Annual Report Year Ending 31 March 2013

CHAIRMAN’S FOREWORD

I am pleased to present the Annual Report for 2012/2013 on behalf of the Secretariat Audit and Risk Committee (SARC). This Report describes how SARC fulfilled its role of providing support and advice to the Assembly Commission and the Clerk/Director General in order to ensure sound financial and governance arrangements. In line with its policy of openness and accessibility, SARC Annual Reports and the minutes of SARC meetings are placed on the Assembly website.

During the reporting year, SARC provided support to the Secretariat in relation to managing risk and contributed to the completion process for 2011/12 Accounts. In particular, SARC concentrated on procurement compliance, the implementation of outstanding audit recommendations, fraud investigation arrangements and improvements to Business Continuity planning arrangements. SARC also considered Risk Management strategy, increased commonality in the completion of the new format Stewardship Statements, issues relating to the Spending Review and Business Efficiency Programme, and the Report to those charged with Governance. The new format Corporate Risk Register was reviewed each quarter by SARC. SARC also agreed a new self-assessment template, based on the National Audit Office’s checklist for Audit Committees issued in January 2012.

The Internal Audit Strategy for 2012-2015 and periodic plan for 2012/13, agreed by SARC on 14 March 2012, were reviewed by SARC throughout the year in light of the Activity Reports received from the Head of Internal Audit at each meeting. The 2012/13 programme was successfully completed. A draft Audit Plan for 2013-14 was considered by SARC at its meeting on 5 March 2013.

When SARC was created some four years ago, it and the newly appointed Secretariat Management Group (SMG) inherited a list of over 100 earlier audit recommendations at various stages of implementation. We have put in place an effective system for systematically assessing new audit recommendations as they arise and actively managing and monitoring implementation with clear timetables and targets. During the past year, this has resulted in SARC ensuring that all audit recommendations have now been implemented or have action in hand to implement them.

In these financially challenging times, I am also pleased to report that we achieved all this and made a substantial saving on our allocated budget.

I am grateful to the Assembly Commission for its support and for allowing me to attend its meetings and to contribute to its discussions throughout the year. This has continued to be very helpful in providing a broader perspective for the work of SARC. The opportunity given to me to meet privately with the Speaker to discuss matters pertaining to SARC has been particularly helpful.

I would like to thank Douglas Bain, who served as SARC Independent member until 16 September 2012, for his support and professionalism. In September, I was delighted to welcome his successor, Bernard Mitchell, to SARC. Bernard settled in very well and has already proven himself as an effective Independent member. I also wish to thank Pat Ramsey MLA for his important and valued contribution to the work of SARC.

Finally, my thanks go to the Clerk/Director General and the staff of the Assembly Secretariat for their commitment and diligence in providing SARC with the information necessary to achieve its objectives as well as very valuable secretarial services.

COLM McKENNA
CHAIRMAN

CONTENTS

Introduction

The Secretariat Audit and Risk Committee (SARC)

  • Meetings
  • Training
  • Management Information Systems and Controls

Progress of SARC 2012/2013

  • Performance against key objectives
  • SARC budget and expenditure

Internal Audit Activity 2012/13

NI Assembly Accounts 2011/2012

Evaluation of SARC 2012/13

SARC Plan 2013/14

  • SARC Key objectives
  • SARC Budget

Internal Audit Plan

Conclusion

Annexes

A Internal Audit Programme Progress Report 2012/2013

B Definition of Audit Ratings

C SARC Self Assessment

D SARC Budget 2013/2014

SECRETARIAT AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE

REPORT TO THE ASSEMBLY COMMISSION
FOR YEAR ENDING 31 MARCH 2013

1 INTRODUCTION

This Report provides the Assembly Commission with an account of the activity and achievements of the Secretariat Audit and Risk Committee (SARC) in 2012/2013 in relation to its objectives for that year. The Report also sets out SARC’s objectives and budget for 2013/2014.

2 SECRETARIAT AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE (SARC)

SARC plays an important role in the overall system of corporate governance in the NI Assembly Secretariat. It is independent of the Secretariat and aims to support the Clerk/Director General in his role as Accounting Officer. It also provides independent support to the Assembly Commission in monitoring its responsibilities for issues of risk, control and governance and by reviewing the comprehensiveness of assurances.  

2.1 Meetings

SARC meets at least four times a year, although the Chairperson may convene additional meetings should he feel that this is necessary. During 2012/13, SARC met five times (22 May 2012; 25 June 2012; 9 October 2012; 4 December 2012; and 5 March 2013).

SARC meetings are normally attended by the Accounting Officer, the Director of Corporate Services, the Head of Internal Audit and a representative from the Northern Ireland Audit Office. Secretarial support is provided by the Legal and Governance Services Directorate.

The Chairperson of SARC attends meetings of the Assembly Commission as an observer. Colm McKenna attended meetings of the Commission on 29 May 2012, 25 September 2012, 6 November 2012 and 27 February 2013. Bernard Mitchell attended the Commission meetings on 6 November 2012, 4 December 2012 and 30 January 2013.

2.2 Training

The new Independent member received induction training in September 2012. SARC members are fully aware of their requirements and duties, undertaking appropriate professional training, both within and without the Assembly.

2.3 Management Information Systems and Controls

At each meeting, SARC is provided with a number of analyses and reports including:

  • A log of all outstanding Audit Recommendations together with a statement of the current position on each and a target date for completion of any outstanding actions. This is used at each meeting to monitor progress and ensure that recommendations are managed and closed in a controlled manner.
  • Changes to the Corporate Risk Register and any areas of concern. SARC monitors the actions taken by SMG to manage the Corporate Risks to ensure they remain both relevant and effective. Copies of the Assurance Statements completed by Risk Owners are submitted to the SARC for scrutiny every six months.
  • A report in relation to any issues of concern relevant to SARC regarding the delivery of Business Plan objectives.
  • A progress report from the Head of Internal Audit summarising:
    • Work performed (and a comparison with work planned)
    • Key issues emerging from Internal Audit work
    • Management response to audit recommendations
    • Changes to the Periodic Plan
    • Any resource issues affecting the delivery of Internal Audit objectives
  • A progress report from the NI Audit Office representative summarising work done and emerging findings.

As and when appropriate, or when requested, the SARC will also be provided with:

  • Proposals for the Terms of Reference of Internal Audit;
  • The Internal Audit Strategy;
  • Head of Internal Audit’s Annual Opinion and Report;
  • Quality Assurance reports on the Internal Audit function;
  • The draft accounts of the Assembly;
  • The draft Governance Statement;
  • A report on any changes to accounting policies;
  • A report from the Accounting Officer summarising progress against the Secretariat’s Business Plans, highlighting any issues that may be relevant to the work of the SARC;
  • The NIAO’s Report to those charged with Governance;
  • A report on any proposals to tender for audit functions;
  • A report on co-operation between Internal and External Audit;
  • The NIAO audit strategy;
  • Information on any impending changes (as identified by Internal or External Audit) that may impact upon the work of the SARC.

SARC is satisfied with the comprehensiveness, reliability and integrity of assurances, the quality of audit, financial reporting and the management of risk. SARC members considered the contents of a draft Governance Statement at the SARC meeting on 5 March 2013.

3 PROGRESS OF SARC IN 2012/13

3.1 Performance against key objectives

KEY OBJECTIVE

PERFORMANCE

To consolidate and embed the recent changes in the rapid implementation of audit recommendations to make them even more effective.

Continued improvement in the rapid implementation the outstanding audit recommendations. An effective system for assessing new audit recommendations as well as managing and monitoring their implementation was maintained and improved.

To adapt SARC processes to any changes emerging from the work of the Independent Financial Review Panel.

Audit programme covers Members’ expenses, as detailed in the relevant version of the Members’ Handbook. SARC Chair has met with IFRP.

To continue to work with the SMG on key risk areas including procurement to help manage risk and secure value for money. 

Procurement issues monitored throughout the year as part of the audit programme. New format Corporate Risk Register introduced and reviewed.

To support the Commission and SMG in the challenges posed by declining budgets and the desire to refine and improve services to MLAs and the public in this new Mandate.

This is addressed in the Corporate Risk Register. Also, the SARC Chairperson attends meetings of the Business Efficiency Project Board and Commission meetings.

3.2 SARC budget and expenditure

The budget for 2012/2013 was estimated based on anticipated activity and the activity in the previous year. Adjustments were made in year in line with the actual level of activity.  

BUDGET HEADING ORIGINAL BUDGET
£
IN YEAR ADJUSTED BUDGET
£
EXPENDITURE
£
Committee members’ fees 7,780 7,780 5,955
Travel and subsistence 1,860 174 177
General Business Expenditure 1,250 114 112
TOTAL 10,890 8,068 6,244

4 INTERNAL AUDIT ACTIVITY 2012/13

4.1 Internal Audit Programme 2012/13

Details of the progress in relation to the Internal Audit Programme for 2012/13 are attached at Annex A.

4.2 Work completed

Risk Rating Definitions are attached at Annex B. Final Internal Audit reports have been issued in respect of the following assignments:

ASSIGNMENT

AUDIT RATING

Review of Members’ Expenses

Satisfactory

Review of Examiner of Statutory Rules

Substantial

Review of Business Continuity Management

Limited

Review of Systems Under Development

Satisfactory

Review of Office Resources

Limited

Review of CCSU

Satisfactory

Review of Research

Satisfactory

Review of Information Security

Satisfactory

Review of Gifts & Hospitality

Satisfactory

Review of Telephony

Limited

Review of AMPS

Satisfactory

Review of Use of Consultants

Satisfactory

Review of Vacancy Management Group

Satisfactory

Review of Committee for the Environment

Substantial

In addition the following assignments were in progress:

ASSIGNMENT

Internal Quality Assurance

Review of Members Expenses

It was noted that Internal Audit had confirmed an increase in the assurance ratings allocated in over 50% of cases after follow-up audits were completed.

4.3 Key Issues

A range of risk and control issues was brought to Management’s attention during the year and included risks relating to business continuity planning, stock management and physical access controls in respect of Office Resources and the use of mobile phones.

4.4 Internal Quality Assessment

An Internal Quality Assurance (IQA) was conducted to evaluate the quality of the NI Assembly’s Internal Audit service. The review was conducted in accordance with the H M Treasury guidance. Results were positive against all seven elements of the framework and a number of recommendations have been made for management consideration.

This exercise will serve as a useful preparation for the External Quality Assessment that is due for completion in 2013.

5 NI ASSEMBLY ACCOUNTS 2011/2012

  Based on an examination of the Accounts and the Report to Those Charged with Governance, SARC recommended on 25 June 2012 that the Clerk/ Director General sign the 2011/12 accounts.  The SARC Chairperson and the Clerk/Director General thanked the Secretariat and NIAO staff involved for delivering the accounts to timetable.

6 EVALUATION OF SARC 2012/13

At the SARC meeting on 5 March 2013, SARC members completed a self-assessment checklist for 2012/2013 which is attached at Annex C. This indicates the extent to which SARC has complied with its remit.

7 SARC PLAN 2013/14

7.1 SARC Key Objectives

Following the SARC meeting on 4 December 2012, the Secretariat Audit and Risk Committee agreed the following objectives for 2013/2014:

  • To ensure the effective implementation of audit recommendations.
  • To oversee the handling of key risk areas to ensure that risk is managed and value for money is secured.
  • To keep under review any risks arising from organisational change and

business efficiency recommendations and any issues arising out of the work

of the Independent Financial Review Panel.

7.2 SARC Budget

Details of the SARC budget for 2013/14 are attached at Annex D. 

8 INTERNAL AUDIT PLAN 2013-14

A draft Internal Audit plan was considered by SARC on 5 March 2013.

9 CONCLUSION

SARC is satisfied that it has discharged its duties as guided by its Terms of Reference. Given this, and taking into account the work of Internal Audit and the NI Audit Office, and assurances provided to the Committee, SARC is satisfied that it provides sufficient assurance to the Assembly Commission and to the Accounting Officer in the discharge of accountability obligations.

MEMBERS OF SARC 2012/13:

COLM McKENNA, INDEPENDENT CHAIRPERSON

DOUGLAS BAIN, INDEPENDENT MEMBER TO 16 SEPTEMBER 2012

BERNARD MITCHELL, INDEPENDENT MEMBER FROM 17 SEPTEMBER 2012

PAT RAMSEY MLA, ASSEMBLY COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE

ANNEX A

INTERNAL AUDIT PROGRAMME 2012/2013 PROGRESS REPORT

DIRECTORATE/BUSINESS AREA
RISK SCORE
ASSURANCE
REPORT
Corporate Services

Review of Members Expenses

145

Satisfactory

April 2012

Review of Gifts & Hospitality

125

Satisfactory

October 2012

Review of AMPS

125

Satisfactory

December 2012

Review of CCSU

80

Satisfactory

August 2012

Review of Use of Consultants

125

Satisfactory

February 2013

Review of Vacancy Management Group

110

Satisfactory

February 2013

 

Information & Outreach

Review of Information Security

135

Satisfactory

November 2012

Review of Research

105

Satisfactory

September 2012

Review of Systems Under Development

135

Satisfactory

May 2012

 

Facilities

Review of Business Continuity Management

140

Limited

September 2012

Review of Office Resources

110

Limited

July 2012

Review of Mobile Phones

140

Limited

December 2012

 

Office of the Clerk/DG

Review of Examiner of Statutory Rules

70

Substantial

June 2012

 

Clerking & Reporting

Review of Committee of the Environment

110

Substantial

March 2013

 

FOLLOW-UP AUDITS

ASSURANCE

REPORT

Review of Learning and Development Branch

Substantial

May 2012

Review of Support Services

Satisfactory

May 2012

Status Update on Review of NIABT

Satisfactory

June 2012

Review of Freedom of Information

Substantial

September 2012

Review of Events

Substantial

October 2012

Review of Bill Office

Substantial

October 2012

Review of Systems Under Development

Satisfactory

January 2013

Review of Third Party Verification Audit of the Managed Print Contract

Satisfactory

February 2013

ANNEX B

ASSURANCE DEFINITIONS

SUBSTANTIAL

There is a robust system of risk management, control and governance which should ensure that objectives are fully achieved.

SATISFACTORY

There is some risk that objectives may not be fully achieved. Some improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and / or effectiveness of risk management, control and governance.

LIMITED

There is considerable risk that the system will fail to meet its objectives. Prompt action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness or risk management, control and governance.

UNACCEPTABLE

The system has failed or there is a real and substantial risk that the system will fail to meet its objectives. Urgent action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of risk management, control and governance.

ANNEX C

ASSEMBLY SECRETARIAT AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE (SARC)
ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 MARCH 2013

ROLE

Terms of Reference

YES/NO/NA

COMMENT

1. Have all executive responsibilities, and making or endorsing of decisions, been excluded from the roles and responsibilities of SARC members?

YES

 

2. Does SARC follow up recommendations regarding its effectiveness?

YES

 

3. Does SARC’s role include monitoring and reviewing the Secretariat’s processes for assessing, reporting and owning business risks and their financial implications?

YES

 

4. Have SARC’s role and responsibilities been clearly defined and communicated to SARC members, along with details of how SARC supports SMG and the Assembly Commission?

YES

 

5. Are SARC’s Terms of Reference reviewed at least annually to ensure that the work of SARC is aligned with good practice and business needs?

YES

The terms of reference were reviewed on 9 October 2012

6. Do the Terms of Reference include rules for a quorum?

YES

 

7. Does SARC meet regularly (at least four times a year) and do meetings coincide with key dates in the financial reporting and audit cycle?

YES

 

MEMBERSHIP, INDEPENDENCE, OBJECTIVITY & UNDERSTANDING

Independence

 

8. Is the Chair of SARC different from the Chair of the Assembly Commission?

YES

 

9. Are SARC members either independent non-executive Board members or independent external members, and have they been appointed for an appropriate period of time (e.g. 3 years)?

YES

One member is from the NI Assembly Commission

Relationship with SMG
YES/NO/NA
COMMENT

10. Are SMG members invited to attend SARC meetings, participate in discussions, and provide information to SARC as and when SARC deems it necessary?

YES

 

11. Do the Accounting Officer, Head of Finance, Head of Internal Audit, and the NIAO, routinely attend SARC, or attend at the request of SARC members?

YES

 

12. Are the numbers attending SARC meetings sufficient to deal adequately with the agenda, but not too many to blur issues?

YES

 

Conflict of Interest

 

13. Is an early agenda item at every SARC meeting a request for SARC members to declare any potential conflict of interest with any of the business items on the SARC agenda?

YES

 

14. In instances where the conflict of interest is likely to last for a long time, has the SARC member been asked to relinquish his or her membership?

N/A

Not an issue to date

15. Are SARC members required to declare their interests in a register of interests?

YES

 

Terms of Appointment

 

16. Do all SARC members have a clear understanding of what is expected on them in their role, set out in a letter, including:

 

 
a) their appointment and purpose;
YES
 

b) the support and training that they will receive;

YES

 

c) the commitment required;

YES

 

d) their fee;

YES

 

e) conflict of interest procedures;

YES

 

f) expected conduct;

YES

 

g) duration of appointment and how often it may be renewed;

YES 

 

h) how their individual performance will be appraised, including a clear understanding of what would be regarded as unsatisfactory performance;

YES 

 

i) termination conditions?

YES 

 

SKILLS

Range of Skills

 

17. Are there formal assessment criteria for the appointment of the SARC Chair?

YES 

 

18. Are there formal assessment criteria for the appointment of the SARC Independent member?

YES 

 

19. Within 6 months of appointment, do the SARC Chair and Independent Member have an:

a) understanding of the objectives of the organisation and current significant issues for the organisation?

YES 

 

b) understanding of the organisation’s structure, including key relationships;

YES 

 

c) understanding of the organisation’s culture;

YES 

 

d) understanding of any relevant legislation or other rules governing the organisation; and

YES 

 

e) broad understanding of the government environment, particularly accountability structures and current major initiatives?

YES 

 

20. Does SARC ensure that there are areas of collective understanding, including:

a) accountancy – with at least one member having recent and relevant financial experience;

YES 

 

b) governance, assurance and risk management;

YES 

 

c) audit;

 YES 

 

d) technical or specialist issues pertinent to the Secretariat’s business;

YES 

 

e) experience of managing similar sized organisations;

YES 

 

f) understanding of the wider environments in which the Secretariat operates;

YES 

 

g) detailed understanding of the government environment and accountability structures?

YES 

 

Additional Skills

 

21. Do SARC members feel empowered to:

 

 
a) co-opt members for a period of less than 1 year to provide specialist skills that the members do not have to be an effective Committee;
YES 
 

b) procure specialist advice at reasonable approved expense to the organisation on an ad hoc basis to support them in relation to particular pieces of Committee business?

YES 

 

Training and Development

 

22. Is there an induction checklist for new SARC members that details key things that they must do e.g. visits to important business areas, meeting with the Commission, Risk owners, Internal Auditors and NIAO?

YES 

 

23. Are all new SARC members offered an induction training course?

YES 

 

24. Does SARC ensure that new members have sufficient knowledge of the business to identify the key risk areas and to challenge both line management and internal and external auditors on critical and sensitive issues?

YES 

 

25. Does SARC make recommendations on the Committee’s and individual members’ training needs, the cost of which is met by the Secretariat?

YES 

 

26. Does SARC keep abreast of best practice and developments in corporate governance in central government and more widely?

YES 

 

SCOPE OF WORK

Relationship with Internal Audit

 

27. Does SARC consider the independence and effectiveness of Internal Audit?

YES 

 

28. Does SARC consider that the experience, expertise and professional standard of the Internal Audit team are appropriate for the size, complexity and inherent risk of the organisation?

YES 

 

29. Does SARC consider that the scope of Internal Audit work, the available resources at its disposal and its access to information and people allow it to address significant risks within the Secretariat?

YES 

 

30. Does SARC approve and review the Internal Audit plan before Internal Audit commences any work and make suggestions regarding risk and problem areas that the audit could address in the short and long term?

YES 

 

31. Does SARC receive regular progress reports on reviews undertaken by Internal Audit?

YES 

 

32. Does SARC review Internal Audit reports and management responses to issues raised, and monitor the progress made on Internal Audit’s recommendations?

YES 

 

Relationship with External Auditors

 

33. Where relevant, does SARC consider the independence, objectivity and effectiveness of the External Auditors?

YES 

 

34. Does SARC periodically obtain the views of the External Auditor on the work and effectiveness of SARC?

YES 

 

35. Does SARC consider the External Auditor’s Audit Strategy before External Audit commences work and make suggestions regarding risk and problem areas that the audit could address in the short and long term?

YES 

 

36. Do the External Auditors inform SARC of key developments and issues at key stages of the audit?

YES 

 

37. Does SARC consider the management letter and other relevant reports and the management response, and monitor the progress made on the recommendations?

YES 

 

Relationship between Internal and External Auditors

 

38. Does SARC consider that there is an effective working relationship between Internal and External Audit?

YES 

 

Fraud

 

39. Does SARC consider whether effective anti-fraud and corruption policies and procedures are in place and operating effectively?

YES 

 

40. Does SARC consider whether management arrangements for whistleblowing are satisfactory?

YES 

 

Internal Control

 

41. Does SARC consider whether corporate governance is embedded throughout the Secretariat rather than treated as a compliance exercise?

YES 

 

42. Does SARC consider whether the system of internal reporting gives early warning of control failures and emerging risks?

YES 

 

43. Does SARC consider whether the Governance Statement is sufficiently comprehensive and meaningful, and the evidence that underpins it?

YES 

 

44. Does SARC satisfy itself that the system of internal control has operated effectively throughout the reporting period?

YES 

 

45. Does SARC monitor whether Secretariat procedures for identifying and managing business risk have regard for the relevant legislation and regulation?

YES

 

Financial Reporting
YES/NO/NA
COMMENT

46. Does SARC review the first draft of the annual accounts before the External Auditors start work on them?

YES 

 

47. Before the Accounting Officer signs off the Annual Report and Financial Statements, does SARC consider:

 

 
a) that accounting policies in place comply with relevant requirements, particularly FReM;
YES 
 

b) that there has been a robust process in preparing the accounts and annual report;

YES 

 

c) whether the accounts and annual report have been subjected to sufficient review by management and the Accounting Officer and/or Commission;

YES 

 

d) that when new or novel accounting treatments arise, whether appropriate advice on accounting treatment has been taken;

YES 

 

e) whether there is an appropriate anti-fraud policy in place and whether losses are suitably recorded;

YES 

 

f) whether suitable processes are in place to ensure accurate financial records are kept;

YES 

 

g) whether suitable processes are in place to ensure regularity and propriety are achieved; and

YES 

 

h) whether issues raised by the External Auditors have been given appropriate attention?

YES 

 

48. Where the accounts have been qualified, does SARC consider the action taken by SMG / Assembly Commission to deal with the causes of qualification?

N/A

Has not arisen to date

49. Does SARC satisfy itself that the annual financial statements represent fairly the financial position of the Secretariat, regardless of the pressures on SMG?

YES 

 

COMMUNICATION

Reporting to the Board

 

50. Is the Commission kept aware of the work of SARC?

YES

Minutes are sent to Commission members

51. Does SARC provide an Annual Report to the Assembly Commission, timed to support the preparation of the Governance Statement?

YES

 

52. Does SARC’s Annual Report present SARC’s opinion about:

 

 
a) the comprehensiveness of assurances in meeting the Commission’s and Accounting Officer’s needs;
YES 
 

b) the reliability and integrity of these assurances;

YES 

 

c) whether the assurance available is sufficient to support the Commission and Accounting Officer in their decisions taken and their accountability obligations;

YES 

 

d) the implication of these assurances for the overall management of risk;

YES 

 

e) any issues SARC considers pertinent to the Governance Statement and any long-term issues SARC thinks the Commission and/or Accounting Officer should give attention to;

YES 

 

f) financial reporting for the year;

YES 

 

g) the quality of both Internal and External Audit and their approach to their responsibilities; and

YES 

 

h) SARC’s view of its own effectiveness, including advice on ways in which it considers it needs to be strengthened or developed?

YES 

 

THE ROLE OF THE CHAIR

Agenda setting

 

53. Is the Commission’s Secretary different from the SARC Secretary?

YES 

 

54. Does the SARC Chair consult with the SARC Secretary before every meeting to discuss and agree the business for the meeting?

YES 

 

55. Are agenda items formally requested in advance from SARC members and attendees?

YES 

 

56. Are outline agendas planned one year ahead to cover core activities and specific issues on a cyclical basis?

YES 

 

57. Does the agenda exclude SMG business, so that there is no overlap with the work of the Commission whilst linking to the main elements of the Secretariat’s business?

YES 

 

58. Are the meetings set for a length of time which allows all business to be conducted, yet not so long that the meeting becomes ineffective?

YES 

 

59. Does the Chair encourage full and open discussion and invite questions at SARC meetings?

YES 

 

Communication

 

60. Does the SARC Chair have open lines of communication with the Assembly Commission, SMG, Head of Internal Audit and the External Auditors?

YES 

SARC Chair attends Commission meetings

61. Does the Chair encourage all SARC members to have regular interface with the Secretariat and its activities to help them understand the Secretariat, its objectives and business needs and priorities?

YES

Directors attend SARC on rolling programme basis

62. Do reports to SARC communicate relevant information at the right frequency, time and in a format that is effective?

YES

 

63. Does SARC direct the format and content of the papers to be presented to SARC?

YES

 

Monitoring Actions

 

64. Does the SARC Chair or the Governance Officer ensure that all action points from SARC meetings are appropriately acted upon?

YES

 

65. Does the SARC Chair or the Secretariat ensure that members who have missed a meeting are appropriately briefed on the business conducted in their absence?

YES

 

66. Are matters arising discussed and minuted at SARC’s next meeting?

YES

 

Appraisal

 

67. Does the SARC Chair ensure that the SARC Independent member is provided with an appropriate appraisal of their performance as a SARC member?

YES

 

68. Does the SARC Chair seek appraisal of their personal performance from the Accounting Officer / Speaker?

YES

 

69. Are SARC meetings well attended, with records of attendance maintained and reviewed annually?

YES

 

SARC SUPPORT

 

70. Does the SARC Secretariat commission papers as necessary to support agenda items?

YES

 

71. Does the SARC Secretariat circulate meeting documents to all SARC members, Internal Audit and NIAO in good time before each meeting to allow members time to study and understand the information, e.g. at least one week before the meeting?

YES

 

72. Does the SARC Secretariat arrange for Directors / senior management to be available as necessary to discuss specific agenda items with SARC during meetings?

YES

 

73. Does the SARC Secretariat keep records of all meetings, and minutes after they have been approved by the SARC Chair and circulate them to SARC members, Head of Internal Audit, NIAO, SMG, Commission members and the Accounting Officer on a timely basis?

YES

 

74. Does the SARC Secretariat ask for confirmation that the minutes are a true and fair representation of the summary of the business taken by SARC?

YES

 

75. Does the SARC Secretariat ensure that the minutes / action points clearly state all agreed actions, the responsible owner, and when the actions will be completed?

YES

 

76. Does the SARC Secretariat ensure that action points are being taken forward between meetings?

YES

 

77. Does the SARC Secretariat support the Chair in the preparation of SARC reports to the Assembly Commission?

YES

 

78. Does the SARC Secretariat facilitate the Chair’s meetings with the Accounting Officer, the Head of Internal Audit, NIAO and the Speaker?

YES

 

79. Does the SARC Secretariat keep the Chair and members in touch with developments and relevant background information about developments in the Secretariat?

YES 

 

80. Does the SARC Secretariat maintain a record of when members’ terms of appointment are due for renewal or termination?

YES 

 

81. Does the SARC Secretariat ensure that appropriate appointment processes are initiated when required?

YES 

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

Does SARC support effectively the Assembly Commission and the Accounting Officer by reviewing the comprehensiveness of assurances to satisfy their needs, and by reviewing the reliability and integrity of these assurances?

YES 

 

Is SARC suitably independent and objective, and does each member have a good understanding of the objectives, priorities and risks of the organisation, and of their role on SARC?

YES 

 

Does SARC contain or have at its disposal an appropriate mix of skills to perform its functions well?

YES 

 

Is the scope of SARC suitably defined, and does it encompass all the assurance needs of the Board and the Accounting Officer?

YES 

 

Does SARC engage effectively with Financial and Performance Reporting issues, and with the work of internal and external audit? And does SARC communicate effectively with the Accounting Officer, the Assembly Commission and other stakeholders?

YES 

 

Is SARC appropriately resourced, work planned in advance as far as possible, and effective communication with stakeholders maintained?

YES 

 

Does SARC receive appropriate support from the Secretariat?

YES 

 

ENHANCING SARC

What do we need to do to enhance SARC?

Keep abreast of developments in Corporate Governance, audit and accounting.

ANNEX D

SECRETARIAT AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE
BUDGET 2013/2014

BUDGET HEADING

AMOUNT
(£)

Committee members’ fees

8,000

Travel and Subsistence

500

General Business Expenditure

1,320

TOTAL (excluding fees)

1,820

Find Your MLA

Locate your local MLA

Find MLA

News and Media Centre

Read press releases, watch live and archived video.

Find out more

Follow the Assembly

Keep up to date with what's happening at the Assembly.

Find out more

Subscribe

Enter your email address to keep up to date

Sign up