Issue - meetings

2.15 pm

Annual Report by Chief Internal Auditor

The report summarises the outcome of the Internal Audit work in 2021/22 and provides an opinion on the Council's System of Internal Control. The opinion is one of the sources of assurance for the Annual Governance Statement.

The Audit and Governance Committee is RECOMMENDED to consider and endorse the annual report.

Recommendations agreed.

The Audit & Governance Committee considered a report by the Chief Internal Auditor summarising the outcome of the Internal Audit work carried out in 2021/22 and providing an opinion on the Council's System of Internal Control. The opinion was one of the sources of assurance for the Annual Governance Statement.

It was recommended that the Audit and Governance Committee consider and endorse the annual report.

Tessa Clayton, Audit Manager, Oxfordshire County Council, presented the report.

In the subsequent discussion, the following points were raised.

(a)  Referring to the overall opinion of “satisfactory assurance” regarding Oxfordshire County Council’s control environment and the arrangements for governance, risk management and control, it was proposed that there were some items which were not satisfactory, as indicated by their RAG (Red Amber Green) rating, including –

(i)    Well-Being and Sickness Management

(ii)  Facilities Management: cleaning asset management (and the short-term measures being adopted to address areas of concern – page 35 of the report)

(iii) Internal Audit Performance (Pages 35 & 36 of the report):

·       Actual performance for 2021/22 compared with performance targets;

·       Issuing of draft and final reports;

·       Below target performance for agreed management actions implemented within the agreed timescales;

·       Customer Satisfaction Questionnaires: the scoring system for levels of satisfaction was not clear; and

·       Director satisfaction with internal audit work: 2021 review to be completed in 2022/23.

(iv)Appendix 1: Overall Conclusion and Management Action Implementation Status of 2021/22 Audits

·       Differences in RAG ratings, for example: Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI-DSS): Green RAG rating; compared with –

§  IT “business as usual” Change Management: Amber RAG rating; and

§  Pensions Administration: Green RAG rating notwithstanding Reported Implementation Status as of 25 April 2022; and

·       Section 106 – Spend: Amber RAG rating – should this be Green?

The Chair noted that RAG ratings were determined according to priority and implementation.

Lorna Baxter, Director of Finance, noted that the RAG rating in the column in the table headed “Conclusion” was the rating for the status of the Audit.

(b)  Under the section headed “Opinion on Systems of Internal Control: basis of the audit opinion” on page 30 of the report, it was noted that the absence of a Senior Auditor who was on a long-term leave of absence appeared to have a disproportionate effect on the effectiveness of the service.

(c)   In Paragraph 41 of the report under the heading “Internal Audit Performance Caps”, officers clarified what was meant when it was stated that –

“The performance for the issue of draft reports has stayed the same as the previous year, however for the issue of finals this had reduced. We have reported in year to the committee that this was due to a positive reason whereby Corporate Directors, Senior Manager are now fully engaged in the audit report process and there is additional time needed now to fully engage with everyone and ensure a robust and quality management action plan is developed.”

(d)  The Chair proposed that the references to Section 106 Spend  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33