Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit (May 2009)

Informations

• Publié par: Onfo
• Nombre de lectures: 31
• Langue: English

Extrait

                                                                       

AUDIT OF THE SECRETARIAT OF THE FRANCOPHONIE SUMMIT Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade of Canada Chief Audit Executive Bureau (ZBD)

 

 

 

 

March 2009  

 

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

TABLE OF CONTENTS

        EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... i   1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background .................................................................................................1 1.2 Key Issues Impacting on the Secretariat .....................................................2 1.3 Overall Assessment of Controls in Place ....................................................4   2.0 OBSERVATIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED .............................................. 5 2.1 Governance and Strategic, Operational and Contingency Plans.................5 2.2 Budget .........................................................................................................6 2.3 Financial Controls........................................................................................7 2.4 Contracting Process ....................................................................................8 2.5 Process of Allocating Contributions to Special Projects ..............................8 2.6 Greening....................................................................................................10 2.7 External Communications .........................................................................12 2.8 Issues Regarding Hotel Reservations .......................................................12   3.0 CONCLUSION.............................................................................................. 14   APPENDIX A – ABOUT THE AUDIT ................................................................. 15   APPENDIX B - SUMMARY OF LESSONS LEARNED AND ACTIONS RECOMMENDED BY MANAGEMENT ..............................................................22  

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   During the winter of 2005-2006, the federal government and the Government of Quebec concluded an agreement on the Francophonie Summit to be held in Quebec City in October 2008. This agreement established a Steering Committee composed of two representatives of Canada, one acting as its chair; two representatives of Quebec, one acting as its vice-chair; and one representative of the Government of New Brunswick. The members of the Steering Committee were appointed by their respective governments.   The Organization Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit (hereafter “the Secretariat”) was established to ensure that all activities leading up to the  Summit, as well as the Summit itself, were appropriately supervised and carried out with no significant problems. All Secretariat employees were considered to be DFAIT employees. The Director General of the Summit Secretariat was also a member of the Steering Committee.   An internal audit of the Secretariat was required by the Treasury Board of Canada. The objectives of this audit were to ensure that the Secretariat had put in place the controls necessary for the appropriate operation of the organization and that those controls were working correctly. The audit was conducted between May 7 and August 15, 2008.   The details of the audit mandate, including the objectives, scope, methodology and criteria used for the audit, are presented inAnnex A – About the Audit.     The audit team was able to obtain reasonable assurance that the Secretariat put a control framework in place necessary for the effective operation of the organization. The Secretariat was successful in fulfilling their mandate as evidenced by the success of the Summit which concluded prior to completing this report.   The following are positive examples of the Secretariat’s management framework: ƒ The Secretariat had a well structured team of directors who were motivated to succeed in making the 2008 Francophonie Summit in Quebec City a resounding success. ƒ The Secretariat put in place the controls necessary to ensure sound management of its activities. ƒ The operational directorates developed and used management tools appropriate to the strategic and operational levels, in order to ensure appropriate and effective planning and monitoring of activities leading to the organization of the Summit.

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT i  

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

ƒSecretariat used resources in compliance with the policies and directives  The of the Treasury Board of Canada and theFinancial Administration Actand observed the terms and conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the governments of Canada, Quebec and New Brunswick.   ISSUES FOR IMPROVEMENT     The Secretariat did not develop an integrated risk management framework at the time it was created. Such a framework would have served to provide assurance that risks were identified, managed and communicated within the Secretariat as a whole, in order for the organization to meet its overall objectives.   The following information was not included in the report on financial performance presented to the Steering Committee:   • Expensescommitment ("soft commitments") in order to show the subject to adjusted available balance; and •Budget and subsequent amendments so that the reader is able to identify   differences between budgeted costs and actual costs incurred.   A table of budgetary risks was not included in the financial performance report presented to the Steering Committee to provide an overall picture of the financial risks, operational costs and possible final balance. At the time of the audit, as of July 31, 2008, the probable deficit in the event that all potential risks materialized was estimated at $0.6 million.   The file of documentary evidence concerning the assessment and the decision- making process for the allocation of contributions related to the special projects financial assistance program was incomplete. Therefore it is not possible to verify that the process was conducted in accordance with Government of Canada policies and directives.   The report outlines improvements in the areas of budgeting, contracting, documenting the process of allocating contributions to special projects and greening. These improvements are written as lessons learned and cover the seven components of the audit. These lessons learned should be taken into consideration in order to improve the controls necessary for the operation of other organizations similar to the Secretariat. These lessons may also be of interest to other Bureaux in the Department that manage summits and conferences.            

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT ii  

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

M AIN LESSONS LEARNED     1. To improve the governance of the Secretariat, risk management should be introduced in the first stages following the creation of an organization secretariat.     2. To provide the Steering Committee with complete and value-added financial information on the situation of the Secretariat, it is recommended that: ƒ all financial information be integrated to provide a consolidated picture of financial risks, operational costs and available balance; and ƒinformation (such as the initial budget and subsequent relevant  all amendments, breakdown of expenditures by activity and expenditures subject to commitment, or "soft commitments") be presented in the financial performance report for the Summit.   3.    To provide Secretariat staff with appropriate control tools and to demonstrate transparency of the process, it is recommended that the formal documentation methodology established to support the evaluations and decisions made about the allocation of contributions to special projects be applied at all levels and maintained on file.   Management has reviewed this draft report and is in agreement with the observations and lessons learned. The actions recommended by management to address the lessons learned can be found in Appendix B. The complete list of lessons learned is also in Appendix B.

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT iii  

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

  1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 B ACKGROUND   The 12th Summit of Heads of State and Government of Countries Using French as a Common Language (hereafter “the Summit”) was held in Quebec City in October 2008, bringing together many heads of state and their delegations. This important meeting demanded considerable organizational capability, and it was to that end that the Organization Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit – Quebec City 2008 (hereafter the Secretariat) was formed. This temporary organization, established jointly by the governments of Canada, Quebec and New Brunswick, was to ensure that all activities leading up to the Summit as well as the Summit itself were appropriately managed and conducted with no unforeseen events.   The cooperation between the three governments was structured by the following two agreements: ƒ Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec on the 2008 Quebec City Summit of La Francophonie, reached in January 2006; and ƒ of understanding between the governments of Canada, Memorandum Quebec and New Brunswick on the preparation, organization, conduct and administrative and financial details of the 12th Summit of Heads of State and Government of Countries Using French as a Common Language signed in June 2007.   The Secretariat was given an operating budget of $32.75 million. It was agreed that the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade of Canada (DFAIT) and the Government of Quebec would each contribute $16 million and the Government of New Brunswick $0.75 million.   As stipulated in the memorandums of understanding, the Secretariat was headed by an Organizing Committee (hereafter “the Steering Committee” as commonly referred to by the Secretariat) that was composed of two representatives of Canada, two representatives of Quebec, and one representative of New Brunswick. This committee was chaired by an official representative of the Prime Minister of Canada and vice-chaired by the assistant deputy minister for Bilateral Affairs and La Francophonie at the Quebec Ministry of International Relations (MRI). Under the memorandums of understanding, it was agreed that the general mandate of the Steering Committee would be to prepare for the Summit and to ensure it ran smoothly.   The mandate of the Secretariat was to implement and coordinate the preparation, organization and conduct of the Summit and the peripheral events connected to the Summit. The senior managers of the Secretariat were

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT1    

 

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

appointed by their respective governments of Canada, Quebec and New Brunswick, however for the conduct of business, the director general of the Secretariat reported directly to the Steering Committee, of which he was a member. The memorandums of understanding governing the Secretariat’s operations, stipulated that they must comply with the policies and directives issued by the Treasury Board of Canada. In this regard, each government designated a representative to ensure that the administrative and financial terms and conditions of the Secretariat in relation to legal and financial obligations were applied.   1.2 K EY ISSUES IMPACTING ON THE S ECRETARIAT   The governments of Canada, Quebec and New Brunswick financed the 12th Francophonie Summit. One of the main challenges the Secretariat faced was the complexity of the decision-making process of the tripartite Steering Committee. This committee, that included representatives of the different levels of government in order to reflect the structure of the public assistance granted, served as a mid-level decision making body between the Secretariat management and the political authorities. Consequently, there was a significant risk of the Secretariat facing complications in the operational planning of the activities necessary for the smooth operation of the Summit.   The following are examples of activities that awaited approval by the Steering Committee that had a significant impact on the Secretariat’s operations: ƒ official Summit program – submitted in June 2007, still under discussion in the July 2008; ƒ program of the Ministerial Conference of La Francophonie (CMF) – the submitted in October 2007 published in April 2008; ƒ greening of the Summit, method of funding carbon credits, and target the objectives (carbon zero trend or carbon neutral event) – submitted in November 2007; the calculation of carbon credits had not been completed as of December 2008; ƒ the individual approval of each component of the communication plan prior to implementation – submitted in November 2007, approved May 2008; ƒ assembly of  thepromotional bags for delegates – submitted in January 2008, still under discussion in July 2008; ƒ theavailability of liaison officers from the three governments - submitted in  April 2008; ƒ the imagery for ceremonial rooms and media galleries – submitted in June 2008; and ƒof official documents – submitted in March the language of communication 2008 (approved in July 2008 but in question until August 2008).  

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT2    

 

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

The following opportunities were not realized because of delays in the decision- making process: ƒpromotional video of the Summit was delayed until the approval of the  The spring 2008. As a result, the Secretariat was not able to produce the DVDs for the Journée de la Francophonie on March 20, 2007, and ship them on time to foreign embassies and delegations. ƒ The absence of a logo until January 31, 2008, submitted for approval in October 2008, caused lost opportunities for visibility, notably at the Ministerial Conference of La Francophone (CMF) in Vientiane, Laos, in November 2007. ƒ launch of the special projects financial assistance program was delayed, The causing the amount of $100,000 from the 2007-2008 fiscal year to lapse from the Secretariat’s budget.   In 2003, the decision that Quebec City would be the host of the 12th Francophonie Summit was taken. In 2006, before the Secretariat was set up, contracts were signed with Quebec City hotels to reserve accommodation and restaurant services. This was done based on the experience of previous summits held in Quebec City in 1987 and 2001, taking into account the high number of delegates at those summits. It was essential to reserve a large number of hotel rooms, as Quebec City would also be celebrating its 400th anniversary during the same period and many visitors and events were anticipated. DFAIT was unable to make the necessary reservations at the time and the Government of Quebec agreed to make the reservations and pay the required deposits.   In order to meet the requirements of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) 1 with respect to hotel security, the contracts for the hotel rooms had to be amended both before and after the creation of the Secretariat. For security reasons, the RCMP required that certain hotels be fully booked and selected hotels had to be accessible only to persons accredited for the Summit during a specified period.

                                                  1.Agency responsible for the security of the heads of state and government during their visit to Canada.  

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT3    

 

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

1.3 O VERALL ASSESSMENT OF CONTROLS IN PLACE   The Secretariat met their mandate by: ƒ putting in place a set of controls that could provide for sound management of the activities; ƒand using appropriate management tools for the operational  developing directorates; ƒ complying with the terms and conditions agreed to in the memorandums of understanding, especially those of an administrative and financial nature; and ƒ utilizing resources in compliance with the policies and directives of the Treasury Board Secretariat of Canada and theFinancial Administration Act.   Although the overall assessment of the Secretariat identified no significant items that might cast doubt on the Secretariat’s control framework, it identified certain findings that should be taken into account in the interest of improved management practices and performance. These findings based on the audit objectives, are presented in detail in the next section of this report.   Since the audit of the Secretariat ended on August 15, 2008, just over two months before the Summit was held, the recommendations have been approached from the perspective of lessons learned which may be of use in future summits or other similar events.       

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT4   

 

 

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

  2.0 OBSERVATIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED 2.1   ECNANREVGO AND STRATEGIC , OPERATIONAL AND CONTINGENCY PLANS   The Secretariat had a well structured team of directors who were motivated to succeed in making the 2008 Francophonie Summit in Quebec City a resounding success. The expertise and experience of the individuals selected to fill key positions within the Secretariat were major assets for the functioning of the operating directorates. The Secretariat management put in place the strategic and operational tools required to ensure appropriate and effective planning and monitoring of the activities involved in organizing the Summit. However, the following situations have been noted as requiring improvement.   I NTEGRATED RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK   At the commencement of the Secretariat operation, an integrated risk management framework was not developed to ensure that risks were identified, managed and communicated throughout the Secretariat in the interest of meeting its overall objectives. The operational directors identified that risks were managed and communicated through the Secretariat management committee and other ad hoc meetings. As a result, use was made of the personal experience of every director. However, given the absence of a risk analysis at the outset, the operational directors stated that risk was managed as incidents arose.   The early design and implementation of an integrated risk management framework for all members of management would have had the benefit of providing the following: ƒ auniform risk management process between each operating directorate;  ƒ risk management throughout the Secretariat and all the directorates sharing the same vision and benchmarks; ƒ necessary controls in place to manage significant risks; and all  possible significant risks be considered to achieve the organization’s ƒ objectives communicated to the Steering Committee at the commencement of operations.   Lesson learned 2.1.1 To improve governance of the Secretariat, risk management should be introduced in the first stages following creation of an organization secretariat.  

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT5    

 

Audit of the Secretariat of the Francophonie Summit

2.2    B UDGET   The Secretariat submitted an initial budget plan and a series of measures in order to balance the budget with the funds allocated by each government to the Steering Committee September 20, 2007 and November 9, 2007 respectively,. At each Steering Committee meeting after January 2008, the Secretariat tabled a memorandum to present the budget situation, summarize the composition of expenditures and obtain any necessary spending authorities. Appended to this memorandum was a table showing the variance between budget and actual expenditures and a table of unforeseen costs that could create a deficit.   B UDGET APPROVAL   The Secretariat’s financial performance was rigorously monitored and questioned by the members of the Committee, as demonstrated in the Committee minutes. The Steering Committee was informed, at each one of the meetings, of the budget situation of the Secretariat and it systematically approved the budget choices that were presented.   B UDGETARY OVERSIGHT   Analysis of the documents related to budgetary oversight indicated the following:   • Supplementary information was not included in the financial results table submitted to the Steering Committee to improve the presentation of the Secretariat’s financial situation. • Theexpenditures subject to commitment (or ”soft commitments”) forecasted were not presented separately in order to show the actual available balance in the financial results report submitted to the Steering Committee.   Certain expenses presented in the budgetary risks table were more than likely to occur, and therefore should have been committed as soon as they were noted, to present a more accurate financial situation to the members of the Steering Committee. Examples include: ƒ cost of agreements with  thethe Centre des Congrès de Québec for “green” services; and ƒ of overtime for the duration of the Summit, as confirmed by the compensation operating directorates.   In order to track the budget situation, the Administration and Finance directorate issued detailed monthly financial reports to the operating divisions so that they could validate the transactions charged to their responsibility centre.   A budgetary risk table, although available, was not integrated with the report on financial results presented to the Steering Committee. Therefore, the possible deficit was not specifically shown in the report indicating the available balance.

Office of the Chief Audit Executive, DFAIT6