Agenda item

The committee is requested to consider and note the audit plan progress report.

The CGAC received and considered the agenda report and its appendix of the audits completed since the previous meeting.

This item was presented by Mr S James (Internal Audit and Corporate Investigations Manager).

Mr T Radcliffe (Human Resources Manager) was also in attendance.

Mr James summarised the report as follows:

·         The need to remove four audits from the 2019-2020 audit plan due to a variety of reasons as set out in para 2.2 and those items would be included in the 2020-2021 audit plan.

·         The figures in para 2.4 should in fact read as 24 not 25 full audits and 35 not 36 reviews.

·         The report addressed (a) four completed reports: (i) housing benefit overpayment recovery, (ii) HR recruitment and selection, (iii) treasury management and (iv) asset management; (b) three follow-ups: (i) trade waste, (ii) gifts, hospitality and car loans and (iii) GDPR; (c) one position statement: building control.

·         The recruitment and selection HR audit was the only one of the four which included an overall assurance rating level of limited assurance having identified two high risk exceptions: (a) completion of checklist, take-up of references, qualification checking and (b) checking of criminal convictions and handling/retention of DBS certificates; and one low risk exception: ensuring that version control dates were applied to guidance documents.

Accordingly Mr Radcliffe was present to answer members’ questions.  

Mr Radcliffe confirmed that the issues pertaining to the high risk exceptions in (a) and (b) above were being addressed. As stated in the agreed actions, the HR team had been instructed about the matters. Adherence to these requirements would be monitored, as would implementation of reforms to procedures and processes to comply with the relevant practice guidance on DBS retention and ensure that duly appointed applicants provided evidence of their stated qualifications. Where such qualifications were not proved this might be a potential misconduct issue to address. With reference to objective 4 on page 70, he explained the timescales for sending contracts to successful applicants, which followed a prompt verbal offer of employment to the successful applicant. The HR team was sufficiently resourced and able to respond efficiently to the inevitable fluctuations in the recruitment process.  

·         The housing benefit overpayment recovery audit had two medium risk exceptions with a reasonable assurance rating.

Members had no questions.

·         The treasury management audit gave rise to no issues and had an assurance rating.

Members had no questions.

·         The asset management audit gave rise to no issues and had an assurance rating.

Members had no questions.

·         The follow-up audit reports in respect of (i) trade waste and (ii) gifts and hospitality declared that all outstanding issues had been addressed. That was mainly the case with the GDPR follow-up audit; a review of CDC’s data protection policy was underway.

Members had no questions.

·         The building control audit was the subject of a position statement in view of the ongoing work being undertaken by the Divisional Manager and Finance as stated in para 3.3 on page 78. As a result the audit could not be completed until the 2020-2021 financial year. It was anticipated that the vacant post of building control manager would be (if not already) filled imminently.  

In response to a member’s question about whether this service had too much capacity to balance its books, Mrs Belenger explained that it was required to break even over a three-year cycle. The new divisional manager was looking at how data was recorded and the practices which were being followed in other West Sussex building control teams. 

Decision

The CGAC voted unanimously to make the resolution set out below.

RESOLVED

That the performance against the 2019-2020 Audit Plan be noted.