued a proclamation, in the wake of public protests, that all 
executive rights in Nepal shall rest in the Council of Ministers. 
Under this provision, the next AG will be appointed not by the king 
but by the Council of Ministers upon the recommendation of a 
parliamentary committee. 

The AG serves a 6-year term and may be reappointed. A candidate for 
the post of AG must hold a bachelor's degree from a recognized 
university and have at least 5 years' work experience as a "special 
class officer" in the government or more than 15 years' experience in 
the field of accounting. A candidate should be between the ages of 45 
and 65 and should not be a member of a political party. 

Independence: 

Constitutionally, the AG enjoys complete independence. The AG's 
conditions of service and remuneration cannot be changed during the 
term of the office, and yearly office budgets are charged directly to 
the consolidated fund without a parliamentary vote. The AG's tenure 
can be terminated only if he or she reaches the age of 65, submits a 
written resignation, dies in office, or is removed as a Supreme Court 
judge for incompetence, misbehavior, or failure to discharge the 
duties of office. A two-thirds majority of the House of 
Representatives must pass a resolution to remove an AG, and the king 
must approve the resolution. 

Despite such independence, the AG is somewhat dependent upon the 
government to approve the annual budget and create the number of staff 
positions. The Ministry of Finance makes budgetary allocations, and 
the AG is required to hire the staff selected and recommended by the 
Public Service Commission, an independent constitutional body 
established to handle hiring for public posts. 

Rights and Duties of the Auditor General: 

The 1990 Constitution and the Audit Act of 1991 prescribe the 
following rights and duties of the AG: 

* audit constitutional bodies, all government offices, courts, the 
Nepali police and army; corporate bodies (public sector undertakings 
or government business enterprises) fully owned by the government; and 
other entities required to be audited under the provision of any other 
law; 

* consent to the appointment of the auditor of corporate bodies 
substantially owned by the government; 

* issue directives to government offices and corporate bodies 
regarding proper arrangements on matters of accounting and maintaining 
regularity on those matters; 

* approve the accounting forms to be maintained by all government 
offices; and; 

* submit to His Majesty the King annual reports along with work 
performed during the year containing observations, comments, and 
recommendations (the reports are also presented to the Parliament). 

In the course of audit, the AG may also exercise the following powers, 
as necessary: 

* examine the status of programs and projects being operated under 
government grants, 

* require government contractors to produce relevant documents and 
evidence relating to particular contracts, and, 

* contract with experts for audit services. 

Audit Approaches: 

Nepal's auditing system is based on the Constitution and the Audit 
Act, which mandate the following three types of audits: 

* Compliance audit: These audits examine financial transactions in 
accordance with established principles to determine whether budgetary 
allocations, financial rules and regulations, and all other accounting 
requirements have been followed. 

* Performance audit: These audits consider all aspects of economy, 
efficiency, and effectiveness—whether resources have been used 
effectively and efficiently to produce goods and services at minimum 
cost, in the shortest time, and without reducing quality and quantity. 

* Propriety audit: These audits determine whether transactions are 
appropriate from the perspective of economic and social interests 
based on ordinary prudence and whether, in the opinion of the AG, 
there have been reckless expenditures or contracts that have resulted 
in an abuse of national property. 

Organization: 

In addition to the AG, there are 465 staff members in the Office of 
the Auditor General (OAG). These staff comprise 4 deputy auditors 
general, 14 assistant auditors general, 42 directors, 144 audit 
officers, 166 audit superintendents, and 95 support staff. In 
addition, each year the OAG contracts with about 40-45 professionals 
from private auditing firms to audit the government's public sector 
undertakings and hires independent experts as consultants (engineers 
and economists) to study and advise the OAG on specific performance 
auditing areas. 

Reporting: 

Each year, the OAG's audit work starts after the July16 closing of the 
fiscal year. One of the OAG's major functions is issuing an audit 
report. The OAG's audit findings, observations, and recommendations 
are reported in the two phases: 

* Preliminary audit reports with detailed audit observations are sent 
to each affected agency after the audit work is completed. Within 35 
days of receiving the preliminary report, the affected agency must 
respond to the OAG. After reviewing the responses, the OAG issues 
final reports. 

* In accordance with constitutional requirements, the AG submits 
directly to the government of Nepal an annual report that summarizes 
the individual reports of the OAG's work. The report is tabled in 
Parliament by the Minister of Finance. This report provides an 
accurate representation of the government's overall financial 
management, the AG's findings, and the recommendations to the 
government. An English version of the summary report is also made 
available to all interested persons. 

Improvement Initiatives: 

The OAG has received Institutional Development Fund (IDF) grants from 
the World Bank to promote capacity building and institutional 
development. From 1995-1997, Government Auditing Standards (GAS) and 
manuals on areas such as revenue, administrative expenditures, 
procurement, performance audit, and project audit were developed, and 
staff were trained in their usage. The office published GAS in 1996, 
and the manuals are being used. This effort has proved to be a 
milestone in capacity development for the OAG. 

A second IDF grant for 1998-1999 helped the office strengthen its 
institutional capacity in performance auditing. KPMG, a private 
international audit firm, was hired to assist in developing a 
Performance Audit Guide (PAG) and tool kit that incorporates best 
practices. Staff are receiving extensive, ongoing training on the 
newly developed guide as an integral part of the OAG's capacity-
building programs. A twinning arrangement with OAG Malaysia gave 
senior Nepali officials exposure to and training in Malaysian 
techniques and practices in performance auditing. The grant has 
facilitated the transfer of technology, a methodology, and an approach 
to handling performance audits. Both auditees and the Public Accounts 
Committee have been impressed with the new audit methodologies. 

In 2001, the government of Nepal formed a high-level National Steering 
Committee (NSC) to work with the World Bank on a Country Financial 
Accountability Assessment (CFAA). Various government, donor, and 
private sector agencies also participated in this joint exercise, 
which resulted in a widely accepted report issued in 2003. The report 
section on public sector auditing highlights examples of the OAG's 
dedicated and fearless reporting and strong partnership with the 
Public Account Committee; it also states that the "OAG requires 
support for its capacity development, including a need for introducing 
modern technology and skills to upgrade its institutional capacity. 
OAG also needs to further enhance its professional skills in financial 
auditing as well as performance auditing, which is a yardstick to 
measure inputs against output and outcome." 

The CFAA report validated three important development action plans 
that the OAG had also identified: 

* revising and consolidating existing audit guidelines to comply with 
International Standards on Auditing and INTOSAI standards, 

* strengthening human resource development plans and the training 
division, and; 

* promoting exposure training visits and "twinning" with well-
developed SAIs for senior officials. 

To help the OAG carry out these plans, the World Bank provided another 
Institutional Development Fund (IDF) grant in 2002. In 2004, KPMG 
Malaysia was selected as the consultant for the job, and arrangements 
were made to involve the National Audit Department, Malaysia (NADM), 
in a twinning and peer review of a pilot audit. 

Under this grant, auditing standards were revised to make them easily 
understandable for other auditors and users of the audit report. Based 
on a needs analysis and review of the OAG's organizational structure, 
a human resources plan was developed. The plan contains training 
toolkits with specific examples of audit tools and methodology, a 
reporting format, an illustrative annual training calendar, 
recommended experience and skills for trainers, and a framework to 
gauge the effectiveness of the training function. 

Training and the exposure to other SAIs have proven to be the most 
effective methods for promoting change and building staff confidence. 
KPMG coordinated a 4-week twinning arrangement and prepared a detailed 
program for the secondment of 13 senior staff to the NADM. This 
arrangement benefited both the Nepalese OAG and the NADM by providing 
an opportunity for them to understand each other's knowledge and 
experience. The audit guidelines and the effectiveness of the training 
program were also tested during the pilot audit the trainees carried 
out. The pilot audit work was peer reviewed by the Auditor General of 
Malaysia and his assistant. 

With the consultant's help, a Web site was launched to make 
information about the OAG publicly available. It contains the OAG's 
mission and vision statement, annual reports for the past 3 years, and 
other important information of SAI. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Auditor General: 

Fax: ++977-1-4662798. 
E-mail: oagnep@ntc.net.np, infoag@most.gov.np. 
Web site: www.oagnep.gov.np. 

[End of section] 

Reports in Print: 

In July 2006, the National Audit Office (NAO) of the United Kingdom 
issued a report entitled International Benchmark of Fraud and Error in 
Social Security Systems. This report investigates the issue of fraud 
and error in the social security systems of eight European
and non-European countries. The study describes the different systems 
studied, assesses the scale and prominence of the problem in a 
national context, and outlines steps taken to measure and reduce fraud 
and error. The report concludes that fraud and customer and official 
errors represent a major risk to the successful delivery of social 
benefits in the United Kingdom and other countries. A copy of the 
report is available on the NAO Web site: www.nao.org.uk. 

For additional information, contact the NAO: 

NAO Press Office: 
157-197 Buckingham Palace Road: 
London, England SW1W 9SP: 
Fax: ++44 (0)20 7798 7710: 
E-mail: enquiries@nao.gsi.gov.uk. 

Brown University has completed its sixth annual global e-government 
study, during which researchers evaluated 1,782 government Web sites 
in 198 countries in June and July 2006. The study covered many 
different types of sites, including executive, legislative, and 
judicial offices as well as such departments and ministries of the 
government as health, education, foreign affairs, interior, finance, 
natural resources, foreign investment, transportation, military, 
tourism, and telecommunications. The results were issued in an August 
2006 report entitled Global E-Government, 2006. The Web sites were 
rated based on two dozen criteria, including disability access, 
existence of publications and databases, presence of privacy and 
security policies, contact information, and the number of online 
services. Asian countries once again received the highest e-government 
ratings, taking three of the top five spots. South Korea, ranked 86th 
last year, earned the top rank, followed by Taiwan, Singapore, the 
United States, and Canada. The study shows that 29 percent of 
governments around the world are offering online services, compared to 
19 percent in 2005. The full e-government study is online at
www.insidepolitics.org. The appendix of the report presents detailed 
profiles for each of the 198 national governments. 

For more information, contact the Center for Public Policy at Brown 
University: 

Telephone: ++(401) 863-1163. 
E-mail: dwest@insidepolitics.org. 

According to the ninth global fraud survey from Ernst & Young, many 
companies still do not have effective antifraud policies in emerging 
markets. Even though almost half the of the 500 corporate leaders 
surveyed were anxious about bribery and corruption in emerging 
markets, 40 percent still had no formal antifraud policy in place. 
Fraud Risk in Emerging Markets, the new report on the survey results, 
states that since the eighth global fraud survey in 2003, corporations 
have expended significant resources to assess and improve their 
internal controls. As a result, corporations believe that they are 
better positioned to deter and detect fraud than ever before. However, 
there is little evidence clearly indicating that fraud has been 
reduced. In fact, one in five of the companies interviewed had 
experienced significant fraudulent activity in the past 2 years. 

Managers in both developed and emerging markets recognize that in new 
markets, local business practices and behavioral norms may differ from 
those in the established markets for which current internal control 
systems were designed. Although senior managers expressed more anxiety 
about new markets, three-quarters of the fraud reported by survey 
respondents had occurred in their developed country operations. 

Robust internal controls remain the first line of defense against 
fraud for companies in all markets. Nearly 90 percent of respondents 
believed controls were sufficient within their organization to 
identify and investigate fraud promptly. Half of the respondents 
stated that they investigate fraud with a desire to identify and 
improve control weaknesses, marking a dramatic increase from the 
eighth survey. Most organizations acknowledged that they did not 
communicate their antifraud stance and policies to agents, 
intermediaries, and joint venture partners. For up to a quarter of 
companies' foreign operations, the effectiveness of antifraud programs 
was limited by poor communication or insufficient training. 

To obtain a copy of the survey result and the report, contact Ernst 
&Young's Fraud Investigation and Dispute Services: 

Web site: www.ey.com/fids. 

[End of section] 

INSIDE	INTOSAI: 

Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee: 

New Subcommittee Members: 

In recent months, two new members joined the Financial Audit 
Guidelines Subcommittee (FAS)--the SAIs of Brazil and the Republic of 
Korea. In addition, the SAI of Jordan has become an observer. The 
other FAS members are Cameroon, Canada, the ECA (European Court of 
Auditors), Namibia, Norway, Sweden (chair), Tunisia, the United 
Kingdom, and the United States. 

New Experts and Task Forces: 

The Project Secretariat is currently setting up a Compliance Audit 
Reference Expert Group to support the Compliance Audit Subcommittee's 
(CAS) work on developing compliance audit guidelines and to enhance 
the consistency between the guidelines produced by FAS and CAS. 

The Project Secretariat is continuously updating the reference panel 
files according to the latest information received from the respective 
SAIs. Approximately 150 experts from some 70 SAIs have now been 
nominated. 

For a complete listing of International Auditing and Assurance 
Standards Board (IAASB) task forces where INTOSAI expects are 
involved, as well as practice note task forces, see the FAS Web site. 

For additional information, contact the FAS Project Secretariat: 

Fax: ++46-8-5171 4111. 
E-mail: projectsecretariat@riksrevisionen.se. 
Web site: http://psc.rigsrevisionen.dk/fas. 

Subcommittee on Performance Audit: 

On August 8-9, 2006, the Brazilian Court of Audit (TCU) hosted the 
first meeting of the INTOSAI Subcommittee on Performance Audit. The 
TCU chairs the subcommittee, which is part of INTOSAI's Professional 
Standards Committee. In addition to Brazil, it has 11 members: the 
SAIs of Australia, Canada, France, Guyana, Kiribati, Norway, United 
Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, and Tunisia and the European Court of 
Auditors (ECA). Representatives from the ECA and the SAIs of Australia,
Brazil, Canada, Norway, and Saudi Arabia attended this first meeting, 
which was held in Brasilia. Its main objective was to approve the 
subcommittee's terms of reference and its 2006-2008 work plan.
In opening the event, Minister Adylson Motta, the President of the 
Brazilian Court of Audit, welcomed the visitors and emphasized the 
importance that the court attributes to performance audit and, in 
particular, to the creation of the Performance Audit Subcommittee. 

[Photograph: Participants at the Performance Audit Subcommittee 
meeting in Brasilia] 

The participants briefed the group on the performance audit work their 
respective SAIs are carrying out, giving special attention to the 
challenges and benefits inherent in this work. TCU representatives 
gave a presentation on a recently completed audit of a family grant 
federal government program; they also informed the other members
about the e-learning course on performance audit offered by the TCU's 
training center. English and Spanish versions of the course are being 
prepared. 

The subcommittee members approved the terms of reference and the 2006-
2008 work plan. Both of these will be examined by the steering 
committee of the INTOSAI Professional Standards Committee and 
forwarded to the INTOSAI Governing Board. 

For additional information, contact the TCU: 

Fax: ++55 (61) 3316 - 7522. 
E-mail: MIN-AM@tcu.gov.br, arint@tcu.gov.br. 
Web site: www.tcu.gov.br. 

Working Group on Environmental Auditing: 

The Office of the Auditor General of Canada hosted the Working Group 
on Environmental Auditing's (WGEA) fifth steering committee meeting in 
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, September 5-9,2006. The meeting 
was very successful and included many fruitful discussions among the 
SAIs that were present. The steering committee members revised the 
first drafts of the following four guidance papers and provided 
constructive comments: 

* movement toward auditing biodiversity, coauthored by the SAI of 
Brazil and the SAI of Canada; 

* cooperation between SAIs on international audits: tips and examples, 
coauthored by the SAIs of the Netherlands and Poland; 

* evolution and trends in environmental auditing, authored by the SAI 
of Canada; and; 

* The World Summit on Sustainable Development: experiences of SAIs, 
authored by the SAI of the United Kingdom. 

The two new Web pages, Focus on Auditing Waste Issues and Focus on 
Auditing Water Issues, have also received the committee's stamp of 
approval and can be found on the WGEA Web site. 

The sixth WGEA steering committee meeting will be held in Nadi, Fiji, 
the week of February 5, 2007. 

Next WGEA Meeting, June 2007: 

The steering committee has also begun planning the 11th meeting of the 
WGEA, to be held in Tanzania June 25-29, 2007. Building on the success 
of the 10th WGEA meeting in Moscow in 2005, this meeting will feature 
workshops and small group discussions, speakers from external groups 
and organizations, and presentations from SAIs on pertinent 
environmental issues. The 11th WGEA meeting will be pivotal to the new 
2008-2010 work plan. 

For additional information, contact the WGEA: 

E-mail: environmentat.auditing@oag-bvg.gc.ca. 
Web site: www.environmental-auditing.org. 

[End of section] 

IDI Update: 
IDI Update keeps you informed of developments in the work and programs 
of the INTOSAI Development Initiative. To find out more about IDI and 
to keep up to date between editions of the Journal, look at the IDI 
Web site: www.idi.no. 

IDI/ASOSAI Cooperation on Capacity Building: 

In July/August 2006, IDI collaborated with ASOSAI to deliver a Russian-
language workshop, Performance Audit of Revenue Agencies, to audit 
teams from the SAIs of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and 
Mongolia. The event, which lasted for 13 days and was hosted by the 
SAI of Mongolia, was a component of the IDI ASOSAI cooperation program 
for building capacity in newly established SAIs in the region. During 
the workshop, audit teams developed detailed audit plans on 
preselected audit topics; these plans were reviewed by an expert and 
presented to all participants. The targeted SAIs made a commitment to 
have the participating audit teams conduct audits of revenue agencies 
within 3 months of completing the workshop and report lessons learned 
to ASOSAI and IDI. 

IDI/ARABOSAI Capacity-Building Program in IT Auditing: 

The fourth and final pilot information technology (IT) audit scheduled 
for this program was held in Amman, Jordan, in July 2006. At a 2-week 
meeting held in Tunisia in September 2006, six new IT audit champions 
designed an IT Audit Workshop based on case studies and exercises 
derived from the four pilot audits. The 2-week IT Audit Workshop is 
scheduled for delivery in December 2006. 

IDI/ISCITA E-learning Cooperation Project 2006: 

As reported in the July IDI Update, IDI demonstrated a prototype e-
learning course in IT auditing at the meeting of the INTOSAI Standing 
Committee on IT Audit in Brazil in May 2006. Upon further review of 
the course after the meeting, IDI decided to incorporate a number of 
new interactive learning strategies. Since this will require more 
complex product development procedures, as well as additional real-
life case studies from the subject matter experts, course delivery has 
been postponed to late March/early April 2007. 

IDI/AFROSAI-E Strategic Planning Program: 

In cooperation with AFROSAI-E, IDI is sponsoring and implementing a 
strategic planning program for the SAIs of Eritrea, the Gambia, Kenya, 
Mauritius, and Swaziland. The first activity in this program was a 1-
week design meeting held in Mauritius in July 2006. IDI staff gathered 
with subject matter experts and facilitators from the region to design 
and develop a 1-week workshop on strategic planning. The workshop was 
held in Kenya in August 2006, with the participation of teams from the 
targeted SAIs. A review meeting is scheduled to take place in April 
2007. At that time, the teams will present a draft of their SAIs' new 
strategic plans and receive feedback from peers and experts. 

Design Meetings in AFROSAI-E: 

In March 2006, IDI graduated a new group of training specialists in 
AFROSAI-E. To help these specialists enhance their design skills and 
respond to the region's needs, IDI arranged two design meetings this 
year. The first was held in Mauritius in July with the aim of 
developing courseware for a 5-day workshop entitled Detecting Fraud 
While Auditing. The second meeting was held in Kenya in August to 
develop courseware for a workshop entitled Conducting Quality 
Assurance Reviews for Financial Audits. The first workshop will be 
held in Namibia in October 2006, and the second is scheduled for 
delivery in 2007. 

IDI's Liaison with the INTOSAI community: 

In its ongoing efforts to collaborate with partners in the INTOSAI 
community, IDI representatives recently attended the following 
meetings: the EUROSAI Training Committee meeting (Luxembourg), the 
INTOSAI Professional Standards Steering Committee meeting (Cameroon), 
the ASOSAI Assembly (China), the OLACEFS Regional Training Committee 
meeting (Bolivia), and the EUROSAI Governing Board Meeting (Iceland). 

Contacting IDI: 

To discuss any of the issues raised in this edition of IDI Update, 
contact IDI: 

Telephone: ++47 21 54 08 10. 
E-mail: idi@idi.no.
Web site: www.idi.no. 

[End of section] 

INTOSAI 2006-2007 Events: 

October	16-19: 
CAROSAI Congress, Nassau, Bahamas. 

November 2-4: 
55th INTOSAI Governing Board, Mexico City, Mexico. 

November 7-12: 
XVI OLACEFS General Assembly, Quito, Ecuador. 

November 27-29: 
2006, IV Meeting of the EUROSAI Working Group on IT, Bratislava, 
Slovak Republic. 

December 1-2: 
I EUROSAI/ARABOSAI Conference, Tunis, Tunisia. 

January TBD: 
Internal Control subcommittee meeting Muscat, Oman. 

February 5-9: 
Working Group on Environmental Auditing Steering Committee meeting, 
Nadi, Fiji. 

March 3-4: 
IT Committee Seminar on Performance Auditing, Muscat, Oman. 

March 6-7: 
IT Committee meeting, Muscat, Oman. 

March 21: 
IDI Board meeting, Oslo, Norway. 

March 26-30: 
UN/INTOSAI Symposium, Vienna, Austria. 

April 16-20: 
6th Meeting of the Committee of Experts on Public Administration,
U.N.Economic and Social Council, New York, United States. 

April 23-24: 
Steering Committee Meeting of the Professional Standards Committee, 
Bahrain. 

April TBD: 
Financial Auditing Guidelines Subcommittee meeting, Canada. 

May 10-12: 
V EUROSAI/OLACEFS, Seminar, Lisbon, Portugal. 

June 25: 
Working Group on Environmental Auditing Assembly, Arusha, Tanzania. 

June TBD: 
Public Debt Committee meeting Lisbon, Portugal. 
	
TBD = To be determined. 

Editor's Note: This calendar is published in support of INTOSAI's 
communications strategy and as a way of helping INTOSAI members plan 
and coordinate schedules. Included in this regular Journal feature 
will be INTOSAI-wide events and regionwide events such as congresses, 
general assemblies, and board meetings. Because of limited space, the 
many training courses and other professional meetings offered by the 
regions cannot be included. For additional information, contact the 
Secretary General of each regional working group. 

[End of October 2006 Journal]