Agenda item

To present to Members the Council’s Provisional Internal Audit Operational Plan for 2015/16, and to confirm Internal Audit’s key performance indicators for 2015/16.

(Report attached)

Members received a report which presented the Redditch Borough Council Provisional Internal Audit Operational Plan for 2015/16 (‘the Plan’) and the key performance indicators for the Worcestershire Internal Audit Shared Service for the same period.

Officers introduced the report and advised that the final Plan would be presented to the next meeting of the Committee.  Members were advised that the Plan was risk-based and Officers were currently working with Heads of Service to identify risk exposures in their areas.

This year’s Plan was more flexible and slightly different to the format in previous years.  Increased shared and joint working arrangements between Redditch Borough Council and Bromsgrove District Council, and using the 2015/16 financial year as a year of realignment in regard to audit assignments, had ensured that both Councils benefitted from the efficiencies derived as a result of a better coordinated approach to audit delivery.

Members’ views were sought on the Plan and suggestions as to where they felt audit resources should be directed.  The Plan would be subject to review and change as the year progressed in consultation with the s151 Officer. 

The 2015/16 Plan was based on a resource allocation of 400 chargeable days, which represented a reduction of 84 days against the previous year’s plan.  The Plan allowed for flexibility in adjusting the number of audit days allocated where deemed necessary.  The Service Manager of the Worcestershire Internal Audit Shared Service was confident that the resource allocation was sufficient for him to provide management, external audit and those charged with governance with the assurances and coverage that they required over the system of internal control, annual governance and statement of accounts.

The Independent Member queried whether the Key Performance Indicators detailed in Appendix 2 to the report could be expanded in order to provide a more detailed picture of performance, and to reflect whether there had been an improvement in performance, particularly as departmental audits were not repeated on a like-for-like 12-month basis. 

Officers responded that, from an Internal Audit perspective, assurances were given on the work was which being undertaken and Internal Audit could only offer an opinion on that work.  From a corporate perspective, departments had individual service measures in place to monitor performance and costs, which they took relevant action on to address any issues of concern.  Costs benefits analyses were undertaken by services but it was not possible to compare these against other authorities as services between authorities varied greatly.  Customer satisfaction was also monitored via various means but at this stage there was not a full suite of performance measures in place, which as stated by Officers earlier in the meeting the Senior Management Team were currently in the process of developing.

Officers stated that internal audits were intended to look at the bigger picture but agreed that what the Independent Member was suggesting in relation to the possible development of Key Performance Indicators was something which could be subject to a separate piece of work.  Officers therefore agreed to take this issue away for discussion with the s151 Officer and to report back on this at the next meeting of the Committee. 

RESOLVED that

1)            the report be noted; and

2)            Officers report back at the next meeting on the outcome of discussions with the s151 Officer concerning the possible development of the Key Performance Indicators.