Counties clean up audit mess as Ouko plans expansion

Some counties have made progress in providing documents that reveal how they spent taxpayers’ money, an analyses of the Auditor-General’s reports show.

The 2017/18 county executive reports show counties have made improvements in the audit opinions they receive.

For instance, although Tharaka-Nithi had audit queries, it received a qualified opinion from Auditor-General Edward Ouko.

This means Mr Ouko received all the information required for the audit, but it revealed gaps that often arise from failure to stick to procedures and budget limits. This shows failure to follow laid-down procedures or the law.

But this was an improvement from the adverse opinion the county executive got in the financial years 2016/17, 2015/16 and 2014/15.

An adverse opinion, the worst a county can receive, means financial documents and statements provided were misleading or incomplete.

Such an opinion means problems singled out by the audit are pervasive and require a great deal of changes to rectify.

And in 2013/14, Tharaka-Nithi had a disclaimer opinion, meaning financial documents and statements provided were misleading or incomplete.

Such an opinion means problems singled out by the audit are pervasive and require a great deal of changes to rectify.

Other counties that have made notable progress are Isiolo and Samburu, both of which had adverse opinions in the FY2016/17 and 2015/16.

Embu County has received an adverse opinion for four consecutive financial years, in 2017/18, 2016/17, 2015/16 and 2014/15.

Meru, Marsabit and Mandera got qualified opinions in the 2017/18 report, after scoring an adverse opinion in 2015/16, 2014/15, and disclaimers in 2013/14.

Only Nyandarua and Makueni got an unqualified opinion, the first since the advent of devolution, showing that all the money was accounted for with the proper documentation provided.

They also proved that they received goods and services.

Instructively, getting an unqualified opinion is the minimum that Kenyan taxpayers must expect from all counties.

Article 229 (6) of the Constitution requires the Auditor-General to confirm whether or not public money has been spent well.

The deadline for submitting financial statements to the Auditor-General is September 30 of the calendar year.

In line with relevant constitutional provisions, audit reports are submitted to relevant county assemblies through the Public Accounts and Investments Committees.

The deliberations by the relevant watchdog committees then involve inviting key officers from the various entities to respond to audit queries.

After the discussions are completed, the committees, with the help of the Office of the Auditor-General, come up with recommendations for implementation by the entity concerned.

The law also requires the Auditor-General to make follow-ups in the subsequent year to confirm whether recommendations made were implemented by accounting officers.

In cases where no action was taken, the matter is included in the subsequent year’s audit report.

More accountability requirements in counties have seen increased requests for special audits, Mr Ouko says.

And in order to ensure timely audits and monitor spending, the Office of the Auditor-General says it has plans to set up regional headquarters so that their staff are near areas where services are demanded most.

“This will ensure timely audits, availability of staff for advisory services, and adequate support to county assemblies as they deliberate on audit reports for county governments.

“First on line has been the construction of the Kakamega Regional Office to serve the western Kenya. The building is 70 percent complete,” Mr Ouko said.