Contact your Parish Council
Appendix B
Summary of Internal Audit Evaluation of Control Environment – Assessed as Substantial or High
Service: Environment and Regulatory Services
Audit title: Building Control Fees
Report Issued: May 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To establish the arrangements for the estimation and charging of fees
· To establish and review the arrangements for the collection, receipting, banking and recording of fees and charges;
· To determine the controls for the adequate reconciliation of income to the Councils Financial Management System (Agresso);
· To establish and review the controls for updating and maintaining the APAS system;
Key Findings:
Key control improvements identified:
· Better resilience over the calculation of fees
· Accuracy and completeness of Surveyor timesheets
· Review and repair of the Building Control website information
Potential service improvements identified:
· Adoption of central payment procedures
· Utilisation of the DIP system for scanning and storing application files; and
· Upgrade of the APAS System
Level of Assurance at the time of the audit: Substantial
Management Response Summary:
All recommendations have been accepted and realistic timeframes for completion have been set. The management response is considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: November/December 2011
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Finance and Customer Services
Audit title: General Ledger – Budget Setting Process
Report Issued: May 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To establish that appropriate budget setting processes are in place.
· To establish that appropriate processes are in place to ensure savings identified within the 2011/12 budget setting process are achieved.
Key Findings: Overall the audit found that effective arrangements are in place to ensure the Council’s budget is robust, and to ensure that significant budgetary savings are achieved. However, several areas were identified where improvements could be made. For example, a reporting framework could be created between Corporate Finance and Performance and Scrutiny Team to ensure budget savings are reported consistently and accurately.
Level of Assurance at the time of the audit: Substantial
Management Response Summary: The recommendations were accepted for prompt implementation. The management response was considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: March 2012
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Finance and Customer Services
Audit title: Insurance
Report Issued: September 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To consider the means by which risks are identified and prevented/mitigated and how insurance requirements are agreed.
· To establish the adequacy of arrangements for the recording and administration of insurance claims and to verify through audit testing that claims are properly administered.
· To establish the adequacy of monitoring and reporting arrangements
· To establish the adequacy of arrangements for the annual review and negotiation of insurance premiums
Key Findings: It was considered that insurance arrangements were well controlled. The audit identified two areas where improvements could be made and these specifically related to the Council’s property portfolio.
Level of Assurance at the time of the audit: High
Management Response Summary: The two low risk recommendations were accepted; therefore the management response was adequate
Proposed Date for Follow-up: January 2012
Follow-up Assessment: High
Service: Environment and Regulatory Services
Audit title: Use of Consultants (non capital projects)
Report Issued: August 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To establish whether consultants and additional resources are procured / employed in accordance with relevant regulations, legislation and Council procedures
· To verify whether payments made to consultants and additional staff are authorised, accurate and within budget
· To consider whether the use of consultants and additional resources is adequately recorded, monitored and reported
Key Findings: The audit identified that the that controls over the arrangements are adequate but that improvements could be made to ensure there is more consistency and transparency over the use of consultants. The main issues arising were: there were no standard procedures in place for procuring the services of a consultant; there were limited checks completed on consultants prior to engagement; invoices were not always coded to the correct account code and there was no central monitoring of the use of consultants.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All of the recommendations were agreed or alternative action proposed. Actions were considered with advice from Human Resources where necessary and all of the agreed actions were due to be implemented by the end of March 2012. The management response was considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: April 2012
Level of Assurance at the time of the audit: Substantial
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Communications
Audit title: Website Management
Report Issued: September 2011
Audit Objectives: To establish and evaluate the arrangements for the ongoing accuracy, accessibility, security, interoperability and usability of the Council’s website
Key Findings: The audit established that the website provides an effective communication method for customers. Information / documents are easy to locate and further work is underway to improve the ‘findability’ of documents. The format of the website content is in line with the corporate brand and the number of online facilities is increasing in line with customer demand. The website provides a secure and reliable means of transacting with the Council.
A number of areas were identified where improvements could be made. For example an action plan setting out how the objectives to increase online transactions by 20% by 2015 is to be met. The website platform (Immediacy) is prone to intermittent faults and is no longer supported by the software provider and the planned development of the new Sharepoint 2010 platform had been delayed. There was no routine / systematic monitoring of the content published on the website to ensure that the information is accurate, up to date and customer friendly and the high number of the Information Champions with responsibility for amending and publishing information on the Council’s website could increase the risk of inconsistencies in the design and format of the content published.
Level of Assurance at the time of the audit: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All of the recommendations were accepted. Some of the recommendations were due to be implemented by the end of March 2012 and the remaining recommendations will be implemented when the new website platform is in place. The management response is considered to be adequate
Proposed Date for Follow-up: April 2012
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Finance and Customer Services
Audit title: Payments to Suppliers - Transparency
Report Issued: July 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To establish compliance with the relevant guidelines and internal procedures for the collation and publication of data;
· To confirm the accuracy of published information and the controls over submission of future data;
Key Findings: A number of weaknesses were identified during the audit affecting the accuracy and completeness of the data being published. Proactive measures were taken by officers during the audit to improve controls and to implement more robust accuracy checks over the publication of data. As a result, the recommendations in the report were based on the updated procedures and included:
· Embedding of robust checks over accuracy & completeness of data;
· Obtaining advice and guidance for redaction of potentially sensitive data;
· Independent management sign-off/authorisation of data reports; and
· Republishing previous spending reports in line with the updated procedures;
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All recommendations were accepted and implementation was expected for December 2011 / January 2012. The management response was therefore considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: January 2012
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Democratic Services
Audit title: Elections
Report Issued: August 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To establish compliance with Election regulations and legislation;
· To establish compliance with operational procedures and policies;
· To review and evaluate the Elections process from pre-election to closing;
· To review the financial procedures and accounting arrangements over the Elections;
Key Findings: All procedures were found to be operating efficiently and effectively. Only one recommendation was made within the report, to ensure that all future payments to election staff (employed to assist in the running of the election) are made via the Council’s payroll system (iTrent).
Level of Assurance at the time of the audit: Substantial
Management Response Summary: The Head of Democratic Services and the Registration Services Manager agreed to pursue the necessary arrangements with Payroll, as soon as possible. The management response was considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: May 2012
Follow-up Assessment: High
Service: Parks & Open Spaces
Audit title: Parks Income
Report Issued: October 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To establish and evaluate the arrangements in place for the booking of sports facilities within the parks
· To establish income arrangements and whether all income received is banked and reconciled
· To consider the security of income at each park
Key Findings: The audit confirmed that the cash income received at the pitch and putt site at Mote Park is fully accounted for and regularly reconciled to banking records and that the security of income at the pitch and putt office is adequate. The audit also confirmed that income from fishing is received in accordance with the agreement.
A number of areas were identified where improvements were needed. For example: projected parks income for 2011/12 was unlikely to be achieved and needed to be re-evaluated; legal and public liability insurance documentation relating to the funfair in 2011/12 was not in place when the event commenced and the procedures for receipting, reconciling and banking of bowls income (season tickets and pay and play bowls) needed to be documented and the bowls income received in 2011/12 needed to be verified to ensure all bowls income due in 2011/12 was received.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All of the recommendations were agreed and the actions were due to be completed by April 2012. The management response was considered therefore to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: April 2012
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Human Resources
Audit title: Terminations of Employment
Report Issued: November 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To establish whether terminations are approved and processed in accordance with relevant employment legislation and Council procedures
· To establish whether all termination payments are authorised and accurate
Key Findings: The report concluded that terminations of employment are properly dealt with and that termination payments are correctly calculated. Recommendations were made in relation to of the documentation held for each termination. For example each termination should be supported by a “rationale for redundancy / early retirement” form and a termination form. The termination form should set out the details of the termination payments to be paid.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All of the recommendations were agreed or alternative controls proposed. The recommendations were due to be fully implemented by September 2012. The management response was, therefore, considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: July 2012
Follow-up Assessment: To be completed July 2012
Service: IT Services
Audit title: PC & Internet Controls
Report Issued: October 2011
Audit Objectives: To establish that:-
· appropriate policies and procedures are in place for PC and Internet Controls with responsibilities clearly defined;
· access to PCs and to the data stored on them is confined to authorised personnel and are appropriate for operational needs;
· PCs are used in a secure manner and the data and software are well protected;
· the Council’s Internet connection presents no risk the Council’s network and IT Systems;
Key Findings: The report concluded that strong controls are in place over the technical security and access controls to IT facilities – such as the corporate network, email, internet and virus-protection.
Recommendations were made relating to the administration and support processes; for example implementing consistent IT standards for shared services and partnership working; to review and refresh awareness of the corporate Computer Use Policy and to update and maintain key documents for recording IT licenses, software, systems guidance and purchases.
Additional recommendations were made in relation to new starters and leavers IT procedures; procedures to improve evidence and compliance/understanding of the IT policies for all staff; and access procedures for the potential investigation of e-mail and internet logs.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: The audit recommendations were responded to positively and a detailed action plan submitted by the Manager accepting all recommendations and setting out key actions. Each action was assigned to a relevant Officer/Manager with all actions being planned for implementation by April 2012.
Management response was considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: April 2012
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Housing
Audit Title: Housing Options
Report Issued: November 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To establish and evaluate whether the Housing Register is maintained in accordance with the process set out in the Housing Allocation Policy.
· To establish and evaluate the process in place which enables applicants to bid for properties through Kent Homechoice website.
· To verify through testing that applicants are allocated a property in accordance with their eligibility and points awarded.
Key Findings: The audit concluded that there are strong procedures of control in place to manage the Housing Register and the Kent Home Choice website and this is reflected in the report as only one recommendation was made.
The audit established that only Golding Homes provide information on re-lets to enable the Deed of Nomination rights drawn up between the Registered Social Land (RSL) and the Council to be monitored. The report therefore recommends that all RSL’s should provide this information.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: The recommendation was agreed to and prompt action proposed, therefore the management response was considered to be adequate
Proposed Date for Follow-up: May 2012
Follow-up Assessment: High
Service: Capital Projects
Audit title: High Street Regeneration Project
Report Issued: January 2012
Audit Objectives:
- To confirm the governance arrangements over delivery and management of the project;
- To ensure that the planning, monitoring and control of all aspects of the project are in place to achieve the project objectives on time and to the specific cost and quality requirements;
Key Findings: Testing conducted during the audit confirmed that comprehensive management and monitoring controls are in place over the project. Three recommendations were made in the report to support and enhance the project monitoring and management controls:
- To progress the formalisation and issue of the Early Contractor Involvement contract;
- To more clearly outline the roles and responsibilities within the project governance structure; and
- To review and update/append the PID to reflect significant changes/deviations from the original plan;
It was concluded that, at the time of the audit, satisfactory progress had been made towards completion of the programmed project works, in line with the projected costs and time/quality assurances.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All recommendations were accepted and action was proposed to address each recommendation. The audit recommendations relating to the High Street project were programmed for implementation for March 2012.
The Audit report will also be used to inform a more general review of the Council’s project management toolkit later in 2012.
The management response is considered to be adequate
Proposed Date for Follow-up: April 2012
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Revenues & Benefits
Audit title: NNDR – Collections & Refunds
Report Issued: December 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To identify, document, evaluate and test the key controls surrounding the NNDR system in respect to collection and refunds;
· To assess compliance with Statutory Regulations in regards to NNDR collections and refunds, including compliance with the Council’s financial rules;
· To review the accuracy of refund calculations and payments.
· To assess the controls surrounding the Collection Account.
Key Findings: The reconciliation between Agresso and Academy was not being completed on a monthly basis and the reconciliation was not being checked and authorised by a second person independent of the reconciliation process. Recommendation was also made to ensure that refunds over £40k, including multiple payments to the same creditor, are all dual authorised by the Head of Finance and Customer Services prior to payment.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All of the recommendations were agreed. The recommendations are due to be implemented by the end of February 2012.
The management response is considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: March 2012
Follow-up Assessment: High
Service: Cultural Services
Audit Title: Events Management
Report Issued: February 2012
Audit Objectives:
· To verify whether all Council events are properly managed
· To establish whether all events are adequately resourced and there is effective budgetary control over expenditure
· To establish whether all events income is fully accounted for
Key Findings: The audit concluded that controls over Event Management are strong and that the Proms in the Park and the Mela events held in 2011 were successfully delivered to a high standard. The audit also acknowledged that the plans for the Olympic Torch Relay and associated events are progressing well and an external events manager was being sought coordinate the events.
A number of low risk recommendations were made within the report to help improve the management of future events and to focus management attention on outstanding actions that need to be taken by event managers in relation to the events planned for 2012.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All of the recommendations were agreed. The agreed actions were due to be implemented by July 2012. The management response was considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: July 2012
Follow-up Assessment: To be completed July 2012
Service: Theatre and Events
Audit title: Hazlitt Theatre & Arts Centre
Report Issued: January 2012
Audit Objectives:
- To establish and test the systems in place to control and account for income from ticket sales, hires and the youth theatre
- To review and evaluate the procedures of control over the booking of shows and payment of artists
- To establish the adequacy of controls over budget monitoring with regard to the individual show accounts.
- To review and evaluate the arrangements in place over the management of the Hazlitt Bar
Key Findings: The report concluded that controls over the arrangements were generally strong. Several areas were identified where improvements could be made; for example there was a need to ensure that purchase orders are raised consistently and in a timely manner for goods and services; that show accounts are reconciled to Agresso and the reasonableness of petty cash and credit card transactions is reviewed due on the high level of usage.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All recommendations were accepted and realistic timeframes for completion were set. The management response was considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: June 2012
Follow-up Assessment: To be completed June 2012
Service: Human Resources
Audit title: Payroll (Maidstone & Swale)
Report Issued: January 2012
Audit Objectives:
· To establish and evaluate the governance arrangements for the effective management of the Payroll function across the partnership
· To examine, evaluate and test the adequacy and effectiveness of the payroll system’s internal controls to ensure that:
- The payroll procedures operate within the requirements of the Councils Constitution - Financial Procedure Rules.
- All appointments, amendments and leavers are valid, accurate and authorised.
- Pay documentation is suitably authorised, appropriate and accurate.
- Pay has been calculated correctly, completely and promptly
- The payments made using the BACS system have been made securely and correctly.
Key Findings: Some minor issues were identified during the audit where improvement was needed. For example there was a back-log of scanning of payroll documentation into the corporate document imaging system (Anite); the monitoring of the net differences report in November 2011 failed to identify a significant error on an overtime payment and expenses claimed by Swale employees were not always claimed in a timely manner and were not always supported by relevant receipts.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: The three recommendations made in the report were agreed or were implemented during the audit. The management response was considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: June 2012
Follow-up Assessment: To be completed June 2012
Service: Revenues
Title: Benefits Overpayment & Recovery
Report Issued: January 2012
Audit Objectives:
- To establish if benefit overpayments are processed in accordance with the agreed procedures.
- To verify that the categorization of overpayments is accurate and therefore correctly reported to DWP.
- To assess the adequacy of the recovery of benefits overpayments
Key Findings: The report concluded that there are good controls in place to help prevent the overpayment of benefits and testing on a sample of overpayments confirmed that the categorisation of overpayments is in line with DWP requirements. However, the audit concluded that the recovery process is in need of improvement to support the progression of debts through the various stages of recovery.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: A comprehensive response was received with all recommendations accepted, therefore the management response was considered to be adequate
Proposed Date for Follow-up: May 2012
Follow-up Assessment: Substantial
Service: Corporate Finance
Audit title: Creditors & Credit Cards
Report Issued: February 2012
Audit Objectives:
· To assess the accuracy of creditor’s payments made during the financial year to date – via data matching testing using IDEA software;
· To determine the accuracy and completeness of requisitions, via sample testing;
· To determine the controls over the issue, use and payment of credit cards;
Key Findings: The report concluded that the integrity of creditor’s system data is strong. One recommendation was made to correct a number of invalid VAT numbers identified during the audit.
The operational controls over credit cards were considered to be robust and controls are in place over checking of transactions and reconciliation of the monthly statements. However, as spending on credit cards increases, a number of control improvements should be adopted to provide better monitoring, reporting and control of credit card usage. Key recommendations made in the report related to the need to formalise and adopt a credit card usage policy; to improve credit card monitoring records; and to implement a reporting process to identify and monitor total spend and types of spend.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All recommendations made within the report were accepted in full by the Manager. Key actions include agreement of a formal credit card policy and implementation of checks by the Senior Accountant over the administration of credit cards and credit card documentation.
Action had already been completed to correct invalid VAT numbers identified within the audit testing.
The management response was considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: September 2012
Follow-up Assessment: To be completed September 2012.
Service: Parks and Leisure
Audit title: Mote Park Regeneration Project
Report Issued: March 2012
Audit Objectives:
- To confirm the governance arrangements over delivery and management of the project.
- To ensure that the planning, monitoring and control of all aspects of the project are in place to achieve the project objectives on time and to the specific cost and quality requirements.
Key Findings: At the time of audit fieldwork, satisfactory progress had been made towards completion of the programmed project work in line with the projected costs and against the project plan
The report concluded that controls over the arrangements were strong. Testing conducted during the audit confirmed that comprehensive management and monitoring controls were in place. Only one recommendation was made in the report and this related to the need by the Head of Finance & Customer Services to confirm that capital funding will be in line with that approved by Cabinet.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: The recommendation was accepted and a prompt action date agreed. Therefore the management response was considered to be adequate
Proposed Date for Follow-up: August 2012
Follow-up Assessment: To be completed August 2012.
Service: Finance
Audit title: Bank reconciliation
Report Issued: March 2012
Audit Objectives:
· To establish whether appropriate procedures and documented procedures notes are in place for completion of the bank reconciliation process.
· To establish and evaluate whether the bank accounts are being adequately controlled.
· To establish whether the bank accounts are being reconciled in a timely manner on a daily and monthly basis; that discrepancies are identified and resolved in a timely manner and that all bank account reconciliations are appropriately reviewed and approved.
Key Findings: The controls over the Bank Reconciliation process are strong. For example the bank accounts are closely monitored on a daily basis to identify discrepancies and bounced payments; all discrepancies are investigated on a timely basis; the daily and monthly reconciliations are completed on a timely basis and the monthly reconciliations are approved by the Senior Accountant every month.
There are also strong controls in place over the security of the Bank-line system; there is good separation of duties surrounding the processing and authorisation of CHAPS payments and cheque stationery is held securely.
Level of Assurance Issued: High
Management Response Summary: Not required
Proposed Date for Follow-up: May 2012
Follow-up Assessment: High. The follow up to the bank reconciliation audit enabled changes to the bank reconciliation procedures arising from the new banking contract to be documented.
Service: Revenues
Audit Title: Council Tax – Collections and Refunds
Report Issued: April 2012
Audit Objectives:
· To establish whether the collection of Council Tax income and the refund of any payments are carried out in accordance with Statutory Regulations and the Council’s Financial Procedure Rules.
· To identify, evaluate and test the controls relating to the collection of Council Tax.
· To determine whether the Council Tax income is subject to regular and adequate reconciliation.
· To verify that all refund payments are legitimate, accurately calculated and authorised.
Key Findings: The report concluded that controls over the arrangements are strong. The records tested were accurate and up-to-date with appropriate procedures in place.
A number of areas were identified where improvements could be made:
· The introduction of automatic interfaces with Academy for processing deductions from benefits, payments through bailiffs and the write back of returned direct debits;
· Refund arrangements for bills with credit values caused by changes to benefit entitlement; and
· Improved control on the movement of funds between Council Tax accounts.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: Of the 4 recommendations made in the report, 3 were fully accepted and 1 was not accepted, as adequate alternative controls were considered to be in place.
The report recommended that Council Tax bills showing a credit balance because of benefit changes should be referred to the benefit section for review. However, the Head of Revenues and Benefits considered that a quality assurance process already exits and additional checks would not represent value for money. This was considered to be acceptable.
It is concluded that the management response was adequate and realistic timeframes for completion was set.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: September 2012
Follow-up Assessment: To be completed September 2012
Service: Finance
Audit Title: General Ledger – Feeder Systems and Journals
Report Issued: March 2012
Audit Objectives:
· To establish and evaluate the controls over electronic inputs to the general ledger
· To evaluate the adequacy over reconciliations between the general ledger and feeder systems
· To ensure that journal transfers between financial codes and the general ledger are correct and appropriately evidenced
· To evaluate the backup routines in place for information contained within the general ledger
Key Findings: The audit concluded that controls over General Ledger (feeder systems and journals) are strong. Two recommendations were made within the report in relation to the checking and authorising of the monthly reconciliations for Academy and Payroll and the need to update the general ledger’s business continuity plan and the disaster recovery plan.
Level of Assurance Issued: Substantial
Management Response Summary: All of the recommendations have been agreed. The agreed actions are due to be implemented by the end of June 2012.
The management response is considered to be adequate.
Proposed Date for Follow-up: August 2012
Follow-up Assessment: To be completed August 2012
Other audit project work
Service: Business Improvement
Audit title: Interreg (Mosaic Project) April 2011 to March 2012
Report issued: Return submitted – July 2011, January 2012 & March 2012
Background:
The Council is a participant in the ‘Mosiac Project which will provide a detailed socio-economic map of Kent to assist resource planning and focus on service delivery. The Council receives 50% funding from the European Union. The Council’s contribution is primarily ‘in kind’, being the time of the officers spent developing the project.
Audit objectives:
Internal Audit act as the ‘First Level Controller’ and are responsible for auditing all of the
claims for European funding. This is to ensure that the claims are correct and comply with strict evidence requirements to support each claim. The FLC, on auditing each claim, is required to agree and sign off the claim prior to payment approval. The claims are made every six months.
Key findings:
The claims were reviewed and evidence was confirmed to support the claims.
Service: Legal Services Partnership
Audit title: Legal Services – Time recording arrangements (IKEN)
Report Issued: September 2011
Background:
The Legal Services Partnership has implemented a case management system called IKEN. The legal services partnership was established under the Mid Kent Improvement Partnership (MKIP). MKIP requested that Internal Audit complete a consultancy review of the use of the time recording system.
The outcomes from the review were considered by the MKIP Management Board.
Service: Corporate/Section 151 Officer
Audit title: National Fraud Initiative (NFI) – data matching exercise 2010/11
Report issued: August 2011
Background:
The National Fraud Initiative is a biennial data matching exercise carried out on behalf of the Audit Commission. The Council is required to submit a broad range of data which is matched against other data sets that the Commission has obtained from a number of sources. Data sets provided by the Council have included Benefits, Payroll, Creditors, Residents Parking Permits, Licensing, Insurance Claims and Register of Electors.
Audit objectives:
The audit sought to confirm that data matches were being appropriately and promptly investigated.
Key findings:
At the time of reporting (8 August 2011), 97% of the data matches had been investigated and closed. The exercise identified 3 frauds and 14 errors totalling £72,193. Of this figure, £49,200 related to just one Housing Benefit case.
Service: Environmental Services
Audit title: Fuel Card Theft
Report Issued: December 2011
Audit Objectives:
· To investigate the reported theft of a fuel card at the Depot
· To identify the extent of the fraudulent transactions reported
· To recommend improvements in control to protect the Council against future theft
Key Findings: A number of key control weaknesses were identified which allowed the fuel card to be stolen from a works vehicle and allowed the card to be used to purchase fuel and other items.
A number of security measures have been introduced by the Depot Management to prevent a fuel card being stolen or used for fraudulent transactions in the future.
Level of Assurance Issued: N/A
Management Response Summary: A management response was not required for this investigation. However, since completing the investigation the Depot’s Operations Manager has confirmed that all of the recommended security measures are now in place and that a new batch of chip and pin fuel cards has now been issued.