[ad_1]
GOVERNMENT INTERNAL AUDITS ACCOUNTABILITY IN MINISTRIES / EXTRA-MINISTERIAL DEPARTMENT.
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to assess the impact of internal audit and accountability on government ministries and extra-ministerial departments by using the office of the Auditor-General of Enugu State, Nigeria, as a case study.
As a result, the researcher used a population size of 54 staffers from the Auditor-office, General’s of which 36 were chosen at random as the population sample.
In addition, the researcher used percentage frequency, tabular, and chi-square statistical techniques to analyze the data acquired. The findings of the researcher reveal that without adequate internal auditing and accountability in most government ministries and government parastatals, the public service will grind to a standstill.
As a result of the importance of audits and accountability in all areas of any establishment, the researcher recommends that the function of internal audit departments in government offices be enhanced to enable them to perform maximally and more credibly to the overall wellbeing of the various government ministries and establishments.
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Study’s Context
Statement of the Issue
The Study’s Purpose
The Study’s Importance
The Study’s Scope
Research Issues
The Null Hypothesis
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE IN CHAPTER 2
Auditing: Its Concept and Nature
Department of Government Audit
The Accountability Concept
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY (CHAPTER 3)
Design of Research
Study Subject
The Study’s Population
Procedure for Taking Samples and Sampling
Instrument Validation
Instrument Reliability
Data Collection Method
DATA ANALYSIS METHOD CHAPTER 4: DATA PRESENTATION AND RESULTS/FINDINGS
Data Display and Analysis
Hypothesis Validation
Findings in Brief
CHAPTER 5: RESULTS/FINDINGS DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Results Discussion
Results Discussion
Conclusion
Suggestions for Additional Research
The Study’s Limitations
References
Appendix
Questionnaire
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
The Study’s Background:
Auditing techniques arose from the need to impose some kind of check on those whose business entails recording the receipt and disbursement of money on their behalf. However, due to the primitive nature of accounting procedures in the early phases of civilization, individuals reviewed their own accounts.
The Renaissance’s enthusiasm for trade and business in the 15th century resulted in the development of a more scientific system of accounting, and in 1494 LUCCA PACIOL, an Italian publisher of the idea of Double Entries Book-keeping, published it in Venice.
As a result of this finding, it became possible to record all types of goods transactions including all accounting matters, and this development resulted in the use of Audit on these records.
The mechanical inventions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, which led to the industrial revolution, explained the formation of various joint stock corporations and corporate undertakings utilizing immense capital under the supervision of a few persons.
Under these conditions, the benefits of using the services of a professional auditor were obvious enough to be publicized, generally to require the operator of these firms to account for the results of all transactions undertaken on the company’s behalf throughout the period of stewardship.
To attest to the formation of auditing as a profession, it is widely understood that autonomous expertise and the service ideal, along with the existence of a structured body of knowledge and authority recognized by the client or user, are not the most distributive features of a profession. All of these have been defined for and apply to auditing.
The necessity for auditing, particularly government auditing, exists throughout government and institutional functions. Based on the preceding management, load has grown more important as a result of broader distribution of authority and duty.
The need for honest, candid public disclosure exists as federal, state, and local government expands an increasing scheme of gross material product and relies on financial data communication to ensure that the costs involved are reasonable, regardless of whether the project is a mass transit system or a foreign aid program.
The current financial crises of federal, state, and municipal governments serve as a reminder that all organizations must be held accountable for proper management of resources entrusted to them if they are changed.
Industries and organizations are subjected to goods accounting and reporting since it constitutes an effective technique of gauging capabilities. Inadequate factual reporting, on the other hand, conceals waste and inefficiency, preventing our economic resources from being distributed effectively.
The majority of material policies, such as growing energy resources, managing inflation, and increasing employment, rely directly on qualitative management of economic operations and data exchange. The entire purpose of audit is undeniably to assure accountability and the rendering of accounts of stewardship to those for whom one is responsible.
A fundamental principle of a democratic society is that government and those in positions of authority have an obligation to account for their actions. Accountability is intrinsic in the government process and may be graphically defined as the degree of responsibility or explanation one individual owes to a superior official for his activity or conduct. It identifies the causes for the diversion of public resources, as well as the manner and extent to which they were applied.
Accountability entails the expenditure of finances as well as the imposition of legal liability on service providers. If the task is not completed according to specifications, the owner has the right to impose fines or penalties on the person or group to whom services are conveyed and who is responsible for developing and implementing strategies to offer those services. It is this competence that is the primary source of concern. As a result, it adds significance to a study.
Statement of the Issue:
The following are the specific issues that prompted the research into this study:
1. The public sector lacks trained employees with technical skills to tackle issues in the public sector, as seen by the audit department’s weak workforce composition.
2. The financial rule that regulates the principle in government auditing restricts the Auditor – General’s Audit duties.
3. In practice, the Audit Department is subjected to disproportionate supervision by politicians and high government officials. As a result, the department’s independence has been compromised.
4. The Auditor – General’s authority is insufficient to tackle audit challenges in ministries and extra-ministerial departments.
The Study’s Goal:
This study is based on an assessment of government audits in relation to accountability in ministries and extra-ministerial departments. As a result, the goals of this research are as follows:
1. Determine the extent to which the public sector lacks trained individuals to tackle difficulties.
2. To determine the financial legislation that leads the principle in government auditing that restricts the Auditor – General’s Audit duties, which are insufficiently enlarged;
3. Determine the extent to which the Audit Department is subjected to excessive influence by politicians and high government officials in practice, rendering the department’s independence inadequate.
4. Determine the scope of the Auditor-power General’s and determine if it is strong enough to tackle audit issues in ministries and extra-ministerial departments.
The Study’s Importance:
Using public funds to address financial carelessness that has resulted in the mismanagement of our public sector’s limited resources. It is clear that this work will be useful in the public sector.
This would also greatly contribute to the rotation of a verile and formidable audit Department that is fully ready to tackle audit difficulties of the times, resulting in a high level of fraudulent practices.
It will also aid in employee development, which will improve accountability in ministries and extra-ministerial departments.
To give basic information about the Auditor-power General’s and the ability to tackle difficulties in ministries and extra-ministerial departments.
This would also enhance ties between the Audit employees and the rest of the staff who believe auditing is something else.
It will also reveal the financial rule that constrained the Auditor – General’s audit role.
This effort will also ensure a useful solution to the Audit Department’s staff composition problem, as well as the realization of audit functions.
Furthermore, because there is little literature on this topic, the study will be useful in polytechnics, higher education institutions, and libraries as it will add to the store of knowledge.
The Study’s Scope:
The focus of this project board is on specific procedures in ministries and extra-ministerial departments, with particular reference to the Auditor General of Enugu State.
Questions for Research:
Four research questions were developed to establish clarity in order to fully address the previously indicated problems. This research question arose from the study’s background, problem statement, and purpose. As an example:
i. To what extent does the public sector lack trained individuals to tackle challenges?
ii. To what extent are financial regulations, which control the principles in government auditing, restricting the Auditor – General’s Audit functions, or are they sufficiently broadened?
iii. To what extent is the Audit Department subjected to excessive influence by politicians and senior government officials in practice?
iv. To what extent is the Auditor – General’s authority not sufficiently enhanced to handle accountability challenges in ministries and extra-ministerial departments?
Hypothesis 0:
To effectively manage this investigation, the null hypothesis on the generalization of the assured relationship between government audit and accountability in ministries / Extra-ministerial Departments was experimentally investigated.
HO1 There is no major difference between senior and junior state audit staff in terms of how a lack of skilled personnel in the public sector affects its challenges.
HO2 On excessive budget control by politicians and government officials, there is no major difference between senior and junior state Audit personnel.
Do You Have New or Fresh Topic? Send Us Your Topic
GOVERNMENT INTERNAL AUDITS ACCOUNTABILITY IN MINISTRIES / EXTRA-MINISTERIAL DEPARTMENT.
[ad_2]