Zh.Z. Oralbaeva

Candidate of Economic Sciences, docentof the Kazakh National University

named after Al-Farabi,

N.Sh.Mansurova

Master student of the Kazakh National University named after Al-Farabi,

Kazakhstan, Almaty

Some aspects of the organizations on the performance audit in the Republic of Kazakhstan

In the economic literature proposes different approach in determining the stages of the performance audit, the classification of which is based on the allocation of a number of features of it implementation. As the experience of many foreign countries performance audit is usually carried out in three stages. Based on the fact that a performance audit is an integral part of the system of public audit; we believe that it should conduct immediately and take place in three main stages:

1. The Planning of performance audit;

2. The Implementation of the audit;

3. The Preparation of report on results of performance audit.

At the first stage of performance audit planning, whose task is the selection of specific topics and objects of performance audit, preliminary study of objects of verification and preparing audit programs audit effectiveness.

Planning is the most important and difficult stage of performance audit, it represents the process of conducting a number of successive and interrelated actions that are performed annually as part of the activities of the state financial control.

Planning inspections audit efficiency, it is necessary to select the most important topics and issues taking into account; their relevance to the tasks that aims to address the body of state financial control and the existence of conditions for their conduct.

In the second stage of performance audit, information is collected on the actual of the object test to obtain the audit evidence, preparing findings, conclusions and recommendations the test results and a preliminary review of the management of the audited object with the audit results.

The basis information for the audit are: constituent other documents that determine the legal form of the object of inspection; notification of budget allocations; documents confirming the amount of budget funding, the estimates of income and expenditure; the accounting registers, and other primary accounting. Accounting settlement and cash documents; financial statements; information on accounts opened in commercial banks; agreements, contracts, and agreements to ensure financial and economic activity and providing for the expenditure of funds; acts of audits previously conducted in the organization; documents related to the information and technical support of the inspection object.

The collection of evidence is carried out by means of analytic procedures. Auditors use analytic techniques for making decisions on the reliability of the indicator value reflected in the financial statements through observations, comparisons, confirm, survey, monitoring and other necessary in each specific case procedures. The analysis formed the assessment of the credibility of the audited object. This evaluation is indirect evidence, based on which the auditor decides on the necessity to apply other auditing procedures to a greater extent focused on obtaining direct evidence, if this need is highlighted by the preliminary analysis of the accounting object.
Standards for the provision of related services within the International standards the audit determined the content and objectives of work. Standard for financial statement analysis is a separate section, which describes the procedures that the auditor should include in the obligation to perform this analysis. This standard applies to the analysis of financial statements, however, can be applied to the analysis of other financial information.
Auditor within the audit of the effectiveness of procedures performs analytic review, including:
- to receive information about the nature of the activities of the organization; conducting a survey to gather information on the classification and reflection of the findings of financial statements, comparisons, conclusions and reporting outcomes to expected results; compares the financial statements with statements for prior periods;
- to examine the relationship between various elements of financial statements and the impact of these elements on the final result. When performing obligations, the auditor could and should use specific analysis procedures. The aggregate of these specific procedures, combined in a certain logical sequence, called the methods of financial analysis.

The main attention during the audit should be given to the results of the object, regardless of whether its the subject program, activity, or system monitoring tools. When checking any component of the program, the verification must have a clear understanding of how this component is connected with the planned results in the program.
The verification process can be carried out a comparative evaluation of the achieved and previous results, as well as actual and planned results. Moreover, at the initial stage of the test examines the outputs and results of the work and not used to achieve them methods or processes. This approach is useful if there are appropriate criteria for qualitative and quantitative evaluations of the obtained results and determine the amount used for this budget.
If the reviewer determines that the results are satisfactory, it means minimal risks of serious deficiencies in the audited area or activity of object of check. In this
the case, can be limited to identifying possible reserves for
more good results and formulation relevant recommendations for improving efficiency
used of public funds.
If the checking of these results and activities are unsatisfied, i.e., it is established that they are significantly lower than planned or do not meet the applicable criteria;. The test must be continued to the extent that it is necessary to identify the specific reasons that leads to an unsatisfied results.
Analysis of the available data allows in the course of the audit;
you must use and analyze the data available,
the administrations of the audited objects and other sources. These
sources may include management information systems, which
used to check the object for the implementation of programs, and other materials and data relevant to the inspection.
The use of existing data is sometimes called "secondary data analysis" because it involves the use of data collected for any other purpose. Therefore, caution should be exercised when using them to verify; be sure to evaluate to what extent these data are reliable, accurate and suitable for the study check problems and formulating the respective conclusions on their basis.
One of the important instruments used to collect actual data and evidence in the course of the audit, is an examination that is held in conjunction with the above methods of verification. Examination used, for example, to get information from the experts of various ministries and agencies involved in the implementation of the program being tested, determine the views of those in whose interests. It is carried out on the results of its execution, etc. When the survey was conducted it must apply scientifically-based methods, because the quality of the data collection mechanism; their generalizations depends on the reliability and value of the results used as evidence in the preparation of the findings and conclusions of the audit.
Information and evidence collected, analyzed and used by a group of auditors to confirm the findings and support recommendations on the results of audit are audit evidence. Evidence must be: sufficient; appropriate; adequate.
The evidence is sufficient, if their scope and content is able to convince people of the validity and correctness of the findings.
The evidence is adequate, if these are sourced from reliable and authentic sources.
The evidence is adequate, if they are directly relevant to the conclusions reached and logically related.
The reliability of audit evidence depends on the source of information (internal or external), as well as from their presentation (visual, documentary or oral). When assessing the reliability of audit evidence-specific situations, the auditors should consider the following :
a) evidence obtained from external sources is more reliable than evidence obtained from internal sources;
b) evidence obtained from internal sources is more reliable if the existing system of accounting and internal control are effective;
C) evidence collected directly by the inspection are more reliable than evidence obtained from the inspected object;
g) evidence in the form of documents and written statements more reliable than statements presented orally.

In the third stage of performance audit, is to prepare the preliminary draft report and final report on results of checks and approval and submission of a report on the findings.
Preparation of opinions and conclusions according to the results of checks carried out in the validation process of objective analysis of collected actual data on the basis of approved evaluation criteria. On the comparison of actual data with the evaluation criteria of efficiency should be prepared of findings, which should indicate the extent to which the results of the checks in areas or to check the work of the organizations are consistent with the evaluation criteria, and formulate conclusions in relation to the objectives set in the framework of this review. Checking, by comparing the resulting check data with the approved criteria, identify the factors that indicate ineffective use of budgetary funds selected for review. These factors can be both quantitative and qualitative assessment.
Quantification may be expressed: in tenge - high costs, low profit; percentage - a low level of profitability, capacity utilization, unproductive use of equipment, loss of working time, or in pieces, square meters or other units of measurement.
Examples of qualitative assessment of inefficient use of budget funds are: the lack of facilities to verify the necessary regulatory documents, low level of control, making bad decisions, etc.
In Russian literature, it has been suggested that "the underdevelopment of the system of parameters to evaluate effectiveness and efficiency of resource use introduces a degree of conditioning, and hence possible errors in conclusions based on the audit results".
As correctly emphasized by foreign authors, "it is usually impossible to make complete and accurate measurements of efficiency, whether it's rules, spheres of activity or control and regardless of whether the problems identified with internal or external conditions".

When conducting comparative analysis and preparing opinions on its results, should only come from received and collected actual data. On the basis of findings, the verification must determine the causes that lead to inefficient results on the check of activity of the object, and to formulate appropriate conclusions for each objectives of this audit for inclusion in the report on audit results. The findings are intended to characterize the conformity of those or other actual
results on the check of activity of the object that approved criteria; to specify the amount, nature and significance of any deviations from the approved criteria; to define the causes of existing problems and the consequences that they may entail; indicate the responsible officials, the competence of which belong the identified problems.
Note that the validity of the conclusions depends on the persuasiveness of evidence conclusions, and logic used in their preparation.
Based on the analysis of the collected additional material are determined by the nature, significance and causes of the identified problems; accordingly are reflected in the findings of the inspection.
If some of the findings and conclusions are not essential in the evaluation of the effectiveness of the audited organization; they can be reported to management separately in writing and not included directly in the statement of the test results. In this case, the report provides only information about the direction of the corresponding letter of the checked organization.
In economic literature there is an opinion that the performance audit "should carry out a comprehensive analysis of the causes of inefficient use of budgetary funds on the basis of recommendations for improving the budget process, current legislation and the entire economic policy of the state".
We believe that if the audit identified deficiencies, and the findings indicate an opportunity to significantly improve the quality and performance of the audited entity. The group auditors should make appropriate recommendations for necessary action to address these deficiencies.
Recommendations based on relevant findings and conclusions must be:
- aimed at addressing the underlying causes of the existence of the defect or problem;
- clear, concise and simple in form, and sufficiently detailed content to understand if they are considered separately;
- focused on concrete action addressed to the organizations, officials responsible for the action and persons authorized to do so; positive from the point of view of their tone and content; practical, that is doable in a reasonable time and taking into account legal and other constraints; cost effective, i.e. the costs associated with their implementation, should not exceed the benefit; focused on the results that can be evaluated or measured;
- formulated in such a way as to check their performance. Recommendations must be sufficiently specific and at the same time to eliminate unnecessary detail. Their content depends primarily on the goals and results of the audit.


References
1. International standards on auditing
2. Ryabukhin S. N. Audit of efficiency of use of public
resources. - M.: Nauka, 2004.
3. Performance Auditing at the Swedish National Audit Bureau. Stockholm. 1993