Audit des projets
12
pages
English
Documents
Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe Tout savoir sur nos offres
12
pages
English
Documents
Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe Tout savoir sur nos offres
Special Report 1/2004 “FP5 (1998 to 2002)”Management of indirect RTD actions under the th5 Framework Programme (FP5) for Research and Technological Development (1998 to 2002)Presentation to Budgetary Control Committee (COCOBU) by Mr François COLLING (Member of the Court)European Parliament, Strasbourg, 19. April 2004CLU000034EN02-04PP-FP5.ppt 1COCOBU, 19.04.2004Agenda• Why an audit of FP5? Some background information ...• What is the budget and the structure of FP5?• What were the audit objectives and the approach?• Summary of observations and recommendations• ConclusionCLU000034EN02-04PP-FP5.ppt 2COCOBU, 19.04.2004IntroductionSome background information on the FP5 audit ...• first audit of an RTD framework programme looking at organisational, 1administrative and financial aspects in a horizontal manner• overall duration of the audit 19 months (start in October 2001 and completion in April 2003 – i.e. three months after official end of FP5); formal adoption by Court after contradictory procedure in February 2004• staff resources used for this audit: 176 person weeks• excellent co-operation with Commission, resulting in a number of the recommendations being already reflected in FP6 (2002 to 2006)1previous audits, for example on FP4, focussed on specific programmes within the same RTD framework programme such as “Joule-Thermie”, “Fisheries, Agriculture & agro-industrial research (FAIR)” or “Training and mobility of researchers ...
Voir
Publié par
Langue
English
Special Report 1/2004 “FP5 (1998 to 2002)”
Management of indirect RTD actions under the th 5 Framework Programme (FP5) for Research and Technological Development (1998 to 2002)
Presentation to Budgetary Control Committee (COCOBU) by Mr François COLLING (Member of the Court)
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
European Parliament, Strasbourg, 19. April 2004
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
1
Why an audit of FP5? Some background information ...
What is the budget and the structure of FP5?
What were the audit objectives and the approach?
Summary of observations and recommendations
Conclusion
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
Agenda
2
Introduction
Some background information on the FP5 audit ...
first auditof an RTD framework programmelooking at organisational, 1 administrative and financial aspects in ahorizontal manner
overall durationof the audit19 months(start in October 2001 and completion in April 2003 – i.e. three months after official end of FP5); formal adoptionby Court after contradictory procedurein February 2004
staff resources used for this audit:176 person weeks
excellent cooperation with Commission,resulting in a number of the recommendations being already reflected in FP6 (2002 to 2006)
1 previous audits, for example on FP4, focussed on specific programmes within the same RTD framework programme such as “JouleThermie”, “Fisheries, Agriculture & agroindustrial research (FAIR)” or “Training and mobility of researchers (TMR)
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
3
1 2
3
Budget and structure of FP5
Budget and structure of FP5
FP5 (1998 until 2002)had a total budget of14 960 million euro two sections of FP5 forEuropean Community(13 700 million euro, i.e. 91% of the budget) andEuratom direct actionscarried out by the Commission’s Joint Research Centre andindirect actionscarried out through contracts with third parties and cofinanced by the Community budget (95% of the budget within the EC section)
1 five different action typesfor indirect RTD actions 2 FP5 comprisesseven specific programmesand three(four thematic 3 horizontal programmes) jointly managed byfive DirectoratesGeneral: for Research, for Information Society, for Energy & Transport, for Enterprise and for Fisheries
“Shared cost RTD actions”, “Training Fellowships”, “Support to networks”, “Concerted actions”, “Accompanying measures” “Quality of life and management of living resources” (QoL), “Userfriendly information society” (IST), “Competitive and sustainable growth” (Growth), “Environment, Energy and sustainable development” (EESD) “Confirming the International role of Community research” (INCO), “Promotion of innovation and encouragement of SME participation” (SME), “Improving the human research potential and the socioeconomic knowledge base” (IHP)
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
4
Budget and structure of FP5
Programme periods and budgets of the successive European RTD framework programmes
FP4: 1994 to 1998
FP5: 1998 to 2002
FP6: 2002 to 2006
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
18 000
16 000
14 000
12 000
13 215
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
14 960
17 500
FP4 FP5 FP6
5
Audit objectives and approach
Audit objectives and approach for Special Report 1/2004 “FP5 (1998 to 2002)”
Was FP5 managedeconomically, efficiently and effectively? Specific audit objectivesaddressed: –Intervention mechanisms and rules applicable to the Community’s financial participation –Organisational structure and procedures and methods for indirect RTD actions –Information Technology (IT) systems –Internal control system –Reporting to senior management description of management systemby Court,testing of a sample of 53 contractsfor FP5 indirect RTD actions (of all DirectoratesGeneral and all specific programmes) throughout their “life cycle” (i.e. from reception of proposal to closure of contract) andanalysis of other audit evidence(such as review of legal basis, internal documents, surveys, analysis of statistics, etc.) onthespot audits of 28 contracts in 9 Member States(Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom)
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
6
Intervention mechanisms
Structure, procedures and methods
IT systems
Internal control system
Reporting
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
Observations and recommendations
Decisionby EP and Council,implementing regulationandmodel contractsadopted late andrulesfor fixing the Community’s financial participationoverly complicated
legal requirementsfor proposal, contract and project management unnecessarily complex (for instance large number of model contracts, contract signature by all participants)
insufficientcontrol over reality and accuracy of costs declared by final beneficiariesand lack ofsanctions
mandatorycertification of financial statements by an external auditorand introduction of visible and dissuasive sanctions(as deterrent to participants overclaiming costs) done in FP6
further strengthening ofjoint and several liabilityand drastic simplification ofcost systemsrecommended for a future FP7
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
7
Intervention mechanisms
Structure, procedures and methods
IT systems
Internal control system
Reporting
1 timetocontract(i.e. from reception of proposal to signing of contract) averaging8 to 9 months, and12 monthsfrom publication of the call for proposal
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
Observations and recommendations
fragmentation of programmesbetween DirectoratesGenerals resulting in a dilution of responsibilities, duplication of functions and increased need for coordination
significantorganisational problemsin starting phase and difficulties in recruiting staffwith required profiles
inefficientprocedures and administrative practicescontributing to 1 administrative delays and reducing the overall system efficiency – but in particular insufficientscientific monitoringof indirect RTD actions
simplification of organisational structure(“merger of FP activities in one entity”) and settingup ofcentralised support functions–partly done in FP6
streamlining procedures(aiming at halving of timetocontract) andstrengthening the role of the coordinator
concentrationof Community fundingon projects with highest likelihood of successbased on mandatory midterm evaluation by external experts
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
8
Intervention mechanisms
Structure, procedures and methods
IT systems
Internal control system
Reporting
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
Observations and recommendations
absence ofcommon or integrated information technology (IT) system inadequacyof the Commission’s (local and central) computerised systems for the proposal, contract and project management, not least due to insufficient investment technical and operational problemspersisted in most DirectoratesGeneral throughout the FP5 programme period, diminishing also the reliability of the Commission’s statistics
deployment of acommon and integrated IT systemfor all DirectoratesGeneral operating the RTD framework programmes– done for FP6
significant potential forefficiency gainsthrough phasing out of paperbased transactions during FP6 and fully electronic data exchange in a future FP7
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
9
Intervention mechanisms
Structure, procedures and methods
IT systems
Internal control system
Reporting
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
Observations and recommendations
improvements in internal controlthanks to gradual implementation of Commission’s internal control standards, but considerable differences between DirectoratesGeneral
tests of key controlsrevealed that not all had been operated effectively by Commission services and some controls were found to be lacking (mainly with regard to negotiation), but level of error not material
significant incidence ofoverdeclaration of costs by final beneficiariesandlate payments(by Commission but in particular by coordinators to other contractors)
simplificationof legal base, reducing need forexcessively detailed checks and verifications by Commission(which realistically cannot be carried out with the current level of staff resources)
joint definition ofrelevant and necessary controlsby all Commission services and use ofpreventive controls, as well as better monitoringof the operation of internal controls
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
10
Intervention mechanisms
Structure, procedures and methods
IT systems
Internal control system
Reporting
CLU000034EN0204PPFP5.ppt
Observations and recommendations
Lack ofcommon (or at least harmonised) operational objectives at the five DirectoratesGeneral for the research area and for the implementation of the RTD framework programmes
Commission’sreportingto Directors and DirectorsGeneral did not capture all relevant information andperformance indicatorsfor nonfinancial/budgetary aspects were missing
lack of proceduresto ensure that managementlevel information is preparedon timeand thatreportsare presentedin a standardised format
joint definition by the five DirectoratesGeneral ofoperational objectives and indicatorsallowing for a benchmarking of Commission services and programmes
development of a comprehensivereporting and controlling systemto permit an adequate monitoring of the RTD framework programmes and the efficient and effective functioning of internal controls
COCOBU, 19.04.2004
11
