Verification of grant use and audit of grant funds in Ukraine<\/h1>\n
Independent verification of grant use, audit of grant funds and audit of project financing: whether the money was spent in line with the budget and the agreement, whether it is supported by documents, and whether the results were delivered. Commissioned by donors, boards, founders or by the organisation itself before it reports. Report in English and Ukrainian under ISRS 4400, ISA 805 or the donor’s own template. Audit firm since 2000, Ukrainian audit register No. 4624, member of DFK International.<\/p>\n
![\"Verification](\"\/wp-content\/plugins\/mk-landing\/img\/contract.jpg\")
<\/div>\n- \n
- Reconciliation of expenditure to the grant budget and agreement, line by line<\/li>\n
- Testing of source documents on a sample or in full<\/li>\n
- Procurement, staff costs, exchange differences, indirect costs<\/li>\n
- Unspent balance and equipment purchased with grant funds<\/li>\n
- Report of factual findings or ISA 805 audit report, plus a management letter<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\nTimeline<\/span>1 to 3 weeks<\/strong><\/div>\nFee<\/span>proposal after we review the assignment<\/strong><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/section>\n
\n \nWho commissions it and why<\/div>\nFour situations that call for verification of grant use<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
\n\nDonor<\/div>\nVerification of the use of grant funds at the donor’s request<\/b><\/p>\n
A donor reviews its partner before the next tranche, at project closure or following a signal. We work to the donor’s terms of reference and report directly to the donor in its template. More on formats: grant audit for donors<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nOrganisation<\/div>\nAudit of grant funds before the report is submitted<\/b><\/p>\n
The organisation commissions the review itself before the report goes to the donor. We find ineligible costs and gaps in documentation while they can still be fixed, rather than after the donor has already disallowed them.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nFounder, bank, public funds<\/div>\nAudit of project financing from other sources<\/b><\/p>\n
Earmarked funding from a founder, a project loan, public budget funds or community money. We check that the money went where it was meant to go and that the report on its use is accurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nSub-grants<\/div>\nReview of partners and sub-grantees<\/b><\/p>\n
The lead partner of a consortium is liable for all partners’ costs. We review sub-grantee reports before they enter the consolidated report to the donor. More: consortium and sub-grant audit<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n\nWhat we test<\/div>\nSeven questions the review answers<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
\nIs expenditure within budget<\/b><\/p>\nEach line is compared with the approved budget; variances above the permitted percentage are recorded and checked for donor approval.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Are the costs eligible<\/b><\/p>\nProject period, link to the activities in the agreement, prohibited cost categories, VAT, fines, hospitality. These are the items donors disallow first.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Are the documents there<\/b><\/p>\nContract, invoice, delivery act, payment record, and for staff a timesheet and a calculation. A missing link makes the cost unsupported.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Was procurement done properly<\/b><\/p>\nThresholds under the donor’s rules, collection of quotations, selection record, absence of conflicts of interest between buyer and supplier.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Is the exchange rate right<\/b><\/p>\nConversion of costs into the reporting currency under the donor’s rule: daily rate, period average or the bank rate on the date the tranche was received.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Were results delivered<\/b><\/p>\nProject indicators under the agreement: people reached, outputs produced, evidence for each. Donors do not accept a financial report without results.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
What about the balance and assets<\/b><\/p>\nUnspent funds at the end of the project, equipment and its fate under the agreement: transfer, continued use or return.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/section>\n
\n \nReport format<\/div>\nWhich document you receive<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
\nReport of factual findings, ISRS 4400<\/b><\/p>\nA list of procedures agreed with the donor and what we found under each, without an audit opinion. The most common format for expenditure verification for the EU, GIZ, embassies and foundations. More: ISRS 4400 report<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Audit report, ISA 805<\/b><\/p>\nThe auditor’s opinion on the project financial report. Required when the donor asks for an audit rather than a verification. More: ISA 800, ISA 805, ISAE 3000<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Donor template<\/b><\/p>\nSome donors provide their own auditor’s report form with a list of questions. We complete it and add a management letter with recommendations for the organisation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n
\n \nHow we work<\/div>\nFour steps with no surprises at the end<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
\n01<\/b>Request and proposal within 1 day<\/strong><\/p>\nWe review the grant agreement, the budget and the donor’s verification requirements, then send a proposal and the list of procedures.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n