Factors affecting capital program performance audit findings

Complex capital programs require specialized management techniques, in order to address the volatility, cost overruns, significant delays in completion, and failures with which such programs are typically associated. The need is greater than ever for careful oversight, especially for programs that expend public monies.

Audit is commonly a statutory or governance requirement on such programs, but traditional performance audit techniques and standards may be insufficient for certain types of programs and industries, providing a mere illusion of oversight adequacy instead of the assurance that is needed. In order to most appropriately define the performance audit scope, phrase the solicitation for services, select the audit team, and provide support to the auditors during the engagement, public and private sector entity auditees need to understand the factors that impact performance audit results and effectiveness. The question becomes one of how performance audit can be improved, and stakeholders satisfied regarding program achievements, accountability for resource use, transparency in operations, and risk management.

The author considered program complexity, governance, project controls, the history and evolution of the audit function, stakeholder expectations, assurance, and obstacles to audit, and used this information in conjunction with data from a large sample of 775 audit reports from complex construction programs, to derive questions and conclusions about performance audit results and effectiveness, and comparisons to expenditure audit results. The ultimate goal was to define key components in the execution of performance audits, based on theconclusions of the analysis, in order to improve performance audit findings and thus their applicability and usefulness.

While this study focused on program performance audit, it was also related to the field of program management. Although the data population was concentrated in the area of construction programs, conclusions from this research may also be applied to other complex, multifaceted or phased activities such as projects and programs in other industries (manufacturing, information technology), and also pursuits such as major event planning, company launch, mergers, and large program implementations or rollouts.

The research results clearly demonstrated that different types of findings were generated by different audit scopes. The author observed that typical audit findings focused on routine procedural, accounting, and controls errors. On average, contract expenditure audits questioned only 2.65% of expenditures, and performance audits of large complex programs questioned only 0.03% of expenditures. The majority (72.56%) of the performance audits in the sample yielded no findings or questioned costs.

There were significant positive correlations between: the number of expenditures tested and the number of qualitative findings, inclusion of construction experts on the audit team and the percentage of expenditures questioned, inclusion of construction experts on the audit team and the number of qualitative findings, broader audit scope and the percentage of expenditures questioned, and broader audit scope and the number of qualitative findings. Of these, auditor expertise and audit scope were the driving factors.

There were significant negative correlations between the application of agreed-upon procedures and the percentage of expenditures questioned, and the application of agreed upon-procedures and the number of qualitative findings. It was determined that the significant negative correlation between the application of audit standards and the number of qualitative findings was due to other factors, such as the application of agreed-upon procedures and the lack of construction experts on the audit team.

Other findings, resulting from review of the data, were unrelated to the research questions yet of considerable importance to industry. An extremely high percentage (81%) of the “performance audits” instead applied a very limited set of agreed-upon-procedures (AUP) in the engagement, According to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (CPAs), AUP engagements could not be classified as audits. Thus, it was inappropriate for the accounting firms to apply AUP engagements in lieu of a performance audit, and it was especially egregious for them to state in their report that the engagements were conducted in accordance with audit standards, as AUP engagements and the specific audit standards were by their very nature mutually exclusive.

The tax treatment of employee stock options : generous to a fault

In the 2000 budgets, both the federal and Ontario governments introduced changes to the tax treatment of employee stock options for the explicit purpose of making their tax treatment in Canada similar to or more favourable than that in the United States. The federal budget added a deferral, similar to that currently applicable to options granted by Canadian-controlled private corporations, for up to $100,000 per year of public company stock options. The Ontario budget introduced an exemption from tax for employees involved in research and development on the first $100,000 per year of employee benefits arising on the exercise of qualified stock options or on eligible capital gains arising from the sale of shares acquired by the exercise of eligible stock options. These proposals reflect the apparent acceptance by the two governments that there is a “brain drain” from Canada to the United States of knowledge workers in the “new” economy and that reductions in Canadian taxes should stem this drain. In the author’s view, the tax treatment of employee stock options, even without these changes, is overly generous. Both the federal and provincial proposals ignore the fact that most employee stock options are taxed more favourably in Canada than in the United States in any event. In particular, most employee stock option benefits in Canada are taxed at capital gains tax rates, whereas in the United States most are taxed at full rates. While the US Internal Revenue Code does provide capital gains tax treatment for certain employee stock option benefits, a number of preconditions must be met. Most important, the shares acquired pursuant to the options must be held for a minimum of one year after the option is exercised. In addition, there are monetary limits on the amount of options that qualify for capital gains treatment. In Canada, there are generally no holding period requirements or monetary limits that apply in order for the option holder to benefit from capital gains tax rates. Empirical evidence indicates that the vast majority of employees in the United States exercise their options and immediately sell the shares acquired. These “cashless exercises” do not benefit from capital gains treatment in the United States, whereas similar cashless exercises in Canada generally do. This empirical evidence suggests not only that the 2000 budget proposals are unwarranted, but also that the existing treatment of employee stock options in Canada is already more generous than that in the United States. This article begins with a theoretical “benchmark” for the taxation of employee stock options. The author suggests that employee stock options should be treated in the same manner as other income from employment. In theory, the value of the benefit should be included in income when the option is granted or vests. However, owing to the practical difficulty of valuing employee stock options, the theoretical benchmark proposed is that the value of the benefit (the difference between the fair market value of the shares acquired and the strike price under the option) be taxed when the shares are acquired, and the employer be entitled to a corresponding deduction. The employee stock option rules in Canada and the United States are then compared and contrasted with each other and the benchmark treatment. The article then examines the arguments that have been made for favourable treatment of employee stock options. Included in this critique is a review of the recent empirical work on the Canadian brain drain. Empirical studies suggest that the brain drain—if it exists at all—is small and that, despite what many newspapers and right-wing think-tanks would have us believe, lower taxes in the United States are not the cause. One study, concluding that taxes do have an effect on migration, suggests that even if Canada adopted a tax system identical to that in the United States, the brain drain would be reduced by a mere 10 percent. Indeed, even if Canada eliminated income tax altogether, it would not stop the brain drain. If governments here want to spend money in order to stem the brain drain, they should focus on other areas. For example, Canada produces fewer university graduates in the fields of mathematics, sciences, and engineering than any other G7 country except Italy. The short supply of university graduates in these fields, the apparent loss of top-calibre academics to US
universities, and the consequent lower levels of university research in these areas (an important spawning ground for new ideas in the “new” knowledge-based economy) suggest that Canada may be better served by devoting more resources to its university institutions, particularly in post-graduate programs, rather than continuing the current trend of budget cuts that universities have endured and may further endure if taxes are reduced.
As far as employee stock options are concerned, if Canada does want to look to the United States for guidance on tax reform (which it seems to do with increasing frequency of late), it should adopt the US rules applicable to nonstatutory options, which are close to the proposed benchmark treatment. In the absence of preferential tax treatment, employee stock options would still be included in compensation packages provided that there were sound business reasons for their use. No persuasive evidence has been put forward that the use of stock options, in the absence of tax incentives, is suboptimal. Indeed, the US experience suggests quite the opposite.

New voice, same story? Social entrepreneurship and active social capital formation

The development of the third sector in Australia has involved the negotiation of varying forms of state and market regulatory mechanisms. In the course of these settlements, ground-up initiatives have often found that authenticity is only the starting point on journeys that end in incorporation. Social entrepreneurship is an emerging set of ideas which attempts to hold on to the authentic and unique elements generated by grassroots actions. What are its chances of success? This article sets out to answer this question through a discussion of regulation and social capital. A four-fold model of social cap ita I formation is advanced which outlines 'defensive', 'consolidative', 'inclusive' and 'regulated' social capital. It is concluded that while social entrepreneurship has the potential to shift social capital formation from reactive to active forms, it is likely to become increasingly standardised and regulated.

Risk analysis in cost planning and its effect on efficiency in capital cost budgeting

Builds on earlier work which reported on the experience of the Hong Kong Government in using risk analysis techniques in capital cost estimating. In 1993 the Hong Kong Government implemented a methodology for capital cost estimating using risk analysis (ERA) in its public works planning. This calculated amount replaces the pre-1993 contingency allowance, which was merely a percentage addition on top of the base estimate of a project. Adopts a team approach to identify, classify and cost the uncertainties associated with a project. The sum of the average risk allowance for the identified risk events thus becomes the contingency. A study of the effect of ERA was carried out to compare the variability and consistency of the contingency estimates between non-ERA and ERA projects. The preliminary results of a survey showed a highly significant difference in variation and consistency between these groups. This analysis indicates the successful use of the ERA method for public works projects to reduce unnecessary and  exaggerated allowance for risk. However, the contingency allowance for ERA projects was also considered high. Adds data from the UK with descriptions of 41 private sector projects which fall into the non-ERA category and reflect better performance in the determining of contingency allowances.

Volunteering and social capital in regional Victoria

The link between volunteerism and social capital has received some attention in Australia in recent years. Of particular note to this paper is the work of Baum, Bush, Modra, Murray, Cox, Alexander, and Potter (2000), who described the contribution volunteers made to social capital in a metropolitan setting - the western suburbs of Adelaide, South Australia. The aim of this current study is twofold, to describe the contribution volunteers make to social capital through participation, reciprocity and social trust in a regional and rural setting; and to compare findings with those relating to a metropolitan environment. In the light of differing volunteer patterns in rural and regional environments compared to metropolitan environments, we hypothesised that the relationship between volunteerism and indicators of social capital would also be different. The results from this study support the findings of Baum, Modra, Bush, Cox, Cooke, and Potter (1999) and therefore reinforce the premise that volunteers make a substantial. contribution to social capital. While greater numbers of people who live in rural or regional areas undertake volunteer work, we found there are more similarities between the rural/regional and metropolitan sectors regarding volunteerism than there are differences.

Capital gains tax in South Africa : lessons from Australia?

In the budget review of23 February 2000, the South African Minister of Finance announced that a capital gains tax ('CGT') would be introduced into South Africa, the anticipated start date at that point being 1 April 2001. Pursuant to Taxation Laws Amendment Act 5 of 2001, a CGT of general operation was introduced into the South African Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (the 'ITA 1962') through the insertion of the Eighth Schedule¹, read together with s 26A of the Act. Section 26A is the charging provision that states that a person's taxable income included their 'taxable capital gain'. As discussed below, the start date was revised to 1 October 2001.

Capitalizing on Bourdieu : how useful are concepts of `social capital` and `social field` for researching `marginalized` young women?

This article considers Bourdieu’s concepts of ‘social capital’ and ‘social fields’, comparing and contrasting his use of these concepts with that of James Coleman and Robert Putnam. It examines how Bourdieu’s ideas offer a different way of understanding the lives of economically disadvantaged young women designated as ‘at risk’ of leaving school early. A micro-level analysis is made of ‘Bluey’s story’, a narrative derived from data gathered during a three-year research project on young women’s negotiations from the margins of education and work in Australia. Deconstructing Bluey’s narrative reveals how social capital is deployed (sometimes unsuccessfully) in a range of social fields. Such narratives can thus be used to ‘speak back’ to educational policies, to provide alternative insights into the issues and needs of economically disadvantaged young women and to challenge current constructs of ‘at risk’.

Baby, it`s you : international capital discovers the under threes

Well-established international entertainment firms such as Disney and Fisher-Price are joining new start-up firms such as Baby Einstein to create a 'Baby' market of products (including toys, games and videos) specifically targeted at children aged 0-3 years. Despite its novelty, the 'Baby' market mirrors older markets that these firms have created around other demographic groups (e.g. older children, adolescents and adults) - it redefines its target demographic group around specific commodities and promotes its redefinition as 'common sense'. The 'Baby' firms redefine babies solely as early learners whose potential to learn can be released by these firms' brand-name 'educational' or 'developmental' products. Many adults buy these products because they accept the firms' redefinition of babies, but other adults ignore the firms' promotional messages and buy the products to give themselves some time apart from their babies. The 'Baby' market is significant for children and adults because it changes young children's relationships with adults and because it subordinates local cultural differences to a children's culture that purports to be 'global' but has, in reality, extremely narrow foundations in class, race and gender.