Terms of Reference for a consultancy:

Analysis of Auditor General’s report of the decentralized entities for the financial year ended 30th June 2016 Public Financial Management analyst 30/05/2017


  1. Background and context

Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre/Transparency International (TI) Nigeria analyses the expenditure and non-expenditure related weaknesses of decentralized entities that are highlighted in the Office of the Auditor General for the Federation (OAGF).

The Government of Nigeria (GoN) recognizes the importance of good public financial management (PFM) as a precondition to achieving socio-economic targets and reducing corruption.

The OAGF produces annual financial audits in line with the provisions of Section 85(3) (b) of the 1999 Constitution (as Amended) which require that the Annual Accounts and Auditor’s reports of government parastatals should be submitted to the Auditor-General of the Federation for comments. However, OAGF regularly complains that government Ministries, Department and Agencies (MDAs) are not complying with the provisions of the law that mandate them to submit their annual audit reports not later than May 31 of the preceding year.

For example, in the 2017 audit report, the OAGF highlights that 76 agencies submitted reports last in 2010 financial year while 65 agencies have never submitted any account since inception. The Auditor-General re-affirmed that as of June 30, 2019, 160 agencies defaulted in the submission of audited accounts for 2016, 265 agencies defaulted in submission of audited accounts for 2017, while 11 agencies had never submitted any financial statements since inception.

Although the OAGF report is thought provoking, one of the persistent weaknesses of the OAGF audit reporting is the lack of aggregated analysis, which would point at systemic problems across the audited MDAs. The financial audits are also too complicated to be simplified and explained to the public and interested stakeholders. Due to the high complexity of the financial audits, the public engagement with this highly valued data is low among stakeholders such as National Assembly, anti-corruption agencies and civil society organisations.

Therefore, simplified aggregated financial reports from OAGF are critical in engaging wider group of stakeholders advocating for greater fiscal transparency and closing of financial gaps identified by the OAGF.


  1. Objectives of the Assignment

The objective of this particular assignment is to collect and analyse data from the OAGF reports of decentralized entities for the fiscal year that ended by June 2017. The results of the analysis shall be later used to:

  • Serve as a basis to increase the understandability and transparency of the OAGF’s reports towards the general public as well as Government officials and the National Assembly;
  • Preparing governmental agencies, civil society and other stakeholders for policy uptake discussions based on the analysis of the OAGF.


  1. Expected Outputs

The expected outputs of the assignment are:

  • A categorization of the expenditures of MDAs that lead to complaints by the OAGF reports including their aggregation and identification of systemic issues;
  • Raw data in excel spreadsheet or SPSS categorized under the financial and non-financial weaknesses in pre-defined sub-groups according to MDAs;
  • A report that compiles and summarizes the results of the OAGF’s analysis and provides recommendations for quick wins and long-term solutions to improve PFM performance of MDAs in the field of expenditures; (It will be appreciated if the report contains reader friendly infographics)
  • Analysis of the recommendations issued by the OAGF Report ended June 2017 and the level of their implementation for pre-defined MDAs;
  • A PowerPoint presentation that summarizes the most important findings of the report which can be used in any meetings with relevant stakeholders.


  1. Methodology for the assignment

The large part of the methodology for this assignment will be standard to the categorization of the OAGF reports under financial and non-financial weaknesses of the expenditures as outlined below.

The consultant will consolidate and categorize data from at least 30% of MDAs’ (set criteria for the selection of these MDAs) that submitted OAGF reports in 2017 into the following sub-groups:

  • Unsupported expenditures;
  • Wasteful expenditures;
  • Overstated expenditures;
  • Fraudulent expenditure;
  • Unrecorded transactions for Non-Budget Agencies (NBAs) ;
  • Non-respect of laws and procedures;
  • Poor bookkeeping;
  • Posting errors.


In addition, the impact of OAGF recommendations on the overall level of financial and non-financial weaknesses in the MDAs will be monitored. For this purpose, the consultant will provide a table that shows the following elements (columns) for each of the decentralized entities:

  1. Name of the MDA
  2. Recommendations: The exact text of each recommendation issued by the OAGF Report ended June 2017
  3. Weakness category: The category of expenditure or non-expenditure related weakness to which the recommendation can be linked
  4. Implementation difficulty category: An assessment of the difficulty of implementation of the recommendation on a scale from 1 to 5 (based on given criteria).
  5. Implementation level: the level of implementation of the recommendation (fully implemented, partially implemented or not implemented) according to the report.

A limited number of Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and interviews will be conducted at the federal level and at the state level to probe numeric data and provide additional explanations within the scope of the study of a qualitative nature. The purpose of the categorization is to determine the likeliness of different types of recommendations to lead to immediate PFM performance improvements for MDAs. A resulting table that indicates the level of implementation of recommendations of different categories for each MDA entity will be compared with the performance in each weakness category for the respective MDA. This will allow identifying correlations between implementation of recommendations and performance for different thematic types of recommendations. The categorization of recommendations by difficulty will allow a better understanding of the MDA’ different levels of implementation.



  1. Submission of transcripts of FGDs and interviews: Within seven (7) days after signing the contract.
  2. Submission of the draft report: Within twenty (20) days after signing the contract.
  • Submission of final report and Power Point presentation: Within twenty-eight (28) days after signing the contract.
  1. Period of the assignment: All activities and deliverables are to be completed within thirty (30) working days from the date of the official signing of the contract.


Interested consultants should submit their CVs (max. 4 pages) and financial offer via email to cislac@cislacnigeria.net copying o.anya@cislac.org   not later than 13th May 2020 with the email subject: TOR: ANALYSIS OF AUDITOR GENERAL’S REPORT 2016 – 2017.


For further information about the assignment, please contact 07088830030.


Abuja, Nigeria. 6th May, 2020

2020-05-06T11:49:46+00:00May 6th, 2020|Categories: News Alerts|0 Comments

Leave A Comment