1 / 4

KHADREP DIR: Background and Methodology

KHADREP DIR: Background and Methodology. Genesis of DIR: a) Previous reviews: EMU (2003) and Deloitte (2005) b) Project included in DIR as joint decision CMU-INT: design applied in various Regions Approach – Review of a) Grants b) Internal Procurement c) Financial Management.

melva
Download Presentation

KHADREP DIR: Background and Methodology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. KHADREP DIR: Background and Methodology • Genesis of DIR: a) Previous reviews: EMU (2003) and Deloitte (2005) b) Project included in DIR as joint decision CMU-INT: design applied in various Regions • Approach – Review of a) Grants b) Internal Procurement c) Financial Management

  2. KHADREP DIR Findings 1. Grants • List of activities provided by NACC; selection of activities to review – criteria • Interviews of implementing NGOs • Field visits and implementation Findings • Inadequate record keeping • Vast majority of activities with indicators of f/c/c • Evidence of fraud and corruption (duplicate/inflated claims, payment of bribes, unaccounted funds, etc.) • Circumvention of rules and procedures for award

  3. KHADREP DIR Findings 2. NACC’s internal procurement • Vast majority of activities with indicators of: a. collusion amongst bidders b. Biased/inconsistent bid evaluation c. Fraudulent misrepresentation by bidders

  4. KHADREP DIR Findings 3. Financial Management • Weaknesses identified: a. internal controls: bypassing internal controls, lack of clear separation of duties, missing internal audit function (despite provisions in DCA); b. accounting/audit procedures: outdated accounting system, lack of formal budget process, missing audit management letters; c. staff capacity: no capacity to review and audit financial returns submitted by CACCs and missing follow-up. • Review of selected transactions: irregularities found

More Related