Government and public sector assurance
Expenditure assurance, procurement reviews and internal control work for public entities and development programmes in Kenya.
On this page Sector perspective · Services and deliverables · Planning questions
Oversight depends on a record that can be followed
Areas of focus
Public expenditure · Procurement and contracts · Accountability and follow-up
A programme may report that funds were spent within budget. The oversight questions go further. Who authorised the commitment, what did the contract require, what evidence shows delivery, and can the payment and report be traced to the same transaction? When funds pass through several implementing teams, each handover can create gaps in that record.
MSM Chris & Associates scopes public sector and development assignments around the commissioning authority, terms of reference and applicable reporting or procurement criteria. We identify the records needed from finance, procurement and programme teams, then explain which findings affect the reported expenditure or the way it is controlled.
Public institutions and programme implementation units, development partners and teams responsible for reporting on publicly funded or co-financed activities.
Public expenditure, procurement and control reviews
Programme and expenditure assurance
We reconcile financial statements, expenditure returns or programme schedules to the underlying accounts and funding records. We examine selected spending against the authorised budget, agreed reporting period and criteria in the commissioning terms.
Typical output. The agreed report on programme expenditure, with material differences linked to the relevant records, budget categories and periods.
Procurement and contract reviews
We follow selected purchases from approval and sourcing through contract award, delivery or acceptance and payment. We review the documents supporting the steps in scope, including variations and evidence of delivery, against the criteria agreed for the assignment.
Typical output. A schedule of exceptions that identifies the transaction, applicable criterion, available evidence and any information still needed.
Internal controls and audit follow-up
We assess how teams manage commitments, advances, bank reconciliations, assets and period-end reports. We can follow up prior audit findings by examining the actions taken and the evidence that a revised control now operates.
Typical output. Prioritised actions and a record of the evidence supporting each finding or follow-up conclusion.
Agreed-upon procedures for oversight bodies
For a defined oversight question, we can agree specific procedures on a set of payments, partner returns or procurement files. We confirm the period, selection method and documents to be examined with the commissioning team.
Typical output. A factual findings report for the agreed users, with each finding presented against the procedure performed.
Scoping a public sector assignment
Can the work focus on one procurement package or programme?
Yes. We can define the contract, programme or population in scope, the period covered, the records to examine and the people who will use the report. The commissioning terms guide the work and the reporting format.
Which rules or criteria will you use?
At planning, we identify the criteria that apply to the assignment, such as the terms of reference, funding agreement, approved budget or relevant procurement requirements. We agree how those criteria will be reflected in the procedures and report.
Can you verify progress on earlier audit findings?
Yes. Share the earlier findings, management’s action plan and evidence of steps taken. We can examine the agreed actions and report the evidence of implementation and any matters still open.
What to send us
Share the commissioning terms, reporting period and deadline, the programme or contracts in scope, and the oversight questions the report should address.