QA Framework Control Objectives Toolkit
QA Framework Control Objectives Toolkit
2 QA Framework – Unclassified
Introduction
Introduction
This toolkit forms part of the response to an Independent Report “Practical Steps to Improve Government MI” produced by Dr
Martin Read CBE and commissioned by the Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chief Secretary to the Treasury. The report
recognised that a major improvement in the quality of management information was essential to achieve the government’s
objectives in relation to improving the efficiency and operational effectiveness of common processes that generate MI across
government. It was agreed at PEX(ER) on 6 July 2012 to implement these recommendations and to establish a framework for the
Quality Assurance of Management Information.
Driving improvements in MI
Dr Read’s report indicates that a critical factor in enabling high quality MI is the quality of the process level controls within the
business processes from which the MI is derived. Currently there is no single recognised cross-government standard in this area,
however this framework will establish a clear, common standard to evaluate the quality of controls over business processes, and
respond to the risks arising from poor MI. These risks include ill-informed decision making, inadequate management of budgets
and the lack of accountability to parliament and the public.
This framework is intended as a tool for civil service managers and assurers. The framework will provide a common cross-
government benchmark to evaluate the coverage and focus of existing controls in a consistent way, and will allow departments to
assess the level of latent risk in the systems used to manage their operations.
3 QA Framework – Unclassified
Purpose and Scope
Purpose
This toolkit provides a set of strong minimum standards for the operational processes that generate management information. It is
aimed at all those who operate, are accountable for, provide assurance on and govern process level controls. It can be used by:
• Operational managers – To provide assurance that performance is being monitored, risks identified and addressed, and that
objectives are being achieved.
• Senior managers – To gain comfort that the processes are being carried out as intended through compliance assessments and
that reviews are being carried out to determine that policy or quality arrangements are being met.
• Internal Audit – To provide audit committees and ultimately Accounting Officers the assurance that organisational internal
controls are operating effectively.
• National Audit Office – To provide assurance to parliament and the taxpayer that processes across Government’s ‘back office’
are operating efficiently, effectively and in the most economic way.
It has been developed through consultation with Government Policy Heads, Finance leadership teams across central government
departments, as well as with representatives from Internal Audit and the National Audit Office (NAO).
Scope
This framework of process level control objectives has been developed for the key operational processes that generate MI. It is
intended that this will provide departments with a clear benchmark against which to evaluate the quality of controls in
these processes.
The focus of this framework is those processes that are common to all organisations and relate to key ‘back-office’ functions. It is
principle based and therefore not system or process specific It is designed to be high level enough so that it can be applied across
government but also with enough detail for it to be applied practically.
4 QA Framework – Unclassified
Context
The link to MI
The following diagram sets out the relationship between the process control objectives defined in this toolkit and the
management information reporting processes currently in place within departments and across government.
• The bottom layer of the diagram represents the core underlying process. This involves both manual and automated activities
that are required for departments’ day to day operations. This framework covers nine such processes.
• The green arrows demonstrate how management information is generated from those underlying processes. Prior to being
reported, this will pass through a number of stages, including; (i) extraction of data; (ii) application of data definitions /
reporting guidance and; (iii) management review and sign-off.
The diagram demonstrates that the data collated at the same point of an underlying process may be reported in a number of
formats/to a number of audiences and in these cases the application of data definitions may differ. However, through establishing
a common standard of control we can help to ensure a sound basis for reporting MI is established.
MI Report MI Report MI Report
Management review
Data definitions
Data extraction
5 QA Framework – Unclassified
Context
Quality Assurance stakeholders and reporting
The diagram below sets out the role of the process level control objectives defined in this toolkit within the broader quality
assurance agenda. This outlines the key flows of management information originating from within a department, and the levels of
assurance provided by the ‘4 lines of defence’ over the internal control framework that support it, in line with HMT guidance on
Assurance Frameworks. A critical first step is for department management to establish clear process ownership and accountability
for good controls, which provides a foundation of good governance and can be supported by the additional 3 layers of assurance.
Reporting
Information
6 QA Framework – Unclassified
Existing Guidance and Assumptions
Existing guidance
During the development of these control objectives we have referenced existing CO and HMT guidance and cross-government
frameworks, for example; Managing the Risk of Financial Loss (MROFL), and Managing Public Money (MPM). Where there are
synergies in the areas of processes covered, we have designed this framework to support this. We have also worked with
Government Policy Leads in order to ensure the contents of this framework are aligned with key messages from the
centre of government.
Risk
This framework assumes an existing methodology is in place within departments and ALBs to allocate clear process ownership and
then to define and assess process level risk. Controls implemented to address the objectives defined in this framework should be
proportionate to the associated risks identified. The starting point for any process risk, control and assurance framework should be
an assessment of the key risks presented by each core business process, followed by an assessment of the adequacy, effectiveness
and proportionality of the controls of these risks in relation to their severity. When considering the assurance framework regarding
these risks and controls, appropriate and proportionate use should be made of each of the four lines of defence (as defined in the
Context section above) in line with HM Treasury guidance on Assurance Frameworks. Consideration should also be given as to
whether the risk and control issues identified are being addressed in other activities, for example, Managing the Risk of
Financial Loss.
7 QA Framework – Unclassified
Process Overview
The processes covered by this framework are set out in the diagram below. Though control objectives from each process can be
read in isolation, it should be noted that objectives from another process may also be relevant when they are applied to real-world
processes, and an overarching view will need to be taken e.g. procurement control objectives are also relevant to procurement
activities that take place as part of a project.
8 QA Framework – Unclassified
How to use this toolkit
The framework has been designed to be used by departmental staff with strategic, management or operational responsibility for
management information. Guidance on how to navigate through the toolkit are set out below.
Click on the process name The Section Overview Further explanation and
on page 11 for process provides an introduction to context is provided for
control objectives relating the control objectives each sub process.
to that process. defined for each process.
Information processing
Navigate through the
objectives are indicated
toolkit using arrows on
for each control objective.
each page.
Refer to Annex 1.
9 QA Framework – Unclassified
Control Objective Framework
Interactive Toolkit
10 QA Framework – Unclassified
Framework Navigator
Click on the boxes below for process control objectives relating to each process. The arrow buttons at the bottom of each page
can be used to navigate through the framework.
11 QA Framework – Unclassified
Reporting Management Information
Section Overview
This section defines a set of minimum standards for the reporting of MI both within a department and externally. The control
objectives set out below are principles-based, and can be applied in a variety of scenarios where information is being reported to
departmental management. This process is broken-down into the following sub processes:
• MI Strategy
• Defining MI reporting requirements
• Report generation
• Review prior to submission
Reporting Management Information
D.4.b Non-compliance X
Appropriate action is taken by the department for non-compliance with grant terms and conditions – including where
appropriate stopping future grant payments and clawing back funds.
D.5 Changes to In this context ‘changes to existing grants arrangements’ refer to the process in place to manage changes to the terms and conditions of the grants. This
existing grants includes both changes initiated by the department and those requested by the grant recipient.
arrangement
D.5.a Escalation of issues X X
Allegations of malpractice or fraud in relation to grants are escalated to an appropriate level of management and
investigated in line with the department’s grants policy.
D.5.b Dispute resolution X X
Issues are resolved on a timely basis in line with the department’s grant policy.
E.2.h Budgets incorporate business activity level estimates and external data X
Budgets incorporate estimates on the level of business activity and external data (e.g. economic situation) to ensure they
are realistic and workable.
E.2.i Granularity of budgets X
Budgets are sufficiently granular to enable effective monitoring and reporting with evidence that they are aligned to
Department’s objectives and accountability framework. Department accounting processes are designed to meet the
requirement of reporting into HMT as well as being suitable for internal department management.
E.3 Budget The term ‘budget approval’ refers to the approval process within the department prior to submission to HMT.
approval
E.3.a Budget sign off X
Budgets are approved in line with the department's budget management policy by appropriate level of management.
E.6 Budget The term ‘budget reporting’ refers to the process of reporting management information on the annual department budget including actual, forecast
reporting and variance data to facilitate efficient management of limited resource.
E.6.a Reporting X X
Departmental performance against budgets and forecasts are reported on a timely basis according to the reporting
schedule identified above and in line with reporting ownership and accountability.
E.7 Segregation ‘Segregation of duties’ refers to the segregation within business roles and access to system functionality that is
of duties necessary to support effective process level controls.
F.8 Segregation ‘Segregation of duties’ refers to the segregation within business roles and access to system functionality that is necessary to support effective process
of duties level controls.
Estates
H.4 Depreciation The term ‘depreciation’ refers to the calculation and recording procedures of depreciation charge of freehold properties.
H.4.a Depreciation calculation X
Depreciation expenses of freehold properties are calculated accurately based on the useful life and verified carrying
value at the beginning of current financial year in line with the department’s estates policy.
H.4.b Recording depreciation X X
Depreciation is recorded accurately, completely and on a timely basis in line with the estates and accounting policies.
H.9 Estates data The term ‘estates data’ refers to records of estates size, occupation, cost and efficiency as well as estates master data. . The objectives defined below
set out key requirements that must be met to facilitate the department to report good quality estates data.
Completeness (C) All transactions that occur are entered and accepted for processing once and only once and in the proper period. For example,
duplicate entries are identified and rejected; all exceptions/rejections are addressed and resolved.
Accuracy (A) Transactions are recorded at the correct amount in the appropriate account and proper period (the date input was correct). This
includes accuracy of key data elements and standing data used in transaction processing.
Validity (V) Only authorised transactions that actually occurred and are related to the organisation are recorded.
Restricted access (R) Data is protected against unauthorised amendments and access to confidential data and physical assets is appropriately
restricted to authorised personnel. It can be difficult to achieve the other three information processing objectives
(Completeness, Accuracy, and Validity), when the restricted access objective is not met.