The problems of performance audit Текст научной статьи по специальности «Экономика и бизнес»

THE PROBLEMS OF PERFORMANCE AUDIT Khussain Л.В. Email: Khussain677@scientifictext.ru

Khussain Assel Baktiyar kyzy - Master degree Student, DEPARTMENT OF STATE AUDIT, FACULTY OF ECONOMICS, L.N. GUMILYOVEURASIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, NUR-SULTAN, REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN

Abstract: the formation of new approaches to the fiscal policy of the state requires a change in the tools for monitoring the use of public funds. In connection with these issues of development and implementation of the practice of performance audit are raised, therefore, the article discusses the current problems of using this tool and identifies areas for their solution. The performance audit differs from the financial audit and from the audit, it should be aimed at assessing the rationality of the use of resources and the economy of the costs incurred, which causes certain problems. This article raises the three most important problems of the practical implementation of performance audits and outlines ways to solve them. The standardization in the field of state audit is due to the processes of globalization, the possibility of a wide exchange of experience in connection with the expansion of the world's representation in the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI). An efficiency audit is characterized by an assessment of the final results of government expenditures, including administrative and organizational systems. Performance audits are also considered in the standards of European and Asian organizations of supreme bodies of state control. Today, in the current international standard of the supreme financial control bodies, performance audit is defined as an independent examination of the efficiency and effectiveness of state enterprises, programs or organizations, the economical use of resources, the purpose of which is to improve the activities of audit facilities.

Keywords: performance audit, state audit, international organizations, international standards, state sector, development of audit.

ПРОБЛЕМЫ АУДИТА ЭФФЕКТИВНОСТИ Хусаин А.Б.

Хусаин Асел Бактияр кызы - магистрант, кафедра государственного аудита, экономический факультет, Евразийский национальный университет им. Л.Н. Гумилева, г. Нур-Султан, Республика Казахстан

Аннотация: формирование новых подходов к фискальной политике государства требует изменения инструментов контроля за использованием государственных средств. В связи с этим поднимаются вопросы разработки и внедрения практики аудита эффективности, поэтому в статье рассматриваются актуальные проблемы использования этого инструмента и определяются области их решения. Аудит эффективности отличается от финансового аудита и аудита, он должен быть направлен на оценку рациональности использования ресурсов и экономии понесенных затрат, что вызывает определенные проблемы. В этой статье рассматриваются три наиболее важные проблемы практической реализации аудита эффективности и намечаются пути их решения. Стандартизация в области государственного аудита обусловлена процессами глобализации, возможностью широкого обмена опытом в связи с расширением мирового представительства в Международной организации высших ревизионных учреждений (ИНТОСАИ). В этом положении наряду с финансовым аудитом формулируется необходимость в другом типе контроля, задачей которого является проверка экономической эффективности, действенности

и эффективности использования ресурсов проверяемой организации при выполнении поставленных задач. к этому. Аудит эффективности характеризуется оценкой конечных результатов государственных расходов, включая административные и организационные системы. Аудит эффективности также учитывается в стандартах европейских и азиатских организаций высших органов государственного контроля. Сегодня в действующем международном стандарте высших органов финансового контроля аудит эффективности определяется как независимая проверка эффективности и действенности государственных предприятий, программ или организаций, экономного использования ресурсов, целью которой является улучшение деятельности объектов аудита.

Ключевые слова: аудит эффективности, государственный аудит, международные организации, международные стандарты, государственный сектор, развитие аудита.

UDC 330.4

For a long period of time, questions of rational use of resources have been of interest in most commercial organizations, since costs have a direct impact on profit. The question of the effective use of state funds in one form or another, although it has existed since the formation of states, but the mechanisms for monitoring their use did not allow a reliable assessment of the economical use of resources. Today, the concept of state budget policy is focused on the transition from cost management to results management. The complexity of introducing such an approach in the fiscal policy of the state compared with the commercial sector is determined by the fact that in addition to economic efficiency, it is necessary to evaluate the numerous social, scientific, environmental and other components of the efficiency of spending public funds. These problems smoothly flow into issues when monitoring the use of public funds. If earlier organizations receiving funds from budgets of various levels underwent audits, today the methods and methods of control and audit work do not satisfy the modern needs of financial control. This led to the development of a new instrument of control - an audit of the effectiveness of the use of public funds.

The study of foreign experience using the audit of effectiveness as a control tool indicates its effectiveness. In foreign countries, positive changes have been outlined in its use and development, but today some obstacles to the development of this type of control, which includes:

1. Inadequate methodological base. The existing methodology for conducting an audit of the effectiveness of using public funds is of a typical type and represents approaches to conducting an audit of effectiveness, rather than universal rules and procedures applicable to all specific tasks and objects of an audit of efficiency. Changing the functioning environment of economic entities of various organizational and legal forms of ownership, the use of private, state and municipal property, modern principles and organization of management in their activities leads to the development of new forms of relations between entities. Moreover, each subject, striving to achieve his goal, must solve certain problems. The ultimate goal of most commercial organizations is clear - it's making a profit and increase in the value of the subject. At various stages, indicators of their activities may vary, they are determined by the owner and leader. Things are much more complicated for economic entities receiving funds from various levels of budgets.

2. The shortage of qualified personnel.

3. The diversity of tasks of the control and accounting authorities in the conditions of limited resources. The important tasks of the performance audit, unlike traditional control, are:

-opening and elimination of possible sources of loss of resources,

-assessment of ways to obtain intermediate results.

It is important to evaluate what the organization does and how it does it. Particular importance should be attached to the determination of conditions and causal relationships, on the basis of which it can be concluded that the program has an impact on the achievement

of stated or proposed goals. Based on the identified problems, it is necessary to carry out training and retraining of personnel, to attract specialized specialists and experts. An audit of performance has significant differences from a financial audit, due to a more complex methodology for conducting it, starting from a preliminary study of the subject and objects being inspected, and to prepare a report on the results of the audit. Its implementation requires significantly larger procedures, time and resources in comparison with a financial audit, therefore it is a much more complex control measure.

Thus, the studies showed that the performance audit has been developed in various foreign countries. Although there are regulatory documents that govern the general provisions of the performance audit, in each country there are features of its implementation, which are caused by historical and national differences, the financial control bodies that carry it out also differ. For Kazakhstan, performance auditing is a new tool; it covers many issues of great importance to society, especially in the context of the formation of new approaches to state financial management. Its advantage is the need to develop recommendations and proposals to address the causes of misallocation of public funds. Identified Practical Issues implementation of the performance audit in different countries, allowed to outline ways to address them: training more qualified personnel, attracting experts; development of a complex of methodological support for organizing and conducting an efficiency audit, taking into account its distinctive characteristics. This control tool should be more actively developed, since it is intended to protect not only the interests of the state, but also of the whole society.

References / Список литературы

1. Barzelay M., 1997. Central audit institutions and performance auditing. A comparative analysis of organizational strategies in the OECD. Governance № 1; 10 (3):236.

2. Lima declaration of control guidelines. 1977. [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.srd.ru/documents/schpal/limdecl.pdf/ (date of access: 22.11.2019).

3. The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On State Audit and Financial Control". [Electronic resource]. URL: http://online.zakon.kz (date of access: 20.11.2019).

4. The International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions, INTOSAI. [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.intosai.org_(date of access: 18.11.2019).

5. Efmenko Т., Stefanyuk I., Ruban N. and others. State financial control of budget programs / Monograph. M.: NIFI, 2004. P. 204-208.

6. Mamyshev А. Performance audit: concept, cycle, planning // Financial control, 2006. № 2 (31). P. 54-60.