audit of disaster preparedness arife coskun turkish court of accounts principal auditor/ audit...

Audit of Disaster Preparedness

Arife COSKUNTurkish Court of Accounts

Principal Auditor/ Audit Manager

INTOSAI Working Group AADA 5 th Meeting in Antalya, October 2011-www.sayistay.gov.tr/aada

Preparedness

TCA’s Tasks within the AADA

Preparation& elaboration of the guidance for auditing disaster-preparedness. (Task 8)

Organization and coordination of a parallel audit on disaster-preparedness, on the basis of the Draft Audit Guidelines, especially the audit programme. (Task 9)


The Draft Guidelines For Auditing

of Disaster Preparedness

AID

AUDITGIS

HARMONISATION

GUIDANCE

FRAUD CORRUPTION

IMPLEMENTATION

PREPAREDNESS

Responsible SAIs:

Austria

Kenya

Turkey (lead)


Respondent SAIs


1. Australia10. European Court of Auditors (ECA)

19. Lesotho 28. Philippines

2. Austria 11. Denmark 20. Macedonia 29. Poland

3. Bangladesh 12. Germany 21. Madagascar 30. Saint Lucia

4. Cameroon 13. Guatemala 22. Morocco 31. Singapore

5. Canada 14. Hungary 23. Netherlands (NCA) 32. Turkey

6. Cape Verde 15. Japan 24. New Zealand 33. Ukraine

7. Czech Republic 16. Korea 25. Norway 34. USA (GAO)

8. Egypt 17. Kyrgyz Republic 26. Papua New Guinea 35. Yemen

9. Estonia 18. Latvia 27. Peru

Criticism and Contributions

Australia

China

Germany

Hungary

Japan

Mexico

Netherland

Philippines


Contributions Part l: Types of Disaster


GEOPHYSICAL(Earthquakes, tsunamis, land

slides, etc.)

NATURAL DISASTERS

DISASTERS

MAN - MADE

HYDROLOGICAL/METEOROLOGICAL(Windstorms, floods, tornados, draughts etc.)

CLIMATOGICAL(Desertification, freezes, etc.)

BIOLOGICAL(Plagues, Epidemics, etc) SOCIOLOGICAL

(Terrorism, Famine, etc)

COMBINATIONS

TECHNOLOGICAL(Nuclear weapons, nuclear plant

melt down, etc.)

Contributions Part ll: Audit of Disaster Preparedness

Present

Introduction

Challenges for the Auditor

Mandate

Types of Audit

Planning and carrying out the audit work

Suggestion Rationale/Audit function or

legislative authority of the audit Planning and risk assessment

- Audit objectives

- Audit scope

- Audit Methodology Execution

- Audit programme Conclusion and reporting:

Findings and recommendations


Contributions Part ll: Audit MandatePresent

Main Recommendation:

SAIs should have full authority to access all kinds of information concerning the subject, including internal and external audit reports, as well as having an audit mandate that covers all activities.

Basis of Main Recommendation:

The SAI is the only institution with the potential to audit all the structures concerning disaster preparedness. If this is not yet the case, the SAI’s mandate should therefore be extended and broadened so as to involve all relevant institutions in its scope.

CriticismIn the guidelines, it shouldn’t be suggested that SAIs should have a full mandate to audit all relevant institutions.

Suggestion SAIs’ biggest concern should be that an appropriate external audit should be conducted on all relevant institutions and SAIs should be able to obtain results from those audits. In accordance to this perspective, the statements should be reformulated regarding the extension of the mandate of SAIs.


Contributions Part ll: Audit Types

Criticism: Both financial& performance audit are applicable in the audit of disaster preparedness. Therefore, which type of audit is the best shouldn’t be paid too much attention.

Present: Compared to Financial Audit

Performance audit adds most value to auditing disaster preparedness.

Performance audit directly covers all aspects and activities of disaster preparedness management and reports as a whole.


Contributions Part lll: Audit Programme

Identification of the Disaster Characteristics What are the possible combinations of the types of disasters? What is the recent experience of major disaster? What were the

government’s responses? What are lessons learned? Has government estimated the costs and benefits of alternative mitigation

efforts? What is the probability of occurrence for each type of disaster taking into

consideration geographic location of the country? Types of climate/season of the country? Are there assessments and early warning systems, standby arrangements for

disaster, relief (i.e. inventory mgt/availability of goods) and emergency response?

The auditor should also need to have knowledge of whether there is

reserve for materials which could be used for disaster preparedness ……



Specifying and Understanding the National Strategy and Action Plans The auditor should also examine whether a consistency and harmonization

could be identified between the disaster plans in various regions and national disaster plan

Is the public ensured to access those plans? If yes, what are the methods to disseminate them?

To what extent do the disaster plans have compelling force? (e.g. limitations of ownership or property rights in case of emergency.)

What are reviewing entities? Are they independent third parties with objective views?

What disaster mitigation investment decision is government facing? What does government know about threat, vulnerability and consequences? Is the National Disaster Plan properly disseminated to all units of

government? ……………………



Identification of the framework and organization of the authorities involved

Are there any specific plans which ensure that the government will continue their operations even in case of a disaster?

The auditor for disaster preparedness should also focus on how the coordination and the concerted actions could be achieved by various entities involved in disaster preparedness.

Is there an existing communication system that will effectively provide timely information to each level of government with regard to disaster preparedness?

What are the lessons learned from previous experiences of disasters in view of the framework and authority of related organizations?

……………………



Assessment of the adequacy of coordination Is the good horizontal communication among entities

concerned ensured? Have persons to contact been identified?

What alternative means of communication, such as telephones, radios and internet, are prepared? Are there multiple options in case of a disaster?

Have expected activities in case of disaster been properly prioritized among stakeholders beforehand?

Is the expected level of coordination between and among the concerned agencies achieved during the occurrence of disasters?

……………………INTOSAI Working Group AADA 5 th Meeting in Antalya, October 2011-www.sayistay.gov.tr/aada


Evaluation of disaster management tools Is there an existing disaster management information system to

analyze risks and plan the disaster efforts to mitigate the impact?

Is the conduct of risk assessment and vulnerability assessment activities properly documented for reference and audit purposes?

If the government has a geographical information system (GIS), has it been tested for efficiency and effectiveness?

Is there an assessment being done by the agency to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of its disaster management tools and measures? When is the assessment done?

Are the results of this assessment used for decision-making and for improvement of future disaster management initiatives?

……………………



Evaluation of emergency exercises and training In order to raise public awareness, is the information on

disaster drills properly open to public and easy to access? At the local level, have more practical matters such as

evacuation area, route been continuously considered, disseminated and reflected in the disaster drills?

Are local drills and simulation exercises conducted at all levels of the government?

Are training functions and activities assured of not being duplicated or overlapping?

Are they also informed of the government’s disaster risk mitigation and awareness campaign?

……………………



Evaluation of disaster funds and grants administration Regarding donated funds to be audited, how is the accountability including

transparency in the use of them ensured? Has the management process of receiving, managing, spending and

recording been clearly established for each of different channels of funds, such as governmental fund, domestic and foreign donations?

The auditor should also examine how the policies of the central and local governments give impacts on the allocation of the funds, as well as on the choosing of the projects receiving the funds.

Are there specific laws in the country that govern the allocation and utilization of funds for the National Disaster Plan and are they complied?

Has the central government developed Guidelines in the Accounting and Utilization of Disaster Funds? Are they complied with?

Is there a periodic reporting of funds allocation and utilization by recipient agencies?


Contributions Wording of Audit Programme

Present

“The auditor should first have knowledge of the following issues”

“The auditor should focus on these points”

Suggestion “Having knowledge of

the following issues are commonly agreed upon/endorsed by INTOSAI”

“Focusing on these points are agreed upon by INTOSAI”


Contributions Lesson Learned


Suggestion

The information in this chapter should be

integrated into the description of the

purpose of this guidance and part ll.

Contributions Audit Plan of SAIs

In order to respond efficiently to the possible occurrence of disaster all of a sudden, SAIs should prepare an audit plan in advance.


Studies for Preparing Guidelines

Document analysis

Reviewed some articles & studies

Examined some disaster management acts

Made a study of some disaster plans concerning disaster preparedness

Interviewed with some institutions & organizations

Examined some reports on GIS

Sent the survey to the INTOSAI members and analysis of the results

Examined the audit reportsINTOSAI Working Group AADA 5 th Meeting in Antalya, October 2011-www.sayistay.gov.tr/aada

Magnitude: 7.4 and 7.2 18.243 citizens lost their lives 48.901 people injuries 376.379 dwelling units and workplaces were damaged about 600.000 homeless.


The Big Earthquake in Marmara Region(1999)

Two Study in the Aftermath of the Earthquake (1999)

The Activities of Reconstruction in the Aftermath of Earthquake in Marmara Region in 1999


Two Study in the Aftermath of the Earthquake (1999)


How well is Istanbul Getting Prepared

for the Earthquake?

How well is Istanbul Getting Prepared

for the Earthquake?

Explored: How the activities towards minimizing a possible Istanbul

earthquake damage were planned and executed. To the extent to which the plans and works done can be effective

and sufficient in earthquake hazard mitigation.

Searched: Whether risks and priorities were taken into account in facing and

solving problems. Adequacy and deficiencies in the building development planning

and implementation activities of Metropolitan and district municipalities that aims at ensuring construction of earthquake-resistant buildings.


Audit Main Questions

Does Organizational Structure charged with Earthquake Preparedness for Istanbul measure up to meet necessities?

Are building development plans, their implementations and building reinforcement works executed in such a way that is to minimize earthquake damages?


Q.1: Organizational Structure

Handled the following issues; How an organizational structure prepares Istanbul

for earthquake? How are resources allocated for earthquake

preparedness? Is effective coordination and cooperation

established? Are activities properly planned and executed? Is there sufficient work related to fires that increase

earthquake damages? How well do service groups prepare emergency

plans? INTOSAI Working Group AADA 5 th Meeting in Antalya, October 2011-www.sayistay.gov.tr/aada

Q.2: Building Development Plans& Building Reinforcement Works

Evaluated sufficiency of

Building Development Planning

Construction Practices and

Reinforcement of Existing Structures


Importance of Audit Mandate

Auditees visited during the on-site audit:

Disaster Management Center established within the Office of Istanbul Governor

Metropolitan Municipality Department of Fire Brigade

Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality

District municipalities, located in the first-degree seismic zone


Collaboration with the Other Actors

Formulating audit criteria and obtaining audit findings were evaluated with

A significant number of scientists known to have contributed in minimizing earthquake risks,

Heads of relevant professional associations,

Representatives of NGOsINTOSAI Working Group AADA 5 th Meeting in Antalya, October 2011-www.sayistay.gov.tr/aada

Conclusions and Recommendations of the 21st UN/INTOSAI Symposium-2011

The theme: “Effective practices of cooperation between SAIs and citizens to enhance public accountability”.

This provides the opportunity to assess both how SAIs engage citizens in their own work, as well as how SAIs communicate their work to citizens.

Aware that citizens have become natural partners of SAIs in terms of enhancing transparency in the public accountability process.

Noting that awareness of citizens’ expectations enables SAIs to include these in their strategic, action and audit plans as appropriate, which also could enhance the credibility of their reports.

By making SAIs’ reports public, they make government actions transparent for the citizens; and, by being responsive to the legitimate concerns of citizens, the civil society and the private sector, they help to build public confidence.


Audit Perspective

Top-down Audit Perspective(based on an overall owner perspective)

Bottom-up Audit Perspective(viewed as an interpretation of the audit mission in order to meet citizens’ interest in having SAIs focus on problems of real significance to the people and the community)


INTOSAI Auditing Standards:

Performance auditing must be free to examine all government activities from different perspectives.

Main Questions for Next Steps

What makes auditing disaster preparedness different than auditing any other policy area/measures?

How to contribute to the efforts towards enhancing accountability in this area and activities out of SAIs’ audit mandate?


Parallel/Coordinated Audit on Disaster Preparedness

Azerbaijan

Chile

India

Indonesia

Netherland

Philippines

Romania

Ukraine


Turkey (Lead)

Thanks for your Patience & Contributions

Arife COSKUN

Turkish Court of Accounts (TCA)Principal Auditor- Audit Manager

e-mail: [email protected]: +90 312 295 37 01


audit of disaster preparedness arife coskun turkish court of accounts principal auditor/ audit...

Documents

audit typescriticism

parallel audit

financial performance

draft audit guidelines

external audit reports

appropriate external

group aada

th meeting