Agenda item

Officers introduced the Internal Audit progress report. Five audit reports had been finalised since the last Committee meeting. Four audit reviews were currently at draft stage. Fieldwork had now commenced for all but one of the audits in the current year’s Internal Audit Plan. A number of reviews were close to completion, with draft reports expected by the end of the month, to be finalised before year end. The Head of Internal Audit Opinion will be drafted post year end.

Officers highlighted the part?limited/ part?reasonable assurance rating issued for the Savings Programme. The limited assurance element related to savings development work undertaken in December 2024 for the 2025/26 savings programme. Several savings lines were written off early in the year. The reasonable assurance reflected improvements in ongoing in?year monitoring, including a new Savings Tracking App; regular updates and challenge sessions; and strengthened governance around whether savings remain deliverable.

Internal Audit did not formally audit the early development of the 2026/27 savings programme due to timing, but officers confirmed that improvements were observed in real time and issues raised in the 2025/26 audit appeared to be actively addressed. A full audit of 2026/27 savings development was included in next year’s Audit Plan.

Members asked why a planned HR-related review was removed. Officers explained that Internal Audit relied on access to evidence and engagement from the service. If a service was unable to provide this due to significant vacancies, sickness, or project pressure, an audit conducted at that time would simply return “No Assurance” due to lack of evidence, adding no value. Instead, timing was reconsidered, or alternative audit methods explored.

Members noted several older management actions. Officers responded that the Council had previously paused its follow?up process, resulting in a backlog in 2023. Many historical actions had now been cleared. Where actions remained overdue, new dates were set only after discussion with services, and reasons recorded. Some actions had been superseded by wider system or process changes. A new automated follow?up system was being introduced next year whereby extensions will be automatically escalated to the relevant Corporate Director and then to CMT. Repeated extensions would be visible corporately, increasing challenge and accountability.

Members queried whether KPIs could distinguish between recommendations still within deadline and recommendations overdue or repeatedly extended. Officers confirmed Internal Audit was already reviewing its KPIs and monitoring arrangements for the next financial year. The new automated system will allow more granular monitoring, including overdue actions, extensions, and time from due date to completion. The Internal Audit Team is also seeking to automate its own internal KPIs.

The Chair noted that, where items were repeatedly extended or remain amber/ red, the Committee may request relevant officers to attend and explain delays.

Members asked whether giving ‘reasonable’ assurance rather than ‘limited’ on monitoring savings was justified given that not all savings are being delivered. Officers explained that Internal Audit did not give assurance that outcomes will be achieved; it gave assurance on whether controls and governance were in place to manage risks.

At the time of audit more savings had been banked or were on track than in previous years; and the main issue was not the monitoring arrangements but the scale and stretch of the savings programme. Monitoring had remained stable since Q1 even though the stretch remained significant.

Members thanked officers for their work.

RESOLVED: That the Audit Committee noted the IA progress since the last Committee meeting