J.11-2NUPAS.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 75 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 72061719R00002
About this file
J.11-2NUPAS
View the file
Other files
Show all 20
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
First Criterion Appendix A2 -- NON-U.S. ORGANIZATION PRE-AWARD SURVEY (NUPAS)
| Name of Organization |
| Type of Organization |
| Proposed Activity/Amount |
| Assessment Conducted by |
| Dates Conducted |
| A NUPAS, using the following matrix, should be performed for all non-U.S. awards to assist Agreement Officers in making responsibility determinations through assessment of a potential awardee’s likelihood for compliance with the Standard Provisions for Non-U.S. Nongovernmental Recipients. |
| NUPAS Objectives: |
| 1. To determine whether the non-U.S. organization has sufficient financial and managerial capacity to manage USAID funds in accordance with U.S. Government and USAID requirements; |
| 2. To determine the most appropriate method of financing to use under the potential USAID award; and |
| 3. To determine the degree of support and oversight necessary to ensure proper accountability of funds to be potentially provided to the organization. |
| SCORING | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 (Highest Score) | ||
| Capacity and Risk Areas to Review | No. | INADEQUATE CAPACITY Key Deficiencies and SW Not Remediable Before Award | WEAK CAPACITY Some Deficiencies and SW Not Easily Remediable Before Award | ADEQUATE CAPACITY No Deficiencies |
SW (if any) Remediable Before Award
| STRONG CAPACITY No Deficiencies or SW | SCORE | SCORE Based On: | Doc. Ref | REMARKS/ RECOMMENDATIONS | ||||||||
| High Risk | Moderate to High Risk | Low to Moderate Risk | Low Risk | Desk Review | Inquiry | Obsn. | Test | |||||
| First Criterion: LEGAL STRUCTURE | ||||||||||||
| 1.1 | Local Organization Definition: | |||||||||||
| Confirm compliance with USAID "local organization" definition. [Only applicable if the Mission intends to limit competition to local organizations.] | 1 | Organization does not meet the definition and has no plan or capacity to change. | Organization does not meet the definition and has a plan by which it will meet the definition within 2 – 4 months. | Organization meets the definition and there are some contingencies or conditions that make maintaining such status challenging or uncertain. | Organization meets the definition and has stable conditions for maintaining such status. | |||||||
| Score | ||||||||||||
| 1.2 | Legal Requirements: | |||||||||||
| Confirm compliance with legal registration requirements and other material licenses, permits, laws and regulations. | 2 | Organization is not legally registered or registration has expired. Organization lacks one or more required permits or licenses to operate. Organization is not aware of its obligations under required licenses and permits or applicable tax, labor, occupational health and safety, environmental, or other material laws and regulations. Or, the organization is aware but has not yet applied for the permits/licenses. | Organization has applied for legal status and is not yet a legally recognized entity in the country in which it operates. Organization has applied for and has not yet obtained one or more required permits or licenses to operate. Organization is aware of its obligations under required licenses and permits or applicable tax, labor, occupational health and safety, environmental, or other material laws and regulations. | Organization is legally registered and has all required permits and licenses to operate. Organization is aware of its obligations under its licenses and permits and applicable tax, labor, occupational health and safety, environmental, and other material laws and regulations; is in substantial compliance with all such legal obligations. The oganization is taking (or plans to take,) corrective action where needed. | Organization is legally registered; has, and is fully compliant with, all required permits and licenses to operate; is aware of its tax status and is fully compliant with applicable tax, labor, occupational health and safety, environmental, and other material laws and regulations relevant to its operations. | |||||||
| See Guidance for definitions of “Deficiency,” Significant Weakness,” and “Weakness.” SW = Significant Weakness(es). | ||||||||||||
| Score | ||||||||||||
| 1.3 | Organizational Structure: | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization’s charter, by-laws and other foundational/operational documents support its mission and goals | 3 | Organization has no formal organizational structure; there are clearly inadequate or entirely missing definitions of departmental or functional responsibilities and lines of responsibility; lines of communication among departments or key functions are weak. The organization has no defined mission. | Organization has less than an adequate organizational structure; roles and responsibilities of departments or functions and lines of communication are not well defined, and the organization does not have a defined mission. | Organization has an adequate organizational structure, adequately designed and relevant to its mission and goals, roles and responsibilities of departments or functions and lines of communication are adequately defined and appropriate. | Organization has a strong organizational structure, well designed and higly relevant to its mission and goals, roles and responsibilities of departments or functions and lines of communication are well-defined and highly appropriate. | |||||||
| 1.4 | Governance: | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization emphasizes the importance of and practices good corporate governance in all key areas. [Refer to OECD Principles of Corporate Governance: right and equitable treatments of shareholders (only used for public organizations), interests of other stakeholders, role and responsibility of the board, integrity and ethical behavior, disclosure and transparency.] | 4 | Management of the organization does not adequately emphasize and the organization does not practice good corporate governance in key areas. Deficiencies and SW in key areas of corporate governance are not remediable prior to award. | There is marginal involvement by organization’s management in addressing the importance of good corporate governance in key areas. Deficiencies and SW** in one or more key areas of corporate governance may not be easily remediable. | Organization’s management addresses the importance of good corporate governance in key areas, and there are a few weaknesses in one or more areas of corporate governance. Those are remediable. | Organization’s management regularly and consistently emphasizes the importance of and practices good corporate governance (as broadly defined) in all key areas. | |||||||
| Score | ||||||||||||
| 1.5 | Control Environment: | |||||||||||
| Confirm that adequate safeguards exist within the organization to ensure fidelity to fiduciary obligations and prevent officials from obtaining financial or non-financial benefits on the basis of decisions made or actions taken in their official capacity. | 5 | Board does not have TOR or a clear understanding of its key functions. Board term limits are not defined or are unreasonable. There is no approved process for electing/ appointing/ removing Board members and officers. Organization has no or negligible fiduciary risk controls covering Board members, officers, and employees; there are no credible mechanisms for enforcement of such policies and controls. The control environment is so deficient it presents an unacceptable level of risk. | Board has incomplete or otherwise inadequate TOR and lacks an adequate understanding of its key functions; key functions are carried out inconsistently. Board term limits are not defined or are unreasonable. No approved process for electing, appointing or removing Board members and officers is in place. Organization has inadequate fiduciary risk controls covering Board members, officers, and employees; there are inadequate mechanisms for enforcement of such policies and controls. | Board has adequate TOR and an adequate understanding of its key functions and those functions are carried out generally well. Board term limits are defined and reasonable. Board members and officers are elected/appointed/ removed in an acceptable manner. Organization has fiduciary risk controls covering Board members, officers, and employees; adequate mechanisms for enforcement of such policies and controls are in place. | Board has clear TOR** and a good understanding of its key functions and those key functions are carried out consistently well. Board term limits are defined and reasonable. Board members and officers are elected/appointed / removed in accordance with applicable laws and approved, written procedures. Organization has fiduciary risk controls covering Board members, officers, and employees; effective mechanisms for enforcement of such policies and controls are in place. | |||||||
| Score | ||||||||||||
| Average Score for LEGAL STRUCTURE |
Second Criterion
| SCORING | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 (Highest Score) | ||
| Capacity and Risk Areas to Review | No. | INADEQUATE CAPACITY Key Deficiencies and SW Not Remediable Before Award | WEAK CAPACITY Some Deficiencies and SW Not Easily Remediable Before Award | ADEQUATE CAPACITY No Deficiencies |
SW (if any) Remediable Before Award
| STRONG CAPACITY No Deficiencies or SW | SCORE | SCORE Based On: | Doc. Ref | REMARKS/ RECOMMENDATIONS | ||||||||
| High Risk | Moderate to High Risk | Low to Moderate Risk | Low Risk | Desk Review | Inquiry | Obsn. | Test | |||||
| Second Criterion: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND INTERNAL CONTROLS SYSTEMS | ||||||||||||
| 2.1 | Banking Relationship and Accounts | |||||||||||
| Confirm the organization has a banking relationship with a registered commercial bank in country, and that the organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to ensure regular reconciliation of bank accounts with the accounting records. | 6 | Organization has no banking relationship. Organization uses the bank account of a senior employee and funds are commingled with personal funds. | Organization has no banking relationship, and plans to establish a bank account in a registered banking institution prior to an award. | Organization has a bank account in a registered banking institution and the account is adequate for its mission/ goals. Opening and maintaining additional accounts limited to specific purposes may be beneficial. | Organization has bank accounts in a registered commercial banking institution that are appropriate for its mission/goals. | |||||||
| Bank accounts are rarely or never reconciled. | Bank accounts are periodically reconciled. Documentary evidence does not exist to determine, review and approve monthly bank reconciliations. | Bank accounts are reconciled on a monthly basis. Adequate documentary evidence exists to determine, review and approve monthly bank reconciliations. | Bank accounts are accurately reconciled on a monthly basis. Documentary evidence exists to show the dates the monthly bank reconciliations were prepared, and who prepared, reviewed and approved them, with corresponding signatures affixed. [Note: This includes credible financial management records sufficient for internal and external audit trail purposes.] | |||||||||
| Overall, the organization’s policies, procedures and practices in this area are not adequate. | Policies do not stipulate requirements for regular bank reconciliation. Less than adequate action is taken on outstanding items over 60 days. | Policies stipulate adequate requirements covering regular bank reconciliation. Adequate action is taken on outstanding items over 60 days. | Polices stipulate sound requirements covering regular bank reconciliation. Appropriate action is taken on any outstanding item over 60 days. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.2 | Accounting/ Bookkeeping System | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has an accounting/ bookkeeping system, and that financial transactions are entered into the system on a consistent basis in accordance with applicable standards, policies and procedures. Note: For very small organizations and awards, a manual (handwritten in books) double entry accounting system may be acceptable provided it is established and used regularly and consistently in accordance with acceptable accounting principles, standards, policies, procedures, and practices and is regularly kept up-to-date, reconciled and reviewed by appropriately trained, experienced, and otherwise competent personnel. | 10 | Organization does not have an adequate accounting/ bookkeeping system. | Organization’s accounting/ bookkeeping system is weak. Financial transactions are not entered into the system on a regular or consistent basis. The bookkeeping system lacks some functionality to automatically reconcile summaries of transactions to the detailed transactions. | Organization has an adequate double entry accounting/ bookkeeping system. Financial transactions are entered into the system on a regular basis. The bookkeeping system has some functionality to automatically reconcile subsidiary ledgers to the main ledger. | Organization has a reliable double entry accounting/ bookkeeping system that meets its needs and is otherwise appropriate. Financial transactions are entered into the system on a daily basis. The bookkeeping system has functionalities to automatically reconcile subsidiary ledger to the main ledger. | |||||||
| Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.3 | Chart of Accounts, General Ledger and Financial Statements | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has a chart of accounts and corresponding General Ledger that are used to prepare financial statements on a regular and consistent basis. [Note: Request the Chart of Accounts to perform a detailed review to ensure that the organization has a logical sequence of accounts, assets, liabilities and owners’ equity. Confirm there is a code to capture “unallowable” costs.] | 11 | Organization does not have a chart of accounts or General Ledger or those are not adequate for purposes of the award. | Organization has an incomplete and otherwise weak chart of accounts and General Ledger. | Organization has a chart of accounts and corresponding General Ledger that is adequate. | Organization has a chart of accounts and corresponding General Ledger that meet its needs and are otherwise appropriate. | |||||||
| The General Ledger numbering system does not follow applicable statutory country requirements (if any). Material financial transactions are not recorded regularly and consistently in accordance with approved accounting standards. | The General Ledger numbering system does not follow all applicable statutory country requirements (if any). Material financial transactions are not recorded regularly and consistently in accordance with approved standards. | The General Ledger numbering system follows statutory country requirements (if any) in all material respects. Material financial transactions are recorded regularly and consistently in accordance with approved and otherwise adequate accounting standards, principles and practices. | The General Ledger numbering system follows statutory country requirements (if any) with no exceptions. All financial transactions are recorded regularly and consistently in accordance with approved and otherwise appropriate accounting standards, principles and practices. | |||||||||
| Financial Statements are not produced, or if produced, are not derived from the General Ledger (trial balance) in accordance with acceptable accounting standards. | Financial Statements are not derived from the General Ledger (trial balance) in an acceptable manner. Financial Statements are not prepared on a consistent basis in accordance with approved accounting standards. | Financial Statements are derived from the General Ledger (trial balance) in an adequate manner. Financial Statements are prepared in accordance with national standards. | Financial Statements are regularly and consistently derived from the General Ledger (trial balance). Financial statements are prepared in accordance with applicable national and international standards. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.4 | Variance Analysis (Budget to Actual Cost) | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to ensure regular variance analysis (budget to actual cost) of program and operating financial data. | 14 | Organization does not have any or adequate systems to analyze actual data versus budget data. | Financial reports are accompanied by incomplete or otherwise weak budget data and variance analysis (budget to actual cost) reports. | Adequate financial reports are accompanied by budget data and variance analysis (budget to actual cost) reports. | Appropriate financial reports are accompanied by budget data and variance analysis (budget to actual cost) reports. | |||||||
| Management is unable to articulate the necessity of variance analysis or to institutionalize the process. | Program managers do not have the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to objectively review the reports and take corrective action. | Program managers generally review financial reports and take corrective action. | Program managers consistently review financial reports and take corrective action. | |||||||||
| Overall, the organization does not have adequate policies, procedures and practices in place. | The organization’s policies, procedures and practices for variance analysis are weak. | The organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place for adequate variance analysis (budget to actual cost) of program and operating financial data. | The organization has appropriate policies, procedures and practices in place to ensure appropriate regular variance analysis (budget to actual cost) of program and operating financial data. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.5 | Allowable and Unallowable Cost | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to segregate allowable and unallowable and to otherwise satisfy donor requirements. [Note: The system can be as simple as a spreadsheet.] | 17 | Organization’s finance personnel or management do not have an adequate understanding or are unable to articulate the concepts surrounding allowable or unallowable cost. | Organization finance/program personnel have weak understanding of the concept of allowable and unallowable costs from a donor restriction perspective. | Organization finance/program personnel have an adequate level of understanding of the concept of allowable and unallowable costs from a donor restriction perspective. | Organization finance/program personnel have an appropriate level of understanding of the concept of allowable and unallowable costs from a donor restriction perspective. | |||||||
| Organization does not have adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to segregate allowable and unallowable cost nor to otherwise satisfy other donor requirements. | The ability of the organization to track unallowable cost is weak. | Organization has an adequate system (formal or informal) to adequately track unallowable cost. | Organization has an appropriate system to track unallowable cost. Organization has effective policies, procedures and practices in place to ensure clear lines of communication between finance and program staff relative to allowable and unallowable cost. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.6 | Direct and Indirect Costs | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization's accountants/bookkeepers have an understanding of direct costs and indirect costs (including cost allocation principles). | 18 | Organization's accountants/bookkeepers do not understand direct costs, indirect costs or cost allocation principles. | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers have a weak understanding of direct costs, indirect cost s and cost allocation principles. | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers have an adequate understanding of direct costs, indirect costs and cost allocation principles. | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers have an appropriate understanding of direct costs, indirect costs and cost allocation principles. | |||||||
| Organization’s accounting records are maintained by personnel with negligible knowledge about direct and indirect costs. | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers have a weak understanding of the concept of “cost objectives” in relation to intermediate and final “cost objectives.” | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers have an adequate understanding of the concept of “cost objectives” in relation to intermediate and final “cost objectives.” | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers have an appropriate understanding of the concept of “cost objectives” in relation to intermediate and final “cost objectives.” | |||||||||
| The overall capacity of the organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers to accurately allocate indirect cost to grants, projects, and other cost objectives according to causal beneficial relationships is negligible. | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers ability to accurately allocate indirect cost to grants, projects, and other cost objectives according to causal beneficial relationships is weak. | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers can accurately allocate indirect cost to grants, projects, and other cost objectives according to causal beneficial relationships. | Organization’s accountants/ bookkeepers have the requisite level of knowledge, skills and experience in this area to accurately allocate indirect cost to grants, projects, and other cost objectives according to causal beneficial relationships. | |||||||||
| The organization lacks the ability to develop or acquire the minimum acceptable level of capacity in accumulating direct and indirect costs by project. | Organization’s capacity to accumulate direct and indirect costs by project in an acceptable manner is weak. | Organization has adequate capacity to accumulate direct and indirect costs by project. | Organization’s skill in accumulating direct and indirect costs by project in an appropriate manner is strong. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.7 | Payments - Segregation of Duties | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has policies, procedures and practices in place regarding segregation of duties to ensure that funds above a certain threshold can only be disbursed with dual signatures and are supported by documentation. | 7 | There are Deficiencies and SW in the payments cycle that lack proper segregation of duties. | Payments are not supported by complete documentation (e.g. missing vendor invoices). | Payments are supported by adequate documentation. Policies, procedures and practices may fall short of best practices. | There are well thought out and documented policies, procedures and practices that safeguard the payment process. | |||||||
| Written policies and procedures do not exist, or those that do, are clearly inadequate. | Adequate written financial practices (e.g. internal controls and audit) are absent or deficient. | Approved policies and procedures are generally followed. | Approved policies and procedures are consistently followed. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.8 | Accounting Cycle - Segregation of Duties | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to ensure proper segregation of duties associated with the accounting cycle. [Note: The adequacy of segregation of duties will vary according to the size of the organization and complexity of its operation.] | 9 | Organization does not have the minimum acceptable set of policies, procedures and practices to ensure proper segregation of duties in relation to the management and disbursement of funds. | The organization does not have adequate policies, procedures and practices in place for purposes of the award to ensure proper segregation of duties associated with the accounting cycle. Funds are disbursed without prior approvals and documentation is inadequate. | Organization has an adequate delegation of authority system to ensure that no one person does all the work relating to a full accounting cycle transaction. Approval is usually obtained prior to disbursement of funds and approvals are adequately documented. | Organization has a sound and well documented delegation of authority system appropriate to the size of the organization to ensure that no one person does all the work relating to a full accounting cycle transaction. Organization has sound policies, procedures and practices to ensure that all approvals are documented prior to cash disbursements. | |||||||
| Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.9 | Financial Records Management | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to ensure proper filing and management of financial records and their ease of access. | 15 | Organization does not have adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to ensure proper filing and management of financial records and their ease of access. | Organization has incomplete and relatively weak policies, procedures and practices to safeguard financial records. [The filing system operates on an ad-hoc, informal basis.] | Organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to safeguard important documents including financial records. [The filing system is not necessarily centralized or optimal.] | Organization has sound policies, procedures and practices in place to safeguard important documents including financial records. [This includes offsite storage of copies of financial records.] | |||||||
| Organization has no contingency plan that includes procedures for backup/recovery of financial data for financial and operational continuity. | Management does not require filing and records management practices. Organization has a weak contingency plan that has significant gaps in procedures for backup/recovery of financial data for financial and operational continuity. | Management supports adequate filing and records management practices throughout the organization. Organization has an adequate contingency plan in place for financial and operational continuity. | Management emphasizes and supports standard, practical, efficient and effective filing and records management practices. Organization has a contingency plan for the organization that includes procedures for backup/recovery for financial and operational continuity. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.10 | Sources of Funding | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has other activities/programs and/or potential sources of funding adequate for continuity of operations during the period of the award and for long term sustainability. [Note: This system can be as simple as having a separate bank account for each funding source.] | 16 | Organization does not have procedures in place to track sources of funding and lacks the capacity to develop and implement such procedures within a reasonable timeframe. | Organization does not have a system in place to track sources of funding. Organization’s bookkeeping system tracks sources of funding through one revenue account. | Organization tracks the sources of funding through offline records. Organization’s accounting/ bookkeeping system adequately tracks sources of funding. | Organization has an effective system in place to track sources of funding. | |||||||
| The level of professional knowledge, skills and experience of finance personnel in job cost accounting, fund accounting, etc. is negligible. | The level of professional knowledge, skills and experience of finance personnel in job cost accounting, fund accounting, etc. is weak. | Finance personnel have an adequate level of professional knowledge, skills and experience in job cost accounting, fund accounting, etc. | Finance personnel have an appropriate level of professional knowledge, skills and experience in job cost accounting, fund accounting, etc. | |||||||||
| Organization has insufficient sources of funding from other activities /programs and/or from other alternative potential sources of funding. | Organization has weak sources of funding from other activities /programs. Organization has weak business development practices in place. | Organization has adequate sources of funding from other activities /programs and/or from other potential sources of funding. Management articulates the importance diversification of sources of funding. Organization has adequate practices in place for business development and it has a satisfactory reputation for satisfactory work. | Organization has good sources of funding from other activities/programs and/or from other potential sources of funding. Management clearly articulates the importance of diversification of sources of funding. Organization has good practices in place for business development and has a reputation for good work. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.11 | Financial Reporting | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has adequate written policies, procedures and practices in place to produce reliable monthly and year-to-date financial statements (income and expenditure report and balance sheet). | 12 | Organization does not have the minimum acceptable set of written policies, procedures and practices in place to produce reliable monthly financial statements (income and expenditure report). | Financial statements are seldom reviewed by management. Management seldom takes corrective actions based its review of financial statements. | Organization produces reasonably adequate financial statements on a regular basis that meet the needs of the organization. Financial statements are reviewed by management. Management generally takes corrective actions based on its review of financial statements. | Organization consistently and accurately produces reliable monthly financial statements from the General Ledger in accordance with its written procedures. The financial statements are reviewed by organization’s management and corrective actions are taken when necessary. | |||||||
| Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.12 | Audit and Review of Financial Statements | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place to ensure that its financial statements are audited or reviewed on a regular basis by a third party recognized under the laws of the country such as a chartered accounting firm or regulatory body or both. | 13 | Financial statements are not usually audited or reviewed. | Organization has incomplete and otherwise weak policies, procedures and practices in place. Financial statements are seldom audited or reviewed on a regular basis by a third party recognized under the laws of the country. | Organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place. Its financial statements are audited or reviewed on a regular basis by a third party recognized under the laws of the country. | Organization has appropriate policies, procedures and practices in place. Its financial statements are audited annually by a third party recognized under the laws of the country. | |||||||
| Organization produces internal financial statements with limited or no Notes to the Financial Statements. | Organization has received a Qualified Opinion, Adverse Opinion, or Disclaimer of Opinion. | When financial statements are audited, a Qualified Opinion is acceptable as long as the audit issues raised are not material to financial management and pose either no or very low fiduciary or performance risk. | Audited financial statements receive an unqualified (unmodified) audit opinion (no Qualified Opinion, Adverse Opinion, or Disclaimer of Opinion). | |||||||||
| If Financial Statements were to be audited, an audit firm would be unable to issue an opinion due to the quality of the financial records. If audited, Organization would most likely receive, a Qualified Opinion, Adverse Opinion, or Disclaimer of Opinion. An auditor, accountant, regulatory body or other third party has communicated a “Deficiency” or “Significant Deficiency” in internal control that cannot be easily remedied. | An auditor, accountant, regulatory body or other third party has communicated a “Deficiency” or “Significant Deficiency” in internal control. Management is unable to represent that no Deficiency or Significant Deficiency in internal control presently exists. | An auditor, accountant, regulatory body or other third party has communicated any “Deficiency” or “Significant Deficiency” in internal control. Management was able to represent that no Deficiency of Significant Deficiency in internal control presently exist. | No auditor, accountant, regulatory body or other third party has communicated any “Deficiency” or “Significant Deficiency” in internal control. | |||||||||
| Review of the financial statements reveals “Going Concern Issues.” | Organization’s policies, procedures and practices for managing and closing audit findings and recommendations are weak. | Organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place for managing and closing audit findings and recommendations. | Organization has appropriate policies, procedures and practices in place for managing and closing audit findings and recommendations. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 2.13 | Financial Management Personnel | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the individuals responsible for discharging accounting and other financial management functions within the organization have the requisite accounting and other financial management qualifications and experience. | 8 | The day-to-day financial management is done by a person with neither formal accounting training nor finance related experience. | The accountant/ bookkeeper is not professionally trained as an accountant and has a limited understanding of management and financial accounting standards, principles and practices. | The accountant/ bookkeeper is adequately trained and has adequate qualifications and experience. | The accountant/ bookkeeper has professional accounting qualifications that clearly meet the needs of the organization. | |||||||
| The individuals responsible for discharging accounting and financial management functions do not have the minimum acceptable level of qualifications and experience needed. | The accountant/ bookkeeper is unable to articulate and apply important concepts, principles and practices and lacks the technical capacity to prepare and monitor operational and project budgets. | The accountant/ bookkeeper is able to articulate and apply basic concepts, principles and practices of management and financial accounting and reporting. The accountant/ bookkeeper has adequate capacity to prepare and monitor budgets including adequate cash flow projections and statements. | The accountant/ bookkeeper has strong ability to apply concepts, principles and practices of management and financial accounting and reporting. The accountant/ bookkeeper has strong technical capacity and experience to prepare and monitor appropriate budgets including cash flow projections and statements. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| Average Score for FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND INTERNAL CONTROL SYSTEMS |
Third Criterion
| SCORING | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 (Highest Score) | ||
| Capacity and Risk Areas to Review | No. | INADEQUATE CAPACITY Key Deficiencies and SW Not Remediable Before Award | WEAK CAPACITY Some Deficiencies and SW Not Easily Remediable Before Award | ADEQUATE CAPACITY No Deficiencies |
SW (if any) Remediable Before Award
| STRONG CAPACITY No Deficiencies or SW | SCORE | SCORE Based On: | Doc. Ref | REMARKS/ RECOMMENDATIONS | ||||||||
| High Risk | Moderate to High Risk | Low to Moderate Risk | Low Risk | Desk Review | Inquiry | Obsn. | Test | |||||
| Third Criterion: PROCUREMENT SYSTEMS | ||||||||||||
| 3.1 | Procurement Policies, Procedures and Practices | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has procurement policies, procedures and practices in place that are adequate. [Note: Procurement policies, procedures and practices include those relating to processes for purchasing, resolving and settling disputes and claims; safeguards and controls over assets; and related records management. | 19 | Organization has no or highly inadequate procurement policies, procedures and practices. | Organization has less than adequate procurement policies and procedures and practices. In some cases, they are incomplete or otherwise inadequate. | Organization has adequate procurement policies, procedures and practices in place that are generally appropriate given the country conditions. Any minor exceptions are easily remediable. | Organization complete and well documented procurement policies, procedures and practices that are appropriate to the country conditions. | |||||||
| Staff has not received any or sufficient training in this area. Management has not emphasized the importance of this area. | Organization’s procurement policies, procedures and practices are not well known to staff and are not consistently followed.Staff needs additional training, and management needs to emphasize the importance of procurement procedures. | Organization’s procurement policies, procedures and practices are known to staff and are generally adhered to. | Organization’s procurement policies, procedures and practices are known and understood by trained staff and are consistently adhered to, reviewed and updated as necessary. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 3.3 | Compliance with Policies and Procedures – Reasonableness of Price | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization complies with its own policies and procedures for how determinations of reasonableness are made for purchases and who in the organization is responsible. | 21 | Organization has no policies and procedures for how determinations of reasonableness are made for purchases and who in the organization is responsible. | Organization has informal policies and procedures for how determinations of reasonableness are made for purchases and who in the organization is responsible. | Organization has adequate policies and procedures that cover competitive procedures, how determinations of reasonableness are to be made, and who is responsible for purchases. | Organization has well thought out, well documented, and effective policies and procedures that require competitive procedures and dictate how determinations of reasonableness are to be made and specify who is responsible for purchases. | |||||||
| Little or no supporting documentation exists to verify that competitive procedures are used or that determinations of reasonableness are made in an acceptable manner. | Supporting documentation to verify compliance is incomplete or otherwise weak. | Adequate supporting documentation exists to verify compliance. | Complete and accurate supporting documentation exists to verify compliance. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 3.2 | Procurement and Sub-awards | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has adequate policies, procedures and practices in place for procurement and sub-award processes using arm’s length bargaining. | 20 | Organization does not have adequate procurement and sub-award management policies, procedures and practices in place. | Organization has incomplete and relatively weak policies and procedure covering sub-grant awards and management. | Organization has adequate policies and procedures that are adequately communicated and generally effective. | Organization has well documented and communicated policies and procedures that are effective in practice, guiding appropriate sub-grant awards and management. | |||||||
| There are no effective policies and procedures to prevent or detect conflicts of interest. | Policies, procedures and practices are inappropriate and may lend themselves to potential conflicts of interest and actions that are not in the best interests of the organization. | Employees are expected to avoid conflicts of interests and achieve value for money in this area, by acting in a manner consistent with the best interests of the organization. | Organization’s policies, procedures and practices in this area reflect arm’s length bargaining principles and avoid the potential for conflicts of interest. | |||||||||
| Training, mentoring and oversight is negligible. | Formal training in this area is non-existent or weak. . | Employees have been trained and generally follow policies and procedures. | Employees are well trained and consistently follow the organization’s policies and procedures. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| Average Score for PROCUREMENT SYSTEMS |
Fourth Criterion
| SCORING | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 (Highest Score) | ||
| Capacity and Risk Areas to Review | No. | INADEQUATE CAPACITY Key Deficiencies and SW Not Remediable Before Award | WEAK CAPACITY Some Deficiencies and SW Not Easily Remediable Before Award | ADEQUATE CAPACITY No Deficiencies |
SW (if any) Remediable Before Award
| STRONG CAPACITY No Deficiencies or SW | SCORE | SCORE Based On: | Doc. Ref | REMARKS/ RECOMMENDATIONS | ||||||||
| High Risk | Moderate to High Risk | Low to Moderate Risk | Low Risk | Desk Review | Inquiry | Obsn. | Test | |||||
| Fourth Criterion: HUMAN RESOURCES SYSTEMS | ||||||||||||
| 4.1 | Overall HR Policies and Procedures | |||||||||||
| Confirm that organization has and follows HR policies, procedures and practices. [Note: Depending on the size and needs of the organization, typical HR policies will cover the hiring, promotion and recognition, retention, retirement, compensation and benefits, supervision, transfer and termination of employees.] | 22 | Organization does not have HR policies, procedures and practices (formal or informal) that satisfy its minimum level of needs and those that do exist are clearly inadequate. | Organization has weak HR policies, procedures and practices that fail to satisfy all of its key needs and are otherwise not adequate. | Organization has HR policies, procedures and practices that meet its needs and are adequate | Organization has comprehensive, well thought out, well documented, and effective HR policies, procedures and practices that meets its needs and reflect best practices. | |||||||
| Organization’s approach to hiring, promotion and recognition, retention, retirement, compensation and benefits, supervision, transfer and termination of employees is ad hoc, following no discernible guidelines. Organization has no organizational chart or written job descriptions; no standard benefits / compensation practices; and no discernible policies and practices outlining roles and responsibilities and delegations of authority. | There are serious gaps in the organization’s HR policies and practices including those related to the collection, management, use and storage of HR information. Organization lacks a reasonably complete organizational chart, up-to-date written position descriptions, a benefits/ compensation plan, and reasonably adequate policies and practices outlining roles and responsibilities and delegations of authority. | Organization has an organizational chart and written job descriptions; adequate benefits/ compensation practices; and adequate policies and practices outlining roles and responsibilities and delegations of authority. | Strong approaches for retaining competent staff are reviewed by management and modified to ensure effectiveness. Organization has an up-to-date and complete organizational chart and written job descriptions for all key employees; a formal benefits/compensation plan and practices that meet its needs; and sound policies and practices outlining roles and responsibilities and delegations of authority. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 4.2 | Staff Time Management | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has an established, reliable and documented labor activity system that it enforces (i.e., timesheets). | 24 | Organization does not have an established and appropriately documented labor activity system. | Organization has weak labor activity policies, procedures and practices. | Organization has an adequate labor activity system that adequately captures, allocates and reports labor time, activities and costs. | Organization has a strong, comprehensive, well documented, and regularly and consistently used labor activity system that properly captures, allocates and reports labor time, activities and costs. | |||||||
| Employees do not provide, sign or written timesheets/activity reports that reflect actual time worked on all projects as well as indirect activities. | Timesheets/activity reports are often based on rough estimates of work hours rather than actual, verifiable data. | Employees provide written timesheets/ activity reports that reflect actual time worked on all projects as well as indirect activities. | Employees maintain written timesheets/ activity reports that reflect actual time worked on all projects as well as indirect activities. | |||||||||
| Timesheets/activity reports are often based on rough estimates or plug figures. | Timesheets/activity reports are not consistently completed nor verified and approved by supervisors. | Timesheets/activity reports are not consistently signed and approved by supervisors. | Timesheets/activity reports are signed/certified and approved by supervisors. | |||||||||
| Labor costs are distributed among projects based on unreliable estimates. | Labor costs are distributed among projects and indirect activities based on budget estimates or other rough estimates of work hours. | Labor costs are generally distributed among projects and indirect activities based on the data derived from the timesheets/activity reports. | Labor costs are accurately distributed among projects and indirect activities based on the data derived from the timesheets/activity reports. | |||||||||
| Payment of salaries and wages does not consistently correspond to verifiable information provided by employees. | Payment of salaries and wages does not consistently correspond to verifiable information derived from timesheets/activity reports. | Payment of salaries and wages generally corresponds to the information documented. Errors or omissions are few or not material. | Payment of salaries and wages corresponds to the information documented in the timesheets/activity reports. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 4.3 | Payroll System | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has a payroll system that is adequate for purposes of the award. [Note: The payroll system can be either electronic or hard copy.] | 23 | Organization does not have a payroll system (either in electronic or hard copy format). | Organization has an incomplete and otherwise weak payroll system. | Organization has an adequate payroll system that meets it key needs. | Organization has a well thought out, well documented, and effective payroll system (either in electronic or hard copy format) founded on sound payroll policies and procedures that are consistently followed. | |||||||
| Organization disburses pay to employees on an irregular basis. Payroll records are incomplete, and are otherwise not reliable. | Payroll records often contain errors. Payroll is infrequently reconciled to the General Ledger. | Payroll is regularly reconciled to the General Ledger. | Payroll is accurately reconciled to the General Ledger at least monthly. | |||||||||
| Payroll is seldom, if ever, reconciled to the General Ledger. Organization has no discernible policy or standard acceptable practices on compensation (salary scales and increases) and benefits for the different types and levels of employees. | Organization has less than an adequate documented and followed policy on compensation (scales and increases) and benefits for the different types and levels of employees. | Organization has and uses an adequate policy on compensation (salary scales and increases) and benefits for the different types and levels of employees. | Organization has and uses an appropriate and well documented policy on compensation (salary scales and increases) and benefits for the different types and levels of employees. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| 4.4 | Travel Policies and Procedures | |||||||||||
| Confirm that the organization has and follows appropriate travel policies and procedures. | 25 | Organization does not have adequate travel policies, procedures and practices. | Organization has incomplete travel policies and procedures. | Organization has travel policies and procedures that are adequate. | Organization has complete documented travel policies and procedures. | |||||||
| Practices are inconsistent and made on an ad hoc basis. | Acceptable travel policies and procedures are not consistently followed in practice by management or other employees. | Travel policies and procedures are generally followed in practice by management or other employees. | Management emphasizes the importance of adherence to approved travel policies and leads by example. | |||||||||
| Recordkeeping for compliance and other control and verification purposes is inadequate. | Records to verify compliance are incomplete and otherwise weak. | Records are kept to verify compliance. | Travel policies and procedures are understood by staff and are consistently adhered to, reviewed and monitored for compliance. | |||||||||
| Average Score | ||||||||||||
| Average Score for HUMAN RESOURCES SYSTEMS |
Fifth Criterion
| SCORING | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 (Highest Score) | ||
| Capacity and Risk Areas to Review | No. | INADEQUATE CAPACITY Key Deficiencies and SW Not Remediable Before Award | WEAK CAPACITY Some Deficiencies and SW Not Easily Remediable Before Award | ADEQUATE CAPACITY No Deficiencies |
SW (if any) Remediable Before Award
| STRONG CAPACITY No Deficiencies or SW | SCORE | SCORE Based On: | Doc. Ref | REMARKS/ RECOMMENDATIONS | ||||||||
| High Risk | Moderate to High Risk | Low to Moderate Risk | Low Risk | Desk Review | Inquiry | Obsn. | Test | |||||
| Fifth Criterion: PROGRAM PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT | ||||||||||||
| 5.1 | Technical Evaluation Criteria | |||||||||||
| Ground truthing/ verification of selected technical evaluation criteria as identified by TEC. Please note: The “to be completed” criteria is intended to allow, where warranted, the NUPAS to focus on what the TEC determines in the technical evaluation to be critical/essential for purposes of programmatic performance that needs to be confirmed in order to determine the programmatic aspect of responsibility. It is based on assumptions that there can be a couple of statements made by an applicant in a technical proposal that, if true, indicate likelihood of successful programmatic performance. Such potential success can be verified during a pre-award survey in a way that reading an application cannot. The use, again, is optional and thus may not apply or not be needed in every case. | 26 | |||||||||||
| 5.2 | Project Management Capacity |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it.