Agenda item

This report updates Members on performance against the Internal Audit Quality Assurance & Improvement Programme (QAIP), including progress against actions to ensure conformance with the Global Internal Audit Standards (GIAS) during 2025-26.

Discussion:

The Head of Internal Audit & Counter Fraud introduced the report which provided an update on the QAIP continuous improvement programme and demonstrated how the service had developed. Performance in the first year was encouraging. There had been an increase in the number of qualified staff and a reduction in staff turnover, improvements in timeliness of key stages of audit and reduction in time to complete audits.

The 2025 Global Internal Audit Standards (GIAS) self-assessment had identified 14 actions to progress conformance with the standards, 11 of which  had been completed during the year. The Council now generally conforms with 49 of 52 of the GIAS standards, a rise from 46 last year.

Minor amendments to performance indicators were proposed to support effective reporting, in particular it was proposed to report on ‘average time to complete a review’.

The following issues were discussed:

QAIP – further information was requested regarding the rise in the overall costs whilst the cost of each review had fallen. The Head of Internal Audit & Counter Fraud stated that reviews were being completed more quickly, but there had been an overall increase in staffing costs as part of the pay and rewards package. In addition, four members of staff were undertaking apprenticeships and 20% of their workload was required to be off the job learning meaning they could not spend more time on additional audits. As staff gained their qualifications, the efficiencies would lead to more reviews being completed. The Committee welcomed the extension of training opportunities for the team.

Survey responses – the Committee expressed disappointment at the fall in the number of survey responses.

Sickness – it was asked whether sickness would be included in the performance measures, the Head of Internal Audit & Counter stated that sickness had not been included because it was not an indicator of continuous improvement and could be affected by one off events. Staff sickness was considered as part of resource projections when the audit plans were developed and any impacts on resources subsequently reported to the Committee via internal audit updates.

Kent Region – it was asked whether other audit teams in the region were also undertaking similar development programmes. The Head of Internal Audit & Counter Fraud stated that there were five partnerships in the county all of which were undertaking similar development and the senior leaders met on a quarterly basis to share information. Partnerships were making positive progress against the standards, Kent County Council had recently received an external quality assessment (EQA) and there were examples of positive practice which Medway could learn from. Medway’s own EQA was not scheduled until January or February 2028.

A Member commented that the EQA was scheduled just prior to the completion of LGR and Medway Council would only continue for a short period following the assessment, he asked whether any consideration had been given to moving the date of the assessment. The Head of Internal Audit and Counter Fraud stated that the possibility of moving the date of the external assessment was under consideration. It was not decided whether it should be brought forwards or delayed until after vesting day in April 2028 to focus on the new authority.

Decision:

a)     The Committee noted the progress against the QAIP and GIAS action plan.

b)     The Committee approved the revisions to performance indicators QAIP7 to QAIP10 (inclusive) as per table two in Appendix 1.