Summary Audit Report - SEEDS. HAP 2010 Standard. Organisation Information. Organisation: SEEDS Certification Ref / No: AS016/1112

Transcription

1 Summary Audit Report - SEEDS HAP 2010 Standard Organisation Information Organisation: SEEDS Certification Ref / No: AS016/1112 Head Office Location: New Delhi, India Programme Site locations: Bihar Date of Head Office Audit: September 17, 21 Dates of Programme Site(s) Audit: September Agency Representative: Varghese Antony, HR & Admin; Accountability Focal Point Auditor (s): Johnny O Regan, Lead Auditor Sultan Ahmed, Trainee Auditor SEEDS Summary Audit Report November 2012

2 Background SEEDS (Sustainable Environment and Ecological Development Society) commenced operations as a humanitarian organisation in Its mission is Equipping the most vulnerable with appropriate tools and technologies, sharing knowledge and skills, and promoting linkages among stakeholders to preserve life, and prevent loss and suffering. Its programmatic focus is on linking long term recovery to development. Thematic areas include sustainable housing as part of humanitarian response, primary health care and awareness, governance, school safety, and disaster risk reduction. Its main on-going projects are: Work on retrofitting and restoring school buildings after the earthquake in Sikkim Post-flood reconstruction response in Leh Maternal/child health care and outreach health activities in Bihar School Safety programme in Delhi SEEDS has seven Board Members including the Director of SEEDS who is accountable for approximately 28 employees in HQ and another 25 employees in six programme sites. The project visited was a health centre with a focus on maternal and child health and outreach health/sanitation awareness/activities. SEEDS is an implementing agency; its primary support base are International Non-Governmental Organisations (INGOs); it also receives approximately 8% of its funding from the corporate sector. SEEDS occasionally extends funds to sub-grantees to carry out advocacy activities that are considered strategically significant but where SEEDS does not have a presence/expertise; two of these arrangements are currently in place representing approximately $2,500 each. One of SEEDS INGO partners is HAP certified: Mercy Malaysia. Audit Plan / Methodology A number of documents were reviewed prior to commencing the certification audit. Additional documents identified during interviews were provided by various staff and reviewed during the audit process. The head office audit was conducted in New Delhi, on September 17 and 21; the programme site audit was conducted in Bihar on September The audit plan changed during the audit as an all India strike ( Bharat Bandh ) announced by opposition parties meant that the Programme Site audit had to be cut short by one day. This resulted in staff being interviewed in focus groups at the Programme Site in order to achieve the audit coverage outlined in the audit plan. Because sub-grantee partnership arrangements are negligible, the audit did not include any partner interviews and HAP Standard partnership requirements are not applicable. Audit evidence was gathered through: Documentation review of core documents relevant to the HAP Standard and the quality management system (see Annex B). Interviews and focus group discussions (Annex A): o o Focus group discussions with three communities SEEDS aims to assist Individual interviews with staff at the head office and individual interviews and focus group discussions at the programme site Observation, noting good practice and achievement of quality and accountability commitments. Audit Report September

3 Conclusion The Independent Auditor audited SEEDS head office in New Delhi and the programme site in Bihar for conformity with the HAP 2010 Standard in Accountability and Quality Management (HAP Standard), with assistance of a Trainee auditor. The audit was carried out in New Delhi on September 17 & 21 and in Bihar from September The provision of evidence in support of the Application for Certification is the responsibility of the Board and the Senior Management of SEEDS. It is the responsibility of the HAP auditors to express an opinion both on the evidence provided and on the interviews carried out during the audit. I confirm that the Independent Auditor conducting the audit meets the requirements for HAP auditors concerning professional competence and independence. The audit was conducted in accordance with the procedures approved by the HAP Certification and Accreditation Review Board, and following the ISO 19011:2002 Auditor Standard, which together require that an audit be planned and performed to obtain reasonable assurance as to the agency s conformity with the HAP Standard. The auditor has audited SEEDS on a sample test basis through an examination of documentary evidence disclosed and through interviews with SEEDS staff in the New Delhi offices. In the Bihar programme site, the auditor interviewed SEEDS staff, and disaster survivors of SEEDS funded programmes. The HAP Certification and Accreditation Review Board reviewed the auditors findings and on that basis determined that SEEDS is in compliance with the HAP 2010 Standard, with findings summarised in the auditor s report. The Certification and Accreditation Review Board has awarded certification on this basis. Smruti Patel Head of Services and Certification, HAP International Audit Report September

4 Summary Table of Findings The table below captures a summary version of the findings and associated corrective actions with timelines (deadline for providing a response on action taken to address noncompliances). HAP Standard General Requirements Risk Management and the HAP Standard Principles Declaration of Interests Specific Requirements Benchmark 1 Benchmark 2 Benchmark 3 Benchmark 4 Benchmark 5 Met Met Head Office (HO) and Programme Site (PS) FINDING MINOR NON-COMPLIANCE RECOMMENDATIONS AGREED CORRECTIVE ACTION (ACA) Benchmark 6 Requirements 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.5 & 6.6 Met 6.4. Learning from programmes is not explicit in workplans and tends to be at the level of feedback rather than programmatic/ organizational lessons learning SEEDS shall ensure that learning on accountability is incorporated into workplans in a timely way Timeframe: 18 months Total 0 1 Audit Report September

5 Audit Key Major Non Compliance: this will result in a delay in the recommendation for certification process, which can only proceed once the correction actions have been met and verified. A major non-compliance could be due to a number of reasons such as: Complete absence of a procedure as noted in the Standard A series of minor non-conformances all focused on the same element of the standard; unless, at re-certification, a time frame agreed for corrective action on first certification has not expired, and the auditor assesses that corrective action is likely to be completed within that time frame A serious violation of qualifying norms and/or humanitarian principles A clear lack of control on some key management issues Immediate dangers for the beneficiaries or for the quality of the service to the beneficiaries A Minor detected in a previous audit not addressed within the specified time False Declarations Minor Non Compliance: this will not result in a delay of the recommendation for certification but will require corrective action within a specified time frame. Certain corrective actions on first certification may warrant a time frame of more than three years (but never more than six years). A minor non-compliance could be due to a number of reasons such as: Failure to implement management system policy / guidelines systematically Incomplete key documents / records Oversight Exoneration: this is when, due to the context of the location audited, a justifiable and up to date explanation has been given by the agency as to why a benchmark / requirement has not been met rationale should be based on the humanitarian accountability principles in the Covenant. Recommendation: This is a non-binding improvement proposition given by the auditor that if not addressed could weaken the agency s humanitarian accountability and quality management assurance. Observation: An observation is the value added input an auditor can give to draw the agency s attention to issues noted during the audit that could impact the agency either negatively or positively. It captures both observed good practice and areas where improvement should be looked into. Audit Report September