The risk management system, as a tool for making managerial decisions, is an important factor determining the quality of the results of the activities of state audit bodies.
This system, which is applicable in the public sector, has shown its consistency in the management processes and the reduction of ineffective audit activities.
When forming an appropriate List of audit activities for the coming year, the state audit bodies, based on the risk management system, determine the intended objects of state audit.
To begin with, risks are events that can happen, but are not guaranteed. In the understanding of many, the term "risk" itself has a negative connotation, that is, the expectation of a negative. Under the risk in the light of issues of state audit, it is necessary to understand a possible violation on the part of the object of audit. Contrary to popular belief, risk is not a bad thing. Risk is simply an event that may affect our decisions and goals in the future.
The fact is that when we identify an opportunity, it may actually represent a derivative risk, while we must manage the associated negative risks in order to properly use the available resources.
When forming the List in accordance with the legislation on state audit, the opinion of so-called external stakeholders, persons interested in the results of the state audit, which include maslikhats, law enforcement agencies, individuals and legal entities who have sent appeals to the state audit bodies, is taken into account.
Taking into account the current norms, the opinions of external stakeholders when deciding on the inclusion of an object in the List for audit are indirect due to the prevalence of the results of risk criteria calculations in the Risk Management System in force in the state audit.
Discrepancies between the proposals of external stakeholders and the results of an arithmetically sound sampling of the risk management system directly affect the prospects for upcoming audit activities.
Proposals of external persons, those who interact with the potential subject of audit and feedback from them are an integral part of the system of selection and formation of the List of audit activities, which makes it possible to take into account opinions and suggestions, to take into account the interests, including of the company and other interested parties in improving the efficiency of the use of budgetary funds.
Attracting, and possibly expanding the number of external persons, including public organizations, to improve the quality of the selection of objects of state audit by involving them in the decision-making process, will have a positive effect on reducing the process of "dispersion" of resources of state audit bodies.
The lack of sufficient automation of accounting of public sector facilities hinders the full processing of data by the risk management system and suggests the need to strengthen the responsibility of officials of state organizations for the lack of accounting in the relevant information systems, in fact, this condition itself is a risk factor.
Despite the positive and negative decisions, in terms of accepting and not accepting the proposals made, the dialogue, in particular with local representative bodies, involves the development of constructive, productive and mutually beneficial relations.
At the same time, the proposals of interested parties included in the decision-making process by the legislation on state audit are a valuable source of information that can be used to improve the quality of the List of Audit Objects for the coming period.
It is important that risk management tools, with a sufficient degree of automation of data processing directly by state audit bodies, obtaining content from a wide range of state information systems, will make it possible to make the right management decisions when selecting potential organizations that may have violated the norms of current legislation. At the same time, we can note a direct pattern that has an inverse sequence, namely, the better the sample in the risk management system, the more we disclose the risks of possible violations by the audit objects and vice versa.
In order to ensure the effectiveness of the risk management system as a tool in the state audit, it is necessary to determine acceptable final criteria and indicators. This, in turn, will increase the chances of a more reliable formation of the List of Audit objects and, therefore, is more likely to identify and prevent financial violations and inefficient planning and use of budget funds.
The opinion of external stakeholders and the results of the selection of the risk management system, in tandem, are important for the effective allocation of resources of state audit bodies, the effectiveness of audit activities and in the long term affects the prevention of violations and improvement of financial discipline of state institutions and quasi-public sector entities.
From an academic point of view, budget planning includes forecasts of future expenditures, while a good initial forecast does not exclude the possibility that changes will follow in dynamics, while variation and flexibility are critical in forecasting. The second important part of public audit management is risk modeling, which is the processing of potential changes in their risk forecasts, which occurs at the stage of direct preliminary study at the start of the audit event. This helps the Audit Commission to deal with uncertainty correctly and ensure flexibility of work, that is, not to fall into the trap of standardized planning schemes.
A comprehensive and consistent understanding of the value of risk and flexibility adapts auditors to the visible and unforeseen factors of the audit process and is the key to ensuring prompt and, most importantly, correct response to uncertainty in order to make timely informed decisions during the audit.
An important value of monitoring risks is taking into account their degree, taking actions aimed at increasing the chances of minimizing them, if we talk about economic processes and their consequences in general.
Thus, it should be concluded that in the presence of a high degree of risk, the goal is to reduce its effect and maximize the use of the resources of the state audit and executive authorities to exclude negative events and develop strategies to mitigate damage to the state and society as a whole.
Arman Ispudinov