Table 30.1: Timelines of audited financial statement submissions

Year Fiscal year covered by the report Date of annual financial statement received by SAI Date of audited annual financial statement submitted to legislature


Dimension 30.2. Timing, coverage and data requirements

Time period Coverage Data requirements/calculation Data sources
Last three completed fiscal years. CG.
  • Date(s) of receipt of financial report(s) by the external auditor.
  • Date(s) of submitting the audit reports to the legislature.
  • Calculation of the period between receipt by the auditor and submission to the legislature.
  •  Information on the causes for any delays in submitting the audited financial report to the legislature
  • SAI corroborated by the parliamentary public.
  • Accounts committee and civic interest groups.
  • Information on submission of reports for audit can also be corroborated with the MoF or the Treasury ministries.

Dimension 30.3. External audit follow-up


30.3:1. This dimension assesses the extent to which effective and timely follow-up on external audit recommendations or observations is undertaken by the executive or audited entity. Evidence of effective follow-up of the audit findings includes the issuance by the executive or audited entity of a formal written response to the audit findings, indicating how these will be or already have been addressed. Reports on follow-up may provide evidence of implementation by summing up the extent to which the audited entities have cleared audit queries and implemented audit recommendations or observations. Note that follow-up to recommendations issued by the legislature is assessed separately under PI-31. 30.3:2. This dimension is concerned only with the response to the audit report (e.g., a management

letter or final report to the auditee). The response remains valid for scoring the dimension irrespective of whether the response is made before or after the parliamentary review.

30.3:3. The terms ‘formal’ and ‘comprehensive’ imply a written response that systematically addresses the audit findings and recommendations; it does not imply that recommendations have necessarily been implemented.

30.3:4. An assessment of timeliness depends on the nature of the recommendation, but suggests that, at a minimum, the issue should not be repeated in the audit report for the following year.

30.3:5. This dimension, as dimensions 30.1 and 30.2, focuses only on audits of financial reports. However, if the SAI addresses other reports such as performance audit reports or compliance audit reports submitted to the executive and obtains responses for which follow-up was expected, assessors can mention this in the narrative.


PEFA Handbook Volume 1: The PEFA Assessment Process – Planning, Managing and Using PEFA